Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Ephesians 5:22
Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
22 32. Special Exhortations: the Christian Home: Wife and Husband
22. Wives ] Cp. Col 3:18; 1Pe 3:1-6. In Col. the corresponding instructions about domestic duty are drawn expressly from the truth (Col 3:1) that the believer lives, in the risen Christ, a resurrection-life.
submit yourselves ] It is probable that the Gr. original has no verb here. R.V. accordingly reads in italics be in subjection to. But it is obvious that the thought if not the word is present, carried on from the last verse.
The Gospel on the one hand recognizes and secures woman’s perfect spiritual equality with man, an equality which modifies and ennobles every aspect of possible “subjection”; on the other hand recognizes and secures man’s responsible leadership.
your own ] Words of special emphasis, suggesting the holy speciality of the marriage relation.
as unto the Lord ] Who is, in a peculiar sense, represented to the wife by the husband. In wifely submission to him she not only acts on the general principle of the acceptance of the Will of God expressed in circumstances: she sees in that attitude a special reflection, as it were, of her relations to the Lord Himself. Her attitude has a special sanction thus from Him.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands – On this passage, compare notes on 1Co 11:3-9. The duty of the submission of the wife to her husband is everywhere enjoined in the Scriptures; see 1Pe 3:1; Col 3:18; Tit 2:5. While Christianity designed to elevate the character of the wife, and to make her a fit companion of an intelligent and pious husband, it did not intend to destroy all subordination and authority. Man, by the fact that he was first created; that the woman was taken from him; that he is better qualified for ruling than she is, is evidently designed to be at the head of the little community that constitutes a family. In many other things, woman may be his equal; in loveliness, and grace, and beauty, and tenderness, and gentleness, she is far his superior; but these are not the qualities adapted for government. Their place is in another sphere; and there, man should be as cautious about invading her prerogative, or abridging her liberty, as she should be about invading the prerogative that belongs to him. In every family there should be a head – someone who is to be looked up to as the counselor and the ruler; someone to whom all should be subordinate. God has given that prerogative to man; and no family prospers where that arrangement is violated. Within proper metes and limits, therefore, it is the duty of the wife to obey, or to submit herself to her husband. Those limits are such as the following:
1. In domestic arrangements, the husband is to be regarded as the head of the family; and he has a right to direct as to the style of living, the expenses of the family, the clothing, etc.
2. In regard to the laws which are to regulate the family, he is the head. It is his to say what is to be done; in what way the children are to employ themselves, and to give directions in regard to their education, etc.
3. In business matters, the wife is to submit to the husband. She may counsel with him, if he chooses; but the affairs of business and property are under his control, and must be left at his disposal.
4. In everything, except that which relates to conscience and religion, he has authority. But there his authority ceases. He has no right to require her to commit an act of dishonesty, to connive at wrong-doing, to visit a place of amusement which her conscience tells her is wrong, nor has he a right to interfere with the proper discharge of her religious duties. He has no right to forbid her to go to church at the proper and usual time, or to make a profession of religion when she pleases. He has no right to forbid her endeavoring to exercise a religious influence over her children, or to endeavor to lead them to God. She is bound to obey God, rather than any man (see the notes on Act 4:19); and when even a husband interferes in such cases, and attempts to control her, he steps beyond his proper bounds, and invades the prerogative of God, and his authority ceases to be binding. It ought to be said, however, that in order to justify her acting independently in such a case, the following things are proper:
(1) It should be really a case of conscience – a case where the Lord has plainly required her to do what she proposes to do – and not a mere matter of whim, fancy, or caprice.
(2) When a husband makes opposition to the course which a wife wishes to pursue in religious duties, it should lead her to re-examine the matter, to pray much over it, and to see whether she cannot, with a good conscience, comply with his wishes.
(3) If she is convinced that she is right, she should still endeavor to see whether it is not possible to win him to her views, and to persuade him to accord with her; see 1Pe 3:1. It is possible that, if she does right, he may be persuaded to do right also.
(4) If she is constrained, however, to differ from him, it should be with mildness and gentleness. There should be no reproach, and no contention. She should simply state her reasons, and leave the event to God.
(5) She should, after this, be a better wife, and put forth more and more effort to make her husband and family happy. She should show that the effect of her religion has been to make her love her husband and children more; to make her more and more attentive to her domestic duties, and more and more kind in affliction. By a life of pure religion, she should aim to secure what she could not by her entreaties – his consent that she should live as she thinks she ought to, and and walk to heaven in the path in which she believes that her Lord calls her. While, however, it is to be conceded that the husband has authority over the wife, and a right to command in all cases that do not pertain to the conscience, it should be remarked:
(1) That his command should be reasonable and proper.
(2) He has no right to require anything wrong, or contrary to the will of God.
(3) Where commands begin in this relation, happiness usually ends; and the moment a husband requires a wife to do anything, it is usually a signal of departing or departed affection and peace. When there are proper feelings in both parties in this relation there will be no occasion either to command or to obey. There should be such mutual love and confidence, that the known wish of the husband should be a law to the wife: and that the known desires of the wife should be the rule which he would approve. A perfect government is that where the known wish of the lawgiver is a sufficient rule to the subject. Such is the government of heaven; and a family on earth should approximate as nearly as possible to that.
As unto the Lord – As you would to the Lord, because the Lord requires it, and has given to the husband this authority.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Eph 5:22-24
Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands as unto the Lord.
Relation of husband and wife
1.For the duly–Submit yourselves. Subjection in the general on Gods part noteth the subordination of one creature to another according to His wise disposal, as the imperfect to the more perfect, and this for the good of both; for it is so ordered, that in all relations comfort and duty shall go together. On our part it is a ready inclination to obey this order set by God; for every creature must know his place, and be content with the order wherein God hath set him. According to this order, submission is required of the wife towards her husband; though she is not to be subject as children to their parents, much less as servants to their masters.
2. The persons–To your own husbands.
3. The manner how it is to be done–As unto the Lord, i.e., Christ.
(1) The regulation of the duty; it must be clone willingly and sincerely, resembling that submission which is performed to Christ, whose image, in His government over the Church, the husband beareth in his superiority over the wife.
(2) It may import the enforcement, the reason and motive of this duty, because Christ hath commanded it; and by virtue of the law of Christ all wives must be subject to their husbands; which doth not disannul, but confirm Gods institution, for His precepts are not privative, but accumulative.
(3) As unto the Lord implieth a limitation; this subjection must be in all things which belong to the lawful authority and superiority of the husband; or so it seemeth to be expressed: Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord (Col 3:18).
(4) It importeth Christs acceptance of this duty. He interpreteth this subjection and obedience as given to Himself, and the contrary as rebellion against Himself; for it is service done to Christ: which may give the woman comfort against all unkindnesses, and unthankful returns from her husband. That wives must reckon it their unquestionable duty to be subject to their husbands.
Let me show you–
(1) Wherein this subjection consisteth.
(2) The reasons and grounds of it.
I. Wherein it consisteth. To speak briefly of it, this subjection lieth in two things–in reverence and obedience.
1. In reverence, which is both inward and outward.
(1) The inward, in a due esteem of the husband, which is the ground of all love and submission. So it is said, Let the woman reverence her husband (Eph 5:33). If for nothing else, yet in a humble acknowledgment of his right by Gods ordinance; for esteem is not only due to personal qualifications, but to the eminent dignity wherein God hath placed any creature with whom we have commerce; and if we cannot acknowledge them for any worth in them, yet we must acknowledge God in them, who hath put His image of superiority upon them, that we may the better discharge our duties to them.
(2) Outward reverence is both in word and deed.
2. Obedience: that is showed in many things.
(1) in studying to please rather than to be pleased; for the apostle telleth us that she that is married eateth for the things of this world, that she may please her husband (1Co 7:34).
(2) By fulfilling his commands in all things lawful, and not contrary to her duty to God (Tit 2:5).
(3) By submitting her will to her husbands content, and her desires to his approbation and allowance (Gen 3:16).
(4) In patience under his rebukes. So the apostle (1Ti 2:12). Meekness and quietness is chiefly exercised in bridling our passions, when anything falleth out cross and contrary to our desires and expectations, and we eschew all needless contradiction and expressions of malcontentedness. Now this is not only gaining upon the husband, but is very acceptable to God, who delighteth in the graces He hath wrought in His own people. But now, on the contrary, a humorous moroseness and impatiency is very displeasing unto God and man, and destructive of family society (Pro 13:19).
(5) By being a comfort and a help to him (Gen 2:18). The woman is to be a help, not a hindrance; not the governor, for the right is originally in the man, but a help in government, to ease him in part of his burden and cares; a help every way, for the comfort of society, for assistance in governing the family.
II. The grounds and reasons.
1. The law of nature written by Gods own finger in the hearts of men. We read of those who were heathens, that they enacted a law and decree: That every man should bear rule in his own house; and that all the women should give honour to the husband, both great and small (Est 1:20; Est 1:22). Indeed, both anciently and to this very day, great is the power of the husbands over their wives in Persia. Now, shall heathens see that which Christians do not?
2. Gods ordination, which a holy heart dareth not disobey. Now, God hath expressly commanded it in His word in the text (so Col 3:18).
3. The natural imperfection of the woman. The apostle calleth her the weaker vessel (1Pe 3:7). Abilities of mind are not ordinarily so strong in her as in the man; and they have fewer opportunities than man hath for perfecting their natural parts; and they are not so able to provide for themselves, modesty not permitting them to go up and down in the world.
4. The manner and order of the creation. The woman was made after man, out of man, and for man. God formed man first, and then the woman out of him, and for mans good (see 1Ti 2:13; 1Co 11:8-9).
5. From the womans being first in the transgression; for this is a part of the sentence: He shall bear rule over thee (Gen 3:16).
6. The inconveniences that would ensue if this subjection were taken away. There must be order in every society, without which there followeth division, and thereupon confusion; and a house divided cannot stand.
Use 1. Is reproof to several sorts.
1. Of all those frothy and profane wits who scoff at womens subjection, and make it a matter of unsavoury mirth. See how misbecoming Christians this is, partly as it is a duty required by God.
2. It reproveth those that dispute against it by manifold cavils; but no reasoning must be allowed against a plain and known duty. Therefore, to prevent these disputes, let me lay down two conclusions–
(1) On the wifes part; no privilege of birth, parts, breeding, can exempt her from it.
(2) On the husbands part; no personal infirmity, no froward nature, no error in religion (1Co 7:13), deprives him of it.
3. It reproveth them that have no reason to allege but their own imperious and peevish humour causeth them to live discontentedly and disobediently in this relation.
4. It reproveth those husbands that by their own default lose their authority and dignity, and are themselves causes that their own power is lessened and diminished, either by their intemperance, behaving themselves as beasts rather than men, that they are altogether unfit to judge what is meet and good for the family. It is true the husband is to govern, not by fear, but by love. He is the image of Christ in governing His Church, and the wife is not a slave, but a meet help; but this love should not be a snare to him. And it is true the wife should not be despised, for God saith to Abraham, Hearken to the voice of Sarah. But there is a difference between hearkening to good counsel, and swallowing a temptation, and being driven to evil by the womans imperiousness.
Use 2. Is to exhort wives to submit to their own husbands.
1. The impediments.
(1) Pride.
(2) A defect of true love.
(3) Affectation of vanity.
(4) Want of self-denial.
2. Motives.
(1) It is easier and safer to obey than to prescribe and direct, and more felicity is found in obedience than in commands; and in the event it is found more safe; as Zipporah, by obeying her husband in circumcising the child, saved his life (Exo 4:26).
(2) It is better to give the husband occasion of thanksgiving than of complaining (Jam 5:9).
(3) Your own peace, that your prayers may not be interrupted (1Pe 3:7).
(4) Honour to God.
(a) It takes away the reproach of the gospel: Obedient to their own husbands, that the Word of God be not blasphemed (Tit 2:5). That Christian religion may not be thought to impose anything contrary to moral virtues.
(b) That gainsayers may be won to God: Ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands, that if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives (1Pe 3:1). (T. Manton, D. D.)
A wifes obedience
Mary, wife of Prince William of Orange, and the heir-apparent to the English throne, was asked what her husband the Prince should be if she became Queen. She called in her husband, and she promised him he should always bear rule; and she asked only that he would obey the command of, Husbands, love your wives, as she should do that, Wives, be obedient to your husbands in all things. (Littles Historical Lights.)
The terms husband and wife defined
Did you ever hear the word husband explained? It means literally the band of the house, the support of it, the person who keeps it together, as a band keeps together a sheaf of corn. There are many married men who are not husbands, because they are not the band of the house. Truly, in many cases, the wife is the husband; far oftentimes it is she who, by her prudence, and thrift, and economy, keeps the house together. The married man who, by his dissolute habits, strips his house of all comfort, is not a husband; in a legal sense he is, but in no other; for he is not a house-band; instead of keeping things together, he scatters them among the pawnbrokers. And now let us see whether the word wife has not a lesson too. It literally means a weaver. The wife is the person who weaves. Before our great cotton and cloth factories arose, one of the principal employments in every house was the fabrication of clothing: every family made its own. The wool was spun into thread by the girls, who were therefore called spinsters; the thread was woven into cloth by their mother, who accordingly was called the weaver, or the wife: and another remnant of this old truth we discover in the word heirloom, applied to any old piece of furniture which has come down to us from our ancestors, and which, though it may be a chair or bed, shows that a loom was once a most important article in every house. Thus the word wife means weaver; and, as Trench well remarks, in the word itself is wrapped up a hint of earnest, indoor, stay-at-home occupations, as being fitted for her who bears this name. (Anon.)
The submission of the Christian wife
I. Jesus is the head of His Church.
1. But observe, He is also her governing Head. He has the sole guidance, and direction, and control of her.
2. But He is also her protecting Head.
II. The submission which the Church is enjoined to give to her Head, is the pattern of the subjection which Christian wives are commanded to give their husbands. But what is the nature of the subjection? I know it has its basis in affection; but yet it goes beyond that; it has its basis in the principle of allegiance. The Church owes Christ its allegiance. He is her rightful Lord.
2. But observe, it is the submission of dependency. The Church is essentially dependent on the Lord Jesus Christ. Here, then, is the true principle of that subjection, that submission which the Lord enjoins on every Christian wife: to rely upon, and to confide in, the power, wisdom, and love of her husband. To receive from him that which supplies her family with all things needful; and to receive it meekly from him too. To seek her happiness in his smile and in his presence; and to mourn for his absence, and to long for his appearing. To go to him for counsel in difficulties; to give up her own pleasures, and yield up her own will.
III. The extent and limit of this subjection–In everything. Not in some things, but in all things; in everything. Some of you may say, beloved sisters in Jesus–In things pleasant I find it not difficult. Yes, but in things painful. Some of you may say, In great things I would yield. Yes, but subjection in little things; in little things; in everything. You may say, When we are alone together, I dare not refuse; but suppose it is in public, then my will goes another way. In public you are commanded to submit. Yes, but you may say, in things that relate to himself of course I submit; but in things that relate to myself, of course I may act for myself. For yourself? In everything, even as regards yourselves. Yet there is a limit. Is there not a limit? Yes, blessed be God, there is a limit in the very text before us. Observe the twenty-second verse: as unto the Lord; no further. Act up to it, but go not beyond it. (J. H. Evans, M. A.)
Duties enjoined upon the wife
I. Subjection. Look at–
1. The creation–woman was made after, out of, and for, man.
2. The Fall–the woman occasioned it.
3. The history of woman. Does not everything point to her subordination?
II. Reverence.
1. In words–speaking of, to, or before her husband.
2. In actions.
III. Meekness.
IV. Modesty–not adorning herself with dress.
V. Economy and order in household management–freedom from extravagance.
VI. Attention to all that concerns the welfare and comfort of the children, if there be any. For this purpose she must be a keeper at home. (J. A. James.)
Reason for the wifes subjection to the husband
The words contain a reason of the foregoing precept, both of the matter and manner of the duty. Why subject to their own husbands? Why as unto the Lord? The reason is taken from the resemblance which the husband carrieth in family government to Christ. In them observe three things–
(1) What the husband is to the wife.
(2) What Christ is to the Church.
(3) The resemblance between the one and the other–Even as Christ.
There is a similitude, though not an exact equality in the case. In handling of this Scripture we must first speak of Christs relation to His Church, and then of the husbands relation to the wife; for first we must consider the pattern before we can state the resemblance. That Jesus Christ is the Churchs Head.
1. Oneness of nature between Him and the Church; for head and members suit. The Church hath such a Head as carrieth conformity with the rest of the members. He and we have one flesh; and so the Godhead, that was at such a distance from us, is brought down in our nature that it might be nearer at hand, and within the reach of our commerce.
2. It implieth an eminency; for the head is the most eminent part of the body. As it is the noblest, so nature hath placed it nearest heaven. The very situation doth in a manner oblige the other parts to show their reverence. So Christ is the Head of She Church, infinitely of much more worth than the Church, as being the only-begotten Son of God.
3. The head is the most illustrious throne of the soul; not only the seat of nerves and senses, but of the memory and understanding: so there is in Christ a fulness of perfection, enabling Him to do all the duties of a Head to such a great and necessitous body as the Church is (Col 2:3).
4. It implies authority and power to govern. His excellency giveth Him fitness, but authority, right to rule and govern the Church; to appoint officers, and to make laws that shall universally bind all His people (Mat 28:18-19).
5. It implies strict union between Him and the Church, such as is between the head and members in the natural body; which union is brought about externally by confederation, or visible owning the covenant, and professing faith in Christ Jesus our Lord.
6. Thence there resulteth a communication of influences.
7. It implies sympathy with His members; there is none of them hurt but it redoundeth to Him (Act 9:6).
Use 1. If Christ be Head of the Church–
(1) Then there is no other that can usurp and take this honour upon him.
(2) None can be a political governing head to the Church universal but He who is a Mediatorial Head, of vital influence to them.
(3) A ministerial, universal head, that shall give law to all other churches and Christian societies; and if they depend not on Him, shall be excluded from the privileges of a Christian Church.
Use 2. Let us make conscience of those duties which this relation bindeth us unto; for if Christ be our Head, we must subject ourselves to Him, and live by His laws.
Use 3. Is comfort to those that are in so near a relation to Christ. He is not only a governing Head, but a quickening Head; giveth life, and strength, and growth (Eph 1:22).
II. I come now to handle the second title, He is the saviour of the body. He must do the part of a Saviour as well as a Head; and His dominion over the Church is exercised in procuring her good and salvation. Here I shall show you–
(1) The nature of this salvation;
(2) The manner, or the several ways by which Christ doth accomplish it.
First: The nature of it will be known by several distinctions.
1. The notion of a saviour is doubly applied–First, to him that preserveth that which is already made, that it may not perish and return into nothing, or to him that recovereth a thing that is lost out of a state of perdition.
2. That salvation is positive and privative.
3. Salvation is either temporal or eternal.
(1) Temporal salvation, when we are saved from the dangers incident to the present life. In this notion it is taken, 1Pe 3:20.
(2) However we have a better salvation to wait for besides the mercies of daily providence, even the enjoyment of God and Christ to all eternity; this is salvation, and this is blessedness. This is the end of our faith (1Pe 1:5). Better we had never been born if we have not an interest in this salvation.
4. Eternal salvation is either begun or consummate. Salvation begun is attributed to the grace vouchsafed to us in this life; as the grace of justification or sanctification.
5. There is a typical saviour and a real Saviour. The people of God of old were mostly acquainted with the typical salvation.
6. There are some inferior helps or subordinate instruments which are called saviours; but the Saviour, or the original author of all salvation, is Christ.
Secondly: The manner, or the ways and means by which Christ doth accomplish it.
1. By way of satisfaction, because He sayeth us from the guilt of sin, the curse of the law, and the eternal wrath of God, which are the lets and hindrances of our salvation, and could not otherwise be removed by us. So we are said to be saved by His blood (Rom 5:9).
2. By His merit, because He procureth to us the favour of God, and a right to all those blessings which are bestowed on the children of God.
3. By way of efficacy and power, because by His Spirit He doth effect and work in us all those things which belong to salvation.
Use 1. Let us come to Christ for salvation if He be a Saviour; for this is His office. All men would be saved, why then is there no more resort and recourse to Christ?
2. Let us believe the truth of this salvation, and how worthy it is of our deepest thoughts (1Ti 1:15).
3. Embrace this salvation in Christs own way, and upon His own terms.
4. Leave not this way till you have the evidence in yourselves (1Jn 5:8; 1Jn 5:10). (T. Manton, D. D.)
The supreme authority of Christ
I. As the Head, Christ is the life of the Church. Head and heart are essential to life of body–latter, blood centre; former, nerve centre. The mere animal life is connected with the heart; but all belonging to higher life depends on head. Paralyze the brain, and all the characteristic features of the life of man fail. Illustrate by the old manner of execution, severing head from body. To keep the head is to keep life; to lose the head is to lose life.
1. This is true of each individual member of the Church. No life as a mere member; no life save as he comes into relation to the head.
2. It is true of the united life of the Church. The harmony that is in the body is only secured through the common share in the life of the Head.
II. As the Head, Christ is the guide of the Church.
III. As the Head, Christ bears the rule in His Church. He alone has the right to make laws for us; and He alone has the right, the power, to preside over their execution. (The Weekly Pulpit.)
The greatness of Christ
The greatness which the apostle commends to Christian wives, is expressly the greatness of Christ. It is His glory and joy to be subject to the Father. I came down from heaven not to do My own will but the will of Him that sent Me. I do always those things which please Him. There is nothing servile in the meek subjection of a wife to her own husband. The very contrary: it is her crown of beauty. She is counselled to clothe herself with the dignity of Jesus. Moreover, the woman who has married wisely, and who respects her own marriage, puts on authority and walks in freedom, just in proportion as she is subject to her husband. The body can in no other way walk in power and freedom, than by being subject to its own head. The earth is beautiful so long as she is directly subject to her own sun. She no sooner enters upon the path of independence than she becomes cold and gloomy. The more complete her subjection, the greater is her freedom, and the more she sings and rejoices. In like manner, wives will find that subjection to their own husbands is the very law of their freedom and joy. Not only the wifes reverence, but her love, for her husband, inclines her in this direction. Wherein a wife hesitates to be subject to her husband, she must lose the sense that she is his wife. By an independent course of action, she virtually separates herself, asserts her self-sufficiency, and ceases to respect her wifehood. If she only knew it, the path of subjection, appointed of God for the Christian wife, is an inestimable opportunity and privilege. Therein she will find the most favorable condition possible, for the growth and development of her eternal beauty. On no account let her look upon subjection to her husband as having its end in time. It is a sacred thing. The root of it is in Christ, the flower thereof is in eternity. The hidden wisdom, and the love and beauty of God are being embodied in her daily meekness. The Lord lifteth up the meek. He will beautify the meek with salvation. Home is the wifes empire, and she is exhorted to reign there, not after a vulgar or worldly manner, but after a heavenly manner. Her free and loving subjection is a perennial means of grace. She renders it indeed to her husband, but as unto the Lord. Many fair appearances are deceitful; but the beautiful deportment of a Christian wife is even more beautiful within than without. Jesus hides Himself under the veil of her quiet habit. By her own obedience she rules her household. There is an air of majesty about her. Steadfast in piety, and self-possessed, an atmosphere of unknown power encircles her. Her husband may, or may not, appreciate her sovereign humility. The Lord notes it. In His sight it is an ornament of great price. It is fragrant to the angels. Her thousand private acts, lost to common observation, are written in heaven. Many an excellent wife, buried in deepest obscurity, and withal, sorely tried, is yet sweetly fulfilling her course. Her fair monument, all unknown to herself, is being built in the presence of the Lord. Pure-hearted woman! she will do her husband nothing but good all the days of her life. He may safely trust in her, as in the quicker soul of his soul, the secret heart of his heart. (J. Pulsford.)
The manner of wifely subjection
Here the apostle inferreth the conclusion from the foregoing argument. In the proposal of this conclusion two things are considerable–
1. The manner how this subjection is to be performed–As the Church is subject to Christ.
2. The extent; unlimited, In everything: that is, in everything that is lawful and belonging to her duty.
1. Let us state the nature of the subjection of the Church of Christ.
2. Give the reasons of it. In stating the subjection to Christ we must consider–
(1) The foundation;
(2) The nature;
(3) The properties of it.
First: The foundation is Christs authority. The primitive sovereign is God; the sovereign by derivation is Christ the Mediator, in His manhood united to the second person in the Godhead. He is Lord, not as Creator but Redeemer, which kind of authority accrueth to Him by His own merit and purchase (Rom 14:9). Concerning it observe two things–
1. It is superadded to the former sovereignty and dominion, which Father, Son, and Holy Ghost had as Creator. This new dominion and sovereignty is not destructive Of the former, but accumulative.
2. This authority and dominion which the Redeemer is possessed of is comfortable and beneficial to us; and the end and effect of it was our cure and recovery. Secondly:–The nature of this subjection. It consisteth of two things–
(1) Our willing and hearty consent to become subjects to Christ;
(2) Our actual obedience to His commands.
Thirdly: The properties of this subjection and obedience.
1. It is a willing subjection and obedience: Thy people shall be a willing people in the day of Thy power (Psa 110:3). They voluntarily submit themselves to the Son of God as their Prophet, Lord, and Sovereign.
2. It is a thankful subjection and obedience. The design of God in the work of redemption was to lay a foundation of the highest thankfulness; therefore the obedience to our Redeemer must be a thankful obedience. A mere law, as a law, requireth obedience; but a benefit, as a benefit, requireth thankfulness. Join both notions together, and then you will see it is a thankful obedience we are called unto.
3. This subjection must be constant unto the death (Rev 2:10).
4. Our subjection must be dutiful, and with great reverence.
5. Our subjection must be universal and unlimited, having respect to all His commandments (Psa 119:6 and Col 4:12). It is not enough to do some things required by Christ, but the Church must be regulated by Him in all things. If we would be contented with a little of Christ, we should soon despatch our business. The world will yield to a little of Christ; they will prize His name when they neglect His office; they will embrace the outward form of His religion when they hate the power: they will value and esteem and desire His benefits, but they despise His laws; they will attend upon external duties, but neglect private or inward acts of grace; they will seem to acknowledge the general duties, but as to particulars questioned or assaulted in the age they live in, they desire to be excused; but a gracious heart reverenceth everything that carrieth the stamp of Christ upon it, and in everything desires to submit to Him.
II. I shall give the reasons of it; though they be evident already in stating the nature of this subjection, yet I shall add more.
1. Because obedience is the best impression or stamp of our religion upon us.
2. This obedience is the qualification of those that, shall have benefit by Christ. That is evident in the same chapter: He is the Author of eternal salvation to those that obey Him (verse 9).
On the contrary, vengeance is threatened on those that obey not the gospel (2Th 1:8).
1. Consider whom it is we call you to obey: Jesus Christ, who–
(1) Hath sovereign authority to command, as He gave good evidence in the days of His flesh: for the whole course of nature obeyed Him (Mat 8:27).
(2) This Jesus is your Saviour, and shall He not be your Lord?
(3) It is Christ who hath set us so perfect a copy, and first obeyed Himself, and put His own neck under the yoke, that we might obey Him the more patiently.
2. Consider wherein we are to obey Him; in things just and equal. He only lays necessary laws upon us.
3. Consider why this obedience is required. Christ doth not rule us for our hurt and ruin, but for our conduct. His conduct and government is to lead us to eternal life, and when you disobey Him, you forsake your own happiness.
Use 1. To persuade the people of God to live in a more perfect and exact obedience to His will.
1. It is more perfidious for you to disobey Him, that have given up yourselves by a serious covenant made with God, renouncing sin, and devoting yourselves to the will of God (1Pe 1:14).
2. You have received the sanctifying Spirit, and begun this work (1Pe 1:22). Others offer violence to their duty, but you to your nature.
3. You make a profession of being in relation to Christ as your Lord, and therefore you should live in a strict obedience to His holy will (Luk 6:46).
4. You know what the will of God is more than others, and therefore, if you disobey it, you will be beaten with many stripes (Luk 12:47).
5. You have found Him a Saviour; and therefore you should not stick to obey Him as a Lord. We have seen the pattern; Christ the pattern of the husbands preeminence, the Church the pattern of the wifes subjection. Now it is easy to accommodate these things.
First: The husband is the head of the wife.
1. As the head is more eminent than the rest of the members Of the body, so there is an eminency and superiority in the husband because of his sex! The head of the woman is the man, and the Head of the man is Christ, and the Head of Christ is God (1Co 11:3). Man is superior in dignity and authority, as the head is above the body.
2. As the head hath power over the body to rule it and direct it, so it noteth his authority and power of government.
3. As the head is the seat of the senses and understanding, so the husband should be furnished with some complete measure of knowledge and prudence (1Pe 3:7).
Use 2. Direction to husbands.
1. They ought to resemble Christ, whose image they bear–
(1) In other things as well as in point of superiority; holiness, self-denial, love, and all sorts of duty.
(2) In using and employing their dignity and power suitable to the ends of their relation. Christ, that is the Head of the Church, is also the Saviour of the body.
2. If the husband, by being the head of the wife, bear Christs image, then this image must not be defaced nor despised.
(1) Not be defaced by the husband by impertinent commands. If they would have that submission and respect from inferiors, they must carry their government prudently and lovingly. Then it is most a similitude of Christs authority over the Church; Christ doth not burden His Church with needless laws.
(2) Not despised by the woman. All superiors have a piece of the image of Christ put upon them, therefore they must not be contemned by their inferiors, lest thereby they despise and contemn the image of God. If Jacob could say, I have seen thy face, as though I had seen the face of God, and thou wast pleased with me (Gen 33:10); he saw God in His kindness and reconciliation; so here.
Secondly: The wifes subjection–As the Church is subject to Christ. Where observe the manner–
(1) Negatively, not merely for their own ease, peace, and credit, but in conscience of and respect to that dignity God hath put on her husband. He bath placed him above her.
(2) Positively.
1. A righteous subjection, not a slavish.
2. A willing subjection, not grudging.
3. A dutiful subjection. (T. Manton, D. D.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 22. Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands] As the Lord, viz. Christ, is the head or governor of the Church, and the head of the man, so is the man the head or governor of the woman. This is God’s ordinance, and should not be transgressed. The husband should not be a tyrant, and the wife should not be the governor. Old Francis Quarles, in his homely rhymes, alluding to the superstitious notion, that the crowing of a hen bodes ill luck to the family, has said:-
“Ill thrives the hapless family that shows
A cock that’s silent, and a hen that crows:
I know not which live most unnatural lives,
Obeying husbands or commanding wives.”
As unto the Lord.] The word Church seems to be necessarily understood here; that is: Act under the authority of your husbands, as the Church acts under the authority of Christ. As the Church submits to the Lord, so let wives submit to their husbands.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands; yielding honour and obedience to them.
As unto the Lord; for the Lords sake who hath commanded it, so that ye cannot be subject to him without being subject to them: see 1Ti 2:12.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
22. (Eph6:9.) The Church’s relation to Christ in His everlasting purpose,is the foundation and archetype of the three greatest of earthlyrelations, that of husband and wife (Eph5:22-33), parent and child (Eph6:1-4), master and servant (Eph6:4-9). The oldest manuscripts omit “submit yourselves”;supplying it from Eph 5:21, “Yewives (submitting yourselves) unto your own husbands.” “Yourown” is an argument for submissiveness on the part of the wives;it is not a stranger, but your own husbands whom you arecalled on to submit unto (compare Gen 3:16;1Co 7:2; 1Co 14:34;Col 3:18; Tit 2:5;1Pe 3:1-7). Those subjectought to submit themselves, of whatever kind their superiors are.”Submit” is the term used of wives: “obey,”of children (Eph 6:1), asthere is a greater equality between wives and husbands, than betweenchildren and parents.
as unto theLordSubmissiveness is rendered by the wife to the husbandunder the eye of Christ, and so is rendered to Christ Himself. Thehusband stands to the wife in the relation that the Lord does to theChurch, and this is to be the ground of her submission: though thatsubmission is inferior in kind and degree to that which she owesChrist (Eph 5:24).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands,…. This is an instance, explaining the above general rule; which subjection lies in honour and reverence, Eph 5:33, and in obedience; they should think well of their husbands, speak becomingly to them, and respectfully of them; the wife should take care of the family, and family affairs, according to the husband’s will; should imitate him in what is good, and bear with that which is not so agreeable; she should not curiously inquire into his business, but leave the management of it to him; she should help and assist in caring and providing for the family; and should abide with him in prosperity and adversity, and do nothing without his will and consent: and this subjection is only to her husband; not to any other man, nor to her children, nor to her servants, or any brought into her house; and this consideration should render the subjection more easy, voluntary, and cheerful: and which is but reasonable that it should be; as may be gathered from the time, matter, and end of the woman’s creation, she was made after him, out of him, and for him; and from her fall, and being first in the transgression; and from her being the weaker and inferior sex; and from the profitableness and comeliness of it; and the credit of religion requires it, that so the word of God be not blasphemed: wherefore it follows,
as unto the Lord; that is, either as the Lord has commanded, that so it should be, showing a regard to his precepts; or as in the sight of the Lord, and so yielding it sincerely and heartily; or in things pertaining to the Lord, which are consistent with the law of the Lord, and the Gospel of Christ; and in like manner as the church is subject to Christ, her Lord and husband, as follows.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Be in subjection . Not in the Greek text of B and Jerome knew of no MS. with it. K L and most MSS. have like Col 3:18, while Aleph A P have (let them be subject to). But the case of (dative) shows that the verb is understood from verse 21 if not written originally. (own) is genuine here, though not in Col 3:18.
As unto the Lord ( ). So here instead of of Col 3:18.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Your own [] . The peculiar personal relationship is emphasized as the ground of the duty.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands. (hai gunaikes tois idiois andrasin) “The wives (be subject) to their own husbands.” Such is a legitimate and exclusive or restricted relation the wife owes to her own husband, that each must mutually respect in marital relations, Col 3:18; 1Pe 3:1-2; Tit 2:4-5; 1Co 14:34; Gen 3:16. The submission of wives is to be to husbands who (idiois) are exclusively their own. The obedience of Christian wives to their own husbands is counted as obedience to Christ
2) “As unto the Lord” (hos; to kurio) “As (you are to be) subject to or toward the Lord.” As she is subject to the call of supreme obedience to Jesus Christ in relation to spiritual things, so is she to be subject to her husband in everything in the unit of family life, Eph 5:24.
This verse introduces three foundations or social orders of society in view of Christian behavior. They are (1) proper relations of husbands and wives, (2) parents and children, and (3) masters and servants, as each order of social activity is related to the church and citizenship duties.
Perhaps no loftier relation of husbands and wives to each other, to Christ, and to His church has ever been written than here expressed by Paul.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
22. Wives, submit yourselves. He comes now to the various conditions of life; for, besides the universal bond of subjection, some are more closely bound to each other, according to their respective callings. The community at large is divided, as it were, into so many yokes, out of which arises mutual obligation. There is, first, the yoke of marriage between husband and wife; — secondly, the yoke which binds parents and children; — and, thirdly, the yoke which connects masters and servants. By this arrangement there are six different classes, for each of whom Paul lays down peculiar duties. He begins with wives, whom he enjoins to be subject to their husbands, in the same manner as to Christ, — as to the Lord. Not that the authority is equal, but wives cannot obey Christ without yielding obedience to their husbands.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
CRITICAL AND EXPLANATORY NOTES
Eph. 5:22. Submit yourselves.Same word as in previous verse; neither here nor there does it involve any loss of self-respect. The wifes tribute to her husbands worth is submissionthe grace of childhood to both parents equally is obedience.
Eph. 5:23. Christ is the head of the Church.Defending her at His own peril (If ye seek Me, let these go their way); serving her in utmost forgetfulness of self (I am amongst you as he that serveth); Giving Himself up for her.
Eph. 5:25. Husbands, love your wives.This will prevent the submission of the wife from ever becoming degradingas submission to a tyrant must be.
Eph. 5:26. That He might sanctify and cleanse.There is no and between sanctify and cleanse in what St. Paul wrote. Sanctify it, having cleansed it (R.V.). I sanctify Myself, that they also may be sanctified (Joh. 17:19).
Eph. 5:27. Spot or wrinkle.Spot, a visible blemish, used in the plural, figuratively, in 2Pe. 2:13, of men who disfigure Christian assemblies. Wrinklea wrinkled bride is an incongruity, just as the mourning which produces wrinkles is out of place in the bride-chamber (Mat. 9:15).
Eph. 5:28. As their own bodies.Not as they love their own bodies merely, but as being their own. See Eph. 5:31, one flesh.
Eph. 5:31. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife.We must regard these words, not as a continuation of Adams in Gen. 2:23, but as the words of the narrator, who regards what our first father said as a mystical hint of the origin of marriage.
Eph. 5:32. This is a great mystery.The meaning of which is known only to the initiated. Something having a significance beyond what appears on the surface. But I speak.The I is emphatic: I give my interpretation. My chief interest in this mystery is as it relates to Christ and to the Church.
Eph. 5:33. Nevertheless.I pursue the matter no further; and though this mystical turn is given to the words, still in actual life let the husband love (Eph. 5:25) and the wife show reverence (Eph. 5:22). Let all the married among you apply the mystery to their own case, so that the husband may love the wife and the wife fear the husband.
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.Eph. 5:22-33
Duties of Wives and Husbands.
I. The duty of the wife is submission to her husband.Wives submit yourselves unto your own husbands.
1. A submission defined by religious obligation.As unto the Lord (Eph. 5:22). This submission implies no inferiority. Husband and wife are equal before God, and each is separately responsible to Him. The husband cannot love and serve God for the wife, nor the wife for the husband; each stands related to Him as a distinct personality, with distinct duties and responsibilities for each. God has the first claim upon them both, and their relation and duties to each other must be in harmony with that supreme claim. The submission demanded is not the subjection of an inferior to a superior, but the voluntary, sympathetic obedience that can be gracefully and appropriately rendered only by an equal to an equal. It is here that Christianity, in contrast with paganism and notably with Mahometanism, raises the weaker sex to honour. In soul and destiny it declares the woman to be man, endowed with all rights and powers inherent in humanity. It is one of the glories of our faith that it has enfranchised our sisters, and raises them in spiritual calling to the full level of their brothers and husbands.
2. A submission recognising the headship of the husband.
(1) Analogous to the headship of Christ to His Church. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the Church (Eph. 5:23).
(2) Unlike that headship inasmuch as Christ is not only the head but also the Saviour of the Church. And He is the Saviour of the body (Eph. 5:23). As the Saviour His headship is unrivalled and must be acknowledged by every member alike. The wife must not think too much of her husband: there is One who is superior to him, and who must be all in all to them both.
3. A submission after the pattern of that of the Church to Christ.As the Church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything (Eph. 5:24; cf. Eph. 5:33). Religion sanctifies all relationships and makes duty a joy. As the wife obeys Christ in spiritual things, so she will obey her husband in all things righteous. Mary, wife of Prince William of Orange and the heir-apparent to the English throne, was asked what her husband the prince should be if she became queen. She called in her husband and promised him he should always bear rule; and asked only that he would obey the command, Husbands, love your wives, as she should do that, Wives, be obedient to your husbands in all things.
II. The duty of the husband is to love his wife.
1. A love that seeks to promote the highest spiritual interests of the wife (Eph. 5:25-29). It must be a Christ-like, self-sacrificing, all-devoted love. It is greatly within the power of the husband to help or hinder the spiritual life of the wife. The man is apt to become so self-absorbed and forgetful that he needs reminding of his duty to love and cherish the one who should be dearer to him than any other. Assured of the reality and unselfishness of her husbands love, there is no sacrifice she will hesitate to make, nor will she spare any effort to attain the Christ-likeness of character to which he may wish to lead her. One with Christ. This is the ideal Christian state. We have a faint reflection of this in that which should be the ideal condition of husband and wife. They are no longer twain but one flesh. They are to be as nearly as possible one person. Their thoughts, their interests, their hopes, their aims are one. Marriage was given that it might be a representation of the spiritual union between Christ and His Church. The union of each separate soul with Christ is a fragment of His union with the whole Church, and must partake of the same character. He that is joined to the Lord is one spirit with Him.
2. A love arising from the intimacy and sacredness of the marriage bond (Eph. 5:30-32).Marriage is a union for life between one man and one woman; consequently bigamy, polygamy, and voluntary divorce are all inconsistent with its nature. It must be entered into freely and cordially by the parties, with the conviction that one is suited to the other, and to take the positions involved in the natural and scriptural view of the relation. Marriage, said Jeremy Taylor, is a school and exercise of virtue. Here is the proper sense of piety and patience, of the duty of parents, and the charity of relatives; here kindness is spread abroad and love is united and made firm as a centre. Marriage is the nursery of heaven, hath in it the labours of love and the delicacies of friendship, the blessing of society and the union of hands and hearts. Like the useful bee, marriage builds a house, unites into societies and republics, exercises many virtues, promotes the interest of mankind, and is that state of good things to which God has designed the present constitution of the world.
3. A love strengthened by the observance of mutual duties (Eph. 5:33).Love manifested begets love, and strengthens with exercise. The loving reverence of the wife follows on the frank and genuine love of the husband. This was an epitaph in a churchyard inscribed by a husband after sixty years of married life She always made home happy. The Christian conception of love and marriage began a new era in the world, and has exalted woman to her true place.
Lessons.
1. Marriage is not to be lightly entered into.
2. Is dignified as a symbol of the union between Christ and His Church. 3. Binds the contracting parties to fidelity in observing the most sacred vows.
GERM NOTES ON THE VERSES
Eph. 5:22-33. Wives and Husbands.
I. There are duties which are common to both the correlates.The husband and wife are in some respects equals. As they are one and have one common interest they ought to act with an undivided concern for the happiness of the family. They are alike bound to mutual fidelity and a chaste conversation. They are under equal obligations to study each others peace and comfort.
II. There are some duties particularly incumbent on the wife.These the apostle expresses by the terms submission, reverence, obedience, and subjection. Since the Church is subject to Christ, the woman ought to be subject to her husband, who, by Christs authority, is constituted her head. A family should resemble a Church in union, peace, and subordination. The honour and interest of religion require that wives, by a cheerful subordination, co-operate with their husbands in all the important concerns of the household, and in the nurture, education, and government of the dependent members.
III. There are duties particularly incumbent on the husband towards his wife.These the apostle expresses by the word love, which here stands opposed to sharpness and severity. One argument for this love is the example of Christ in His love and devotion to the Church. Another reason is, the intimacy of the relationshipWhoso loveth his wife loveth himself. Where the spirit of religion reigns in both, the union will be easy and their joint government in the family have efficacy. The maintenance of family religion depends on nothing more than the union of the heads. For how can they unite in prayers and praises who unite in nothing else.Lathrop.
Eph. 5:23-32. Christ and His Bride.
I. Christs love to the Church (Eph. 5:25-27). We must value and joyfully assert our individual part in the redeeming love of the Son of God; but we must equally admit the sovereign rights of the Church in the Redeemers passion. There is in some an absorption in the work of grace within their own hearts, an individualistic salvation-seeking that like all selfishness defeats its end, for it narrows and impoverishes the inner life thus sedulously cherished. The Church does not exist simply for the benefit of individual souls; it is an eternal institution, with an affiance to Christ, a calling and destiny of its own; within that universal sphere our personal destiny holds its particular place. The Christ is worthy and she must be made worthy. From eternity He set His love upon her; on the cross He won her back from her infidelity at the price of His blood. Through the ages He has been wooing her to Himself, and schooling her in wise and manifold ways that she may be fit for her heavenly calling. Through what cleansing fires, through what baptisms, even of blood, she has still to pass ere the consummation is reached, He only knows who loved her and gave Himself for her. He will spare to His Church nothing, either of bounty or of trial, that her perfection needs.
II. Christs authority over the Church (Eph. 5:23-24).The Church is no democracy, any more than she is an aristocracy or a sacerdotal absolutism: she is a Christocracy. The people are not rulers in the house of God; they are the ruled, laity and ministers alike. We acknowledge this in theory; but our language and spirit would oftentimes be other than they are, if we were penetrated with the sense of the continual presence and majesty of the Lord Jesus in our assemblies. The Churchs protection from human tyranny, from schemes of ambition, from the intrusion of political methods and designs, lies in her sense of the splendour and reality of Christs dominion and of her own eternal life in Him.
III. The mystery of the Churchs origin in Christ (Eph. 5:30-32).God chose us in Christ before the worlds foundation. We were created in the Son of Gods love antecedently to our redemption by Him. Christ recovers through the cross that which pertains inherently to Him, which belonged to Him by nature, and is as a part of Himself. The derivation of Eve from the body of Adam, as that is affirmed in the mysterious words of Genesis, is analogous to the derivation of the Church from Christ. The latter relationship existed in its ideal, and as conceived in the purpose of God, prior to the appearance of the human race. In St. Pauls theory, the origin of the woman in man, which forms the basis of marriage in Scripture, looked farther back to the origin of humanity in Christ Himself. In some mystical but real sense marriage is a reunion, the reincorporation of what had been sundered. Seeking his other self, the complement of his nature, the man breaks the ties of birth and founds a new home. So the inspired author of the passage in Genesis (Eph. 2:21-22) explains the origin of marriage, and the instinct which draws the bridegroom to his bride. But our apostle sees within this declaration a deeper truth, kept secret from the foundation of the world. When he speaks of this great mystery, he means thereby not marriage itself, but the saying of Adam about it. This text was a standing problem to the Jewish interpreters. But for my part, says the apostle, I refer it to Christ and to the Church. St. Paul, who has so often before drawn the parallel between Adam and Christ, by the light of this analogy perceives a new and rich meaning in the old dark sentence. It helps him to see how believers in Christ, forming collectively His body, are not only grafted into Him, but were derived from Him and formed in the very mould of His nature. In our union through grace and faith with Christ crucified we realise again the original design of our being. Christ has purchased by His blood no new or foreign bride, but her who was His from eternitythe child who had wandered from the Fathers house, the betrothed who had left her Lord and spouse.Findlay.
Eph. 5:25-33. The Christian Law of Marriage
I. Demands self-sacrificing love.
II. Recognises the sacredness of the union between the contracting parties.
III. Is ennobled in being a type of the union between Christ and the Church.
IV. Involves mutual fidelity on the part of both husband and wife.
Eph. 5:25-27. Christs Love for the Church.
I. Christs love of His Church.It was
1. Ancient.
2. Self-moved.
3. Active.
4. Effective.
II. Christs sacrifice of Himself as an exhibition of His love.
1. Himself. His life. What a life!
2. As a sacrifice. The essence of it is vicarious suffering.
3. To all the suffering which justice demanded.
III. Christs more immediate object in what He has done.
1. Sanctification. As essential as pardon.
2. By the agency of the Holy Spirit. Signified by the washing of water.
3. Through the instrumentality of the word.
IV. Christs ultimate aim.
1. To present His Church to Himself. A nuptial figure.
2. Free from all imperfections.
3. Adorned with all excellencies.
(1) Our obligations to Christ.
(2) The real value of holiness.
(3) The high destiny of believers.G. Brooks.
The Future Glory of the Church.
I. The future state of the Church.In describing the future condition of the Church, the apostle has evidently in his mind two previous states: her original state when lying dead in trespasses and sins, and her subsequent earthly state when separated from the mass of the ungodly and partially redeemed. We have the people of Christ before us in three distinct points of view:
1. As wholly defiled.Speaking of sanctifying and cleansing the Church intimates her complete defilement.
2. As in some measure cleansed.Though sanctified and cleansed, we read of spots still left on the Church.
3. As altogether pure.Faultless in Gods presence and estimation.
II. The causes to which this state is to be ascribed.
1. The love of Christ.
2. Love revealed in sacrifice as another step towards final purity.
3. The work of the Holy Spirit (Eph. 5:26).
4. The word of God (Eph. 5:26). A right understanding of its testimony and a heartfelt belief in its truth.
III. The great end for which all these means of holiness are brought into operation.That He might present it to Himself a glorious Church (Eph. 5:27). The likeness of God will be put on her, the image of God shine in her; that attribute of divinityholinesswhich is the perfection of divinity will be her crown.C. Bradley.
The Divine Ideal of the Church.
I. We have an array of stupendous facts concerning the Church.
1. The divine prevision. Before the eternal Son of God could give Himself for the Church, He must have had it in His mind.
2. The Redeemers actual love for the Church. 3. The Redeemers amazing self-sacrifice on behalf of the Church. 4. That the Redeemer has a very definite purpose concerning His Church.
II. The distinguishing marks or signs of the members of the Church.They are personal and experimental.
1. The casting out of natural impurities. Improvement is not enough. Nothing but a thorough re-creation can effect what is required.
2. The instrument of this change is the truth.
3. This change, this introduction into the Church, is a thing complete in itself, becomes historical, and ought never to need repeating.
4. The way is open for the appearance of the other personal and experimental signsanctification (Eph. 5:26).
5. Christs idea of the Church given in these verses is not abstract, impracticable, and untrue to the possibilities of ordinary human nature.
III. Here we catch a glimpse of the future and eternal glory of the Church.How stupendous an event it will be when, at the consummation of all things, the whole Church will be presented to the Lord Jesus! What can secure Church membership? Neither early training, nor baptism, nor the holding of, an orthodox creed, nor association with a religious and devout assembly, nor the filling of ecclesiastical office, nor even intelligent approach to the table of the Lord. Such things are means to an end. That end is true membership in the Church of Christ. And that membership is attained and secured by divine renewal of the heart, and by that conformity to the mind of Christ which is expressive of the new life. The true unity of the Church of Christ is that spiritual oneness which has its expression in identity of Christian life.W. Hudson.
Eph. 5:25. A Noble Self-sacrifice.Caius Gracchus, who was the idol of the Roman people, having carried his regard for the lower orders so far as to draw upon himself the resentment of the nobility, an open rupture ensued; and the two extremities of Rome resembled two campsOpimius the consul on one side, and Gracchus and his friend Fulvius on the other. A battle ensued in which the consul, meeting with more vigorous resistance than he expected, proclaimed an amnesty for all those who should lay down their arms, and at the same time promised to pay for the heads of Gracchus and Fulvius their weight in gold. This proclamation had the desired effect. The populace deserted their leaders, Fulvius was taken and beheaded, and Gracchus, at the advice of his two friends, Licinius Crassus and Pomponius, determined to flee the city, and reached the bridge Sublicius, where his enemies, who pursued him close, would have overtaken and seized him if his two friends had not opposed their fury; but they saw the danger he was in and determined to save his life at the expense of their own. They defended the bridge against all the consular troops till Gracchus was out of their reach; but at length, being overpowered by numbers, and covered with wounds, they both expired on the bridge they had so valiantly defended.Biblical Treasury.
Eph. 5:30. Members of the Body of Christ.
I. The doctrine.The apostle is speaking of believers only; of believers as believing; of all believers. His language implies:
1. Union.Real, intimate, indissoluble.
2. Dependence.Of the members on the heart. Of the members on the head.
3. Sympathy.Sincere, entire, uninterrupted. Value of human sympathy. Its rarity. Its necessary imperfection. The superiority of Christs.
II. The duty.
1. Love. A special affection arising out of a special relation.
2. Reverence.There should be no unholy familiarity.
3. Obedience.Responsive to His will as a part of Himself.G. Brooks.
Eph. 5:33. The Sanctity of Home Life.The Christian home is the corner-stone of modern civilisationthe best fruit Christianity has yielded the earth. The Anglo-Saxon home is the crowning glory of the race. Contrast it with French home life, or the miserable home life in Utah! National self-preservation demands a vigorous uprooting of Mormon polygamy and Western divorce lawlessness. That which is punished as a crime in the best and purest Christian lands must be punished as a crime wherever it is found. Garfield kissing his mother and his wife at his Inauguration was a sweet revelation of holy family life.Homiletic Monthly.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
(4 a.) In Eph. 5:22-33. St. Paul passes from warning against special sins to consider the three great relations of life, first considered as subjections, and so illustrating the general precept of submission in Eph. 5:21, but ultimately viewed in their reciprocity of mutual obligations and rights. First, accordingly, he dwells on the relation of marriage, declaring it to be hallowed as a type of the unity of Christ with His Church, and hence drawing the inference of the duty of free obedience in the wife, and of self-sacrificing love in the husband. This passage may be held to contain the complete and normal doctrine of the New Testament on this great question, written at a time when Christianity had already begun to exalt and purify the nuptial tie; and it is instructive to compare it with 1 Corinthians 7, written for the present distress, glancing not obscurely at marriage with unbelievers, and adapted to the condition of a proverbially profligate society, as yet scarcely raised above the low heathen ideas of marriage.
(22) Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands.The same exhortation is found in Col. 3:18; Tit. 2:5; 1Pe. 3:1-6; and besides these formal exhortations there is distinct and emphatic declaration of the subjection of women in 1Co. 11:3; 1Co. 11:7-9; 1Co. 14:34-35; 1Ti. 2:11-12. Probably the sense of that fundamental equality in Christ, in which (see Gal. 3:28) there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female, while it was rightly accepted as showing that there is no spiritual inferiority in womansuch as Oriental theory asserted, and even Greek and corrupt Roman practice impliedwas perverted to the denial of the greater natural weakness of woman, from which subordination comes, and to the foolish and reckless disregard of all social conventions. St. Paul, as usual, brings out the simple truth of principle, sanctioning whatever is fundamental and natural in womans subordination, and leaving the artificial enactments of law or custom to grow by degrees into accordance with it. The principle of subordination is permanent; the special regulations of it in the world or in the Church must vary as circumstances change.
As unto the Lord.These words are explained by the next verse. In Col. 3:18 we have the less emphatic phrase, as it is fitting in the Lord.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
[5.
Practical Exhortation continued (Eph. 5:22 to Eph. 6:9).
(4)
THE BEARING OF THE TRUTH OF UNITY ON THE THREE GREAT RELATIONS OF LIFE.
(a)
Between husbands and wivesa relation which is a type of the unity between Christ and His Church (Eph. 5:22-33).
(b) Between parents and childrena relation hallowed as existing in the Lord (Eph. 6:1-4).
(c)
Between masters and servantsa relation softened and deepened by common service to the one Master (Eph. 6:5-9).]
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
II. IN THE FAMILY AND DOMESTIC CONSTITUTIONS, Eph 5:22 to Eph 6:9.
a. Wives and husbands, Eph 5:22-33 .
St. Paul here makes transition, clear, indeed, yet so slight as scarce to be marked, from his model Church to his model family. Indeed, the two are one. The family is not only a part of the Church, but also in itself a Church, modelled ideally after the ideal Church, impregnated with Christian principle through its whole structure. Scientists may show how marriage is based in our physiological nature; jurists may show how it forms a part of the civil constitution; but it is the apostle’s part to show how it is enshrined in Christian law, and how the family is indeed both part of the holy Church and itself a holy Church. Hence, let no wives imagine that they are to be absolved by the new Christianity from their dutiful position as prescribed, not only by nature, but by God and Christ; nor let any husband imagine that he is discharged from his sacred responsibilities and ties. On the contrary, the looseness of Judaism and the profligacy of paganism are both abolished, and a new perfect sacredness is infused into the marriage constitution.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
22. Submit yourselves So slight is the break from the previous to the present topic, that we are obliged to go back to Eph 5:21 to obtain this submit, the leading verb. For it is not found in the best copies of the text, and has undoubtedly been supplied by copyists, who perceived the blank without realizing the reason. Going back to Eph 5:21, we find that the mutual submission of Church members and the submission of wives, are expressed by the same word. It is the submission of joyous love under fear of Christ. Bengel truly notes, therefore, that this submit is altogether different from the obey, Eph 6:1, and be obedient, Eph 6:5, prescribed to children and servants. And that would suggest that the “obey” prescribed to the bride in the marriage service is unbiblical.
Your own husbands Your own is emphatic, as not only yours as distinguished from other husbands, but as deeply and intensely your own.
As unto the Lord Said in anticipation of what he is about to state, that the husband represents Christ in the family Church.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘Wives be in subjection to your own husbands as to the Lord, for the husband is the head of the wife as Christ also is the head of the church, being himself the saviour of the body.’
From time immemorial the husband has been head of the family in all societies with rare exceptions. And this natural order is confirmed by Scripture on the grounds that man was first made and the woman was created for the man (1Co 11:9). Both are equal in God’s eyes (Gal 3:28) but the man takes precedence in the line of authority (1Co 11:3). So Paul says that just as Jesus, in the plan of salvation, subjected Himself to the Father even though He was co-equal and co-eternal, and the man subjects himself to Christ, so the woman is to subject herself to the man (1Co 11:3). It is the divine order and those who rebel against it rebel against God. Thus the wife in fact reveals her submission to the Lord by a proper submission to her husband.
However subjection is a voluntary state and does not mean being browbeaten. Each member of the church is to submit to the other (1Co 11:19), but not to be browbeaten, and Christ subjected Himself to God, with mutual ‘respect’ being shown. So husbands are to love their wives as Christ loves the church (1Co 11:25), nurturing and caring for them and showing them proper respect, and the wives are to respect their headship. The whole relationship can only work properly when all parts are doing so.
‘As Christ is also the head of the church.’ Here the headship of Christ over His church is likened to that of the husband over the wife. Christ is head over all things, but He is in a special way head over His people, and He watches over them, cares for them and seeks their responsive obedience and submission.
‘Being Himself the Saviour of the body.’ Notice the careful wording. Not the head of the body but the Saviour of the body, for the body is made up of His people in union with Himself and He is revealing His Headship by being at work in saving them (see 1Co 11:25-27). The husband/wife analogy is suspended. He is elsewhere said to be ‘the Head of the body’ (Col 3:18 but see Col 3:22) but there the idea is of His Headship rather than as differentiating between the head and the rest of the body (see Appendix below).
It should be noted that outside Revelation 19-21 and 2Co 11:2 Jesus Christ is never strictly said to be the husband or bridegroom of the church nor is the church said to be His wife or bride. While the illustrative idea is used it is never made specific. In 2Co 11:2 the idea is different from here. There Paul, acting as a father with a beloved daughter, espoused the church to one husband, to Jesus Christ, that he might ‘present them as a chaste virgin to Christ’. There the idea is that he has obtained from them a permanent commitment to Jesus Christ, so that they are betrothed to Him and will not go running off and being unfaithful to Him or misbehaving. The context is the possibility of being unfaithful by following false teachers. (A betrothed man could be described as a husband, and Mary, while only betrothed to Joseph, is described as a wife).
Here, however, in Ephesians the comparison is more of the wife to the husband and there is no suggestion of betrothal. Given that fact interpretation of the passage often tends to be more romantic than exact.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Husbands and Wives Are A Pattern of Christ and His Church (5:22-33).
In this passage there is a constant movement from the husband wife relationship to that of Christ and His church. In one sense it is the former which is the main theme, for both opening and closing verses refer to it. But Paul’s illustrative application of the idea to the Christ-church relationship leads him on to an expansion of that relationship as he exults in the wonder and glory of it, so that it too becomes a main thought. However, the church is never spoken of as His wife (or His bride) and there is no direct application of the idea. The application is rather of His Headship and His care and nourishment of His church as being similar to that required of a good husband.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Submission in Marriage Eph 5:21 tells us to be in submission in our relationships to others. The passage in Eph 5:22-33 focuses on the issue of submission in the marriage relationship.
When God told Adam and Eve to be fruitful and multiply, it was so that God’s purpose and plan for His creation might be fulfilled. Thus, the institution of marriage and procreation plays a central role in God’s divine plan for all things. The passage in Eph 5:22-33 regarding the husband and wife is placed within the context of the theme of Ephesians, which theme is God’s eternal plan for mankind. Thus, as we will see in the passage on parents and children in Eph 6:1-4, Paul speaks of the one key element in this relationship that will help an individual to fulfil his personal divine calling in life. For children, it is obedience to parents and for fathers it is proper training of a child. However, in marriage, the emphasis is different. The submission of a wife brings her under the protective care and nourishment of the husband so that she can support him to fulfil his destiny. The husband is to love his wife in a way that causes her to be all that God created her to be. Thus, in order for a person who is married to fulfil his individual calling in life, he or she must order their lives within the divine rule and guidelines of the marriage institution. Although Paul will state that a single individual has a much easier time in fulfilling his divine calling (1Co 7:1-40), he also understood that celibacy was not God’s original plan for mankind. When a married couple follows the rules of love and submission in marriage, they will place themselves on the road to succeeding in God’s divine plan for each one of their lives. A wife’s ability to submit to her husband will determine her ability to walk in submission to the Lord. The husband’s ability to honour his wife will determine his ability to honour the Lord in his daily walk. If either one or both fail to do so, it will hinder the journey of both of them (1Ti 2:8, 1Pe 3:7).
1Ti 2:8, “I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting.”
1Pe 3:7, “Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.”
Within any normal marriage, the wife continually longs for her husband’s love, while the husband most earnestly desires his wife’s respect. Thus, within this passage on marriage (Eph 5:22-33) the wife is told to honor her husband by submitting to him, and the husband is told to love his wife as Christ loves the Church. This type of response requires believers to daily crucify their flesh in order to fulfill this biblical command. For example, when a wife is not loved, she responds by not showing respect unto her husband; and when a husband is not honored, he responds by not show love towards his wife. Thus, the themes of love and respect are woven within the fabric of this passage of Scripture.
The Analogy of Christ and the Church Eph 5:25-27 describes Jesus’ office and ministry to the New Testament Church as a type of marriage. Some explanation is needed to understand why Paul uses the analogy of Christ and the Church when discussing the institution of marriage. He gave Himself in behalf of the Church to justify it before God the Father (Eph 5:25), and takes it through the process of sanctification as the Church embraces the Word and walks in it. In our sanctification, Jesus Christ sits as our Great High priest before the Father to intercede for us, while the Holy Spirit indwells every believer to guide him into the truth of God’s Word. His goal is to take the Church as His “bride” and be eternally wed to it in eternal glory (Eph 5:26). Thus, this passage of Scripture deals with man’s redemption: justification, sanctification, and glorification. Paul uses this relationship as an example to the husband of how to love his wife.
Just as Christ Jesus is the head of the Church, so does the husband serve the role as head over the wife. The role of the husband is a divine role created by God to serve a divine purpose. This analogy reveals that the institution of the family is embedded within God the Father’s overall plan of redemption as laid forth in the first three chapters of Ephesians. Paul puts this divine order into a single statement in 1Co 11:3, “But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.” Arthur Patzia explains how this analogy also helps the readers understand their intimate relationship with Christ as their loving head, caring for their every need as a member of the body of Christ; thus, this analogy has a domestic application as well as a doctrinal, ecclesiastical one. He explains that the husband’s role of authority is shaped by the role of Christ as head of the Church. [153]
[153] Arthur G. Patzia, Ephesians, Colossians, Philemon, in Understanding the Bible Commentary Series (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2011), 267.
Illustration As a husband guiding my family in the mission field, I often sense the anointing when opening the Scriptures with them, or when discussing issues and offering counsel. The role of the father come with a special anointing that God gives each man in order to fulfill this God-given task of leading the family into His plan for their lives.
Eph 5:22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
Eph 5:22
[154] Arthur G. Patzia, Ephesians, Colossians, Philemon, in Understanding the Bible Commentary Series (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2011), 268.
Now, if I were writing this epistle as an American born in a culture where marriage was consummated by two people who mutually loved each other, I would begin this passage by saying, “Wives, love your husbands.” However, Paul does not ask once in this passage for the wives to love their husbands. Why would this be so? One reason might be the fact that in the first century culture of the Ephesians, as in many cultures today, the fathers choose the husband for their daughter. A wedding was not consummated out of love, but out of a mutual arrangement by a father and a daughter’s obedience to a father. The wife was to learn to love her husband.
Illustration – Perhaps Uriah and Bathsheba were newly married and therefore, she had not yet developed a deep love for her husband. Therefore, her heart was not as torn apart as a person who had lost one who was dearly loved.
Eph 5:23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.
Eph 5:23
1Co 11:3, “But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.”
Eph 1:3, “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:”
Eph 5:24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.
Eph 5:24
Eph 5:25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
Eph 5:25
In one sense, both husband and wife are to submit to one another. The husband, as a leader, submits to the Lord by loving his wife. The wife, so as one who obeys her husband, does so by submitting to a husband’s leadership. Jack Hayford says the Lord taught him as a pastor that “ the greatest way to love and serve Christ’s Bride, the Church, was to learn first to love his own bride.” [155]
[155]
Eph 5:25 “even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it” Comments Christ Jesus loved the Church before the Church was sanctified. He loved us while we were unloveable and yet in our sins and gave Himself for us. [156] He gave Himself for the Church so that it could be sanctified and fulfill its destiny. He gave Himself on Calvary so that each child of God could obtain his final destiny through the process of sanctification, as described in Eph 5:26-27. In the same manner, the husband is to love his wife and guiding her into the fulfilment of her God-given destiny. Thus, Paul says, “So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies.” (Eph 5:28) The wife should have a sense of fulfilment in her life just as the husband when he fulfils his goals.
[156] Brook Foss Westcott, Saint Paul’s Epistle to the Ephesians: The Greek Text with Notes and Addenda (London: Macmillan and Co., 1906), 84.
Scripture References – Note:
Joh 15:13, “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.”
Eph 5:26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,
Eph 5:26
The Greek text reads, “that he might sanctify her after having cleansed (her).” The Greek word (to cleanse) is an aorist active participle that refers to a past event that has already been completed. In addition, the English translation “with the washing of water” literally reads in the Greek text, “with a water-kind of washing.” We must keep in mind that Paul is writing to the Ephesians from a heavenly perspective, so he describes our salvation from a divine standpoint, as if he were standing in heaven and looking down upon earth describing the salvation experience. The Old Testament priest washed himself in the brass laver prior to entering the door of the Tabernacle, which serves as a type and figure of the daily cleansing of the Word of God in the life of the believer. Thus, the word (water) is used figuratively to describe the inward cleansing that one outwardly testifies about through public water baptism. In Tit 3:5, Paul describes the salvation experience with a similar statement, saying, “by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost.” Paul describes the salvation experience again when writing to the believers at Corinth, saying, “And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.” (1Co 6:11) Ezekiel offers similar, figurative language when he says, “Then washed I thee with water; yea, I thoroughly washed away thy blood from thee, and I anointed thee with oil.” (Eze 16:9) The water is figurative of the cleansing blood of Jesus Christ. B. H. Carroll notes that under the old covenant, the water of purification was sprinkled for cleansing (Psa 51:7, Eze 36:25).
Psa 51:7, “Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean: wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow.”
Eze 36:25, “Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you.”
Moses sprinkled the people and the Tabernacle and its articles with blood from the altar using a bunch of hyssop (Exo 24:6-8, Lev 8:30, Psa 51:7, Eze 36:25). [157]
[157] B. H. Carroll, Colossians, Ephesians, and Hebrews, in An Interpretation of the English Bible (New York: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1917), 166.
Paul appropriately uses the term “washing” in a figurative sense to describe one’s salvation experience in Eph 5:26. Modern western cultures enjoy an abundance of clean water for drinking, for bathing, for washing the hands, body, and other household items. However, in primitive cultures, hygiene is poorly understood and clean water is not abundant. Something we practice so regularly and take for granted each day is seldom done in primitive cultures simply because of an insufficient supply of pure water. Such cultures experience disease with understanding its causes.
B. F. Westcott and others understands the phrase “by the word” to mean that we were initially saved and cleansed from our sins through our word of confession of faith in Jesus Christ. [158] In contrast, Andrew Lincoln and others believes this phrase refers to the sacramental confession made by the one doing the baptismal ceremony upon the candidate. [159] The interpretation of a confession of faith is warranted by the use of the Greek word , which describes the spoken words of one’s mouth, rather than the use of the Greek word , which has a broad scope of meanings, in particular to the written Word of God. However, Andrew Lincoln cites the phrase “ ” in Eph 6:17 as justification for interpreting this to mean the proclamation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
[158] Brook Foss Westcott, Saint Paul’s Epistle to the Ephesians: The Greek Text with Notes and Addenda (London: Macmillan and Co., 1906), 84.
[159] Andrew T. Lincoln, Ephesians, in Word Biblical Commentary: 58 Volumes on CD-Rom, vol. 42, eds. Bruce M. Metzger, David A. Hubbard, and Glenn W. Barker (Dallas: Word Inc., 2002), in Libronix Digital Library System, v. 3.0b [CD-ROM] (Bellingham, WA: Libronix Corp., 2004), notes on Ephesians 5:26.
The Greek word is clearly linked to (to cleanse). However, if is linked at all to the word (to sanctify) by any sense of meaning, which view is held by the minority, then the phrase “by the word” can refer both to the cleansing and sanctification of the believer. The process of sanctification takes place by daily feeding upon God’s Word. Children of God fail to understand the need of the daily washing of the soul of man by the Word of God. The Word is neglected because its value is not understood. As a result, many problems result in the life of the believer because of the lack of appropriating the Word of God, problems that could have been avoided.
Eph 5:27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.
Eph 5:27
Paul makes a similar analogy of the Church as the bride of Christ in 2Co 11:2, “For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.” John the apostle describes the marriage supper of the Lamb in Rev 19:5-9
Rev 19:5-9, “And a voice came out of the throne, saying, Praise our God, all ye his servants, and ye that fear him, both small and great. And I heard as it were the voice of a great multitude, and as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of mighty thunderings, saying, Alleluia: for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth. Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready. And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints. And he saith unto me, Write, Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb. And he saith unto me, These are the true sayings of God.”
This glorious uniting of the Church with Christ is mentioned by Jesus Christ in the Parable of the Ten Virgins (Mat 25:1-13).
In contrast to the spotless Church, Peter represents the unrighteous as being “spots and blemishes” (2Pe 2:13).
2Pe 2:13, “And shall receive the reward of unrighteousness, as they that count it pleasure to riot in the day time. Spots they are and blemishes, sporting themselves with their own deceivings while they feast with you;”
Eph 5:26-27 Comments The Three Phases of the Sanctification of the Church Eph 5:26-27 consists of three purpose clauses beginning with . Westcott describes the sequences of these clauses as three phases of our sanctification. Christ is to lead the Church into the process of sanctification, present her to Himself as a glorious Church, and bring her into a place of continuous holiness. [160] Westcott uses these three phases to draws the three-fold image of a bride preparing for her wedding, being presented to her bridegroom, and abiding in his continual fellowship.
[160] Brook Foss Westcott, Saint Paul’s Epistle to the Ephesians: The Greek Text with Notes and Addenda (London: Macmillan and Co., 1906), 84.
Eph 5:28 So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself.
Eph 5:28
[161] Brook Foss Westcott, Saint Paul’s Epistle to the Ephesians: The Greek Text with Notes and Addenda (London: Macmillan and Co., 1906), 85.
[162] Andrew T. Lincoln, Ephesians, in Word Biblical Commentary: 58 Volumes on CD-Rom, vol. 42, eds. Bruce M. Metzger, David A. Hubbard, and Glenn W. Barker (Dallas: Word Inc., 2002), in Libronix Digital Library System, v. 3.0b [CD-ROM] (Bellingham, WA: Libronix Corp., 2004), notes on Ephesians 5:28.
Eph 5:29 For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church:
Eph 5:29
[163] Arthur G. Patzia, Ephesians, Colossians, Philemon, in Understanding the Bible Commentary Series (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2011), 272.
“but nourisheth and cherisheth it” – Comments – These words tell us how men are to love their wives. They are to nourish and cherish her. One pastor, who was also a marriage counsellor, said that the Lord told him that his job was to help his wife to become what God created her to be. He was not to abuse her nor put her down, but he was to build her up so that she might reach her full potential. In this way, the wife can fulfil God’s purpose and plan for her life. This pastor went on to say that many husbands will stand before the throne of God one day and give an account of how they handled one of the most precious gifts that God gave the husband, his wife.
“even as the Lord the church” – Comments – Even the Lord Jesus Christ nourishes and cherishes His own body, the Church.
Eph 5:30 For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.
Eph 5:30
“of his flesh, and of his bones” Comments Albert Barnes suggests this phrase reflects Gen 2:23, “And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.” [164] The fact that the following verse (Eph 5:31) is a quote from Gen 2:24 further supports this view. Barnes believes this phrase reflects the intimacy of marriage. It certainly reflects the absolute unity that God intended within the institution of marriage. The UBS 3 treats the phrase “of his flesh, and of his bones” as a later addition to the text.
[164] Albert Barnes, Notes, Explanatory and Practical, on the Epistles of Paul to the Ephesians, Philippians and Colossians (New York: Harper and Brothers, Publishers, 1855), 126.
Eph 5:30 Comments As the natural man nourishes and cherishes his own physical body (Eph 5:29), so does Christ love and cherish His own body, which is the Church.
A. B. Simpson comments on Eph 5:30 saying, “These words recognize a union between our body and the risen body of the Lord Jesus Christ, which gives us the right to claim for our mortal frame all the vital energy of His perfect life. His body is ours. His life is ours, and it is all sufficient.” [165] This divine empowering within our mortal bodies has been given to us by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit (Rom 8:11).
[165] A. B. Simpson, The Gospel of Healing (New York: Christian Alliance Publication Co., 1890) [on-line]; accessed 26 October 2008; available from http://www.cmalliance.org/whoweare/archives/pdfs/simpson/TheGospelOfHealing.pdf; Internet, chapter 1, section 12.
Rom 8:11, “But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.”
Eph 5:31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.
Eph 5:31
Eph 5:32 This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.
Eph 5:32
Within the context of the New Testament, the “mystery” of the Gospel generally refers to divine revelation which has until now been hidden from mankind; but it has now been revealed at the revelation of Christ Jesus. God’s divine plan of redemption for mankind through His Son Jesus Christ was a mystery hidden within the Old Testament Scriptures, but has now been revealed to us by the Holy Spirit through the New Testament writings. In Eph 5:32 Paul uses to refer to one aspect of God’s plan of redemption, which is the spiritual relationship between Christ and His Church.
“but I speak concerning Christ and the church” – Comments Paul cites Gen 2:24 in 1Co 6:16-17 when explaining the relationship of one flesh when a man commits fornication with a harlot. Just as Paul further explains in this passage that the believer who is united with Jesus Christ becomes one spirit, so does Paul follow with a similar statement in Eph 5:32, explaining how a man and a woman uniting in marriage serves as an analogy of the unity between a believer and Christ, for both become one flesh, that is, one spirit.
1Co 6:16-17, “What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh. But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.”
Eph 5:33 Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband.
Eph 5:33
“A husband is to obey the commandment to love even if his wife does not obey the commandment to respect, and a wife is to obey the commandment to loveA husband is even called to love a disrespectful wife, and a wife is called to respect an unloving husbandWhen a husband feels disrespected, he has a natural tendency to react in ways that feel unloving to his wife. (Perhaps the command to love was given to him precisely for this reason!) When a wife feels unloved, she has a natural tendency to react in ways that feel disrespectful to her husband. (Perhaps the command to respect was given to her precisely for this reason!)” [166]
[166] Emerson Eggerichs, Love and Respect (Nashville, Tennessee: Thomas Nelson, c2004), 16.
Illustration Eggerichs illustrates the application of a woman respecting her husband by referring to 1Pe 3:1-2. Perhaps the most powerful tool that a believing woman can use to win her husband to Christ is to show him “unconditional respect.” [167] This passage of Scripture goes on to say that Sarah called Abraham “lord” (1Pe 3:6), as a sign of respect and obedience towards her husband. Peter then turns to the husband and tells him to honour his wife (1Pe 3:7), which reflects the need to give his wife the love she craves.
[167] Emerson Eggerichs, Love and Respect (Nashville, Tennessee: Thomas Nelson, c2004), 18.
1Pe 3:1-2, “Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives; While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear.”
Illustration A man’s desire for respect from his wife is clearly illustrated in the story of King Ahasuerus’ rejection of Queen Vashti (Est 1:1-22). The opening story of the book of Esther is about a man’s desire for respect from his wife. During a royal banquet, the king asked the queen to present herself before his peers in order to boast of her beauty. Because she refused, perhaps to avoid feeling humiliated before a group of vulgar, drunken, lustful men, the king rejected her as his queen. There is no love or romance involved in this decision. The king’s decision was driven strictly by his desire for respect from a wife. Had the king loved the queen, he would have considered her feelings and emotions behind her decision. In contrast, God commands the husband to love his wife, a practice that encourages the wife to respect her husband (Eph 5:33). She had great honor and respect in hosting the wives of the nation’s leaders. Now, she was compelled to be displayed before a group of vulgar men who would look at her with envy and lust. Instead of obeying the king, the queen disrespected her husband because he disrespected her.
Illustration Menchu told me last night that she admired me for the first time in our fifteen-year marriage (6 April 2011). She could have told me that she loves me a hundred times; but it would not carry as much weight as one statement of admiration and honor. Her admiration tells me that as a man, I am fulfilling my divine destiny and she is willing to go with me on the journey. However, if she tells me she loves me, tomorrow she can become upset with me. Love toward a husband vacillates, but honur endures.
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
The Duties of Husbands and Wives as Shown by the Relation of Christ to the Church. Eph 5:22-33
The exhortation with its basis:
v. 22. Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands as unto the Lord;
v. 23. for the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the Head of the Church; and He is the Savior of the body.
v. 24. Therefore, as the Church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything.
v. 25. Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the Church, and gave Himself for it,
v. 26. that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,
v. 27. that he might present it to Himself a glorious Church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing, but that it should be holy and without blemish. Of this entire section it has been stated that “it gives the Christian ideal of the marriage-relation, It is the loftiest conception of that relation that has ever come from human pen, and one than which no higher can be imagined. ” Expanding the thought of the last admonition, the apostle writes: Wives, to your own husbands be subject as to the Lord. To their own husbands, to the men with whom they have entered into the relationship of holy wedlock, Christian wives give subjection. This they do, not unwillingly, as in the obedience of a forced submission, but by virtue of their willing consent at the time of the betrothal; for they are not subject to the husband as their lord and master, but “as to the Lord,” that is, as to Christ. Just as Christian women are, by virtue of faith, in a state of submission to Christ. so the obedience which they render to their husbands is one rendered to Christ, the Christian husband being the head of the wife and typifying to her Christ, the Head of the entire Christian Church: For the husband is the head of the wife, just as also Christ is the Head of the Church, Himself being the Savior of the body. In the case of Christ it is a matter both of superiority and of headship, for He is both God and the Savior of the body; His Church, the Christians, having accepted Him by faith, they have individually and collectively become the members of His body, the communion of saints, united in one great organism. In the case of the husband not all points of comparison can be stressed. It may not be a question of superiority, but it is always very distinctly a question of headship. It is God’s will that the husband be the head of the wife; the provision made at the time of creation is thus confirmed for the time of the Few Testament.
Just how far this relation will extend in the sense as here given, is stated by the apostle: Nevertheless, as the Church is subject to Christ, so also the wives to the husbands in everything. The apostle makes no concessions to modern over-emancipation, neither does he give to the husband unlimited latitude. The meaning of the apostle is this: The fact that Christ is the Savior of the Church in no way affects the fact that He is also the Head of the Church; now, though the husband is not the savior of the body, the question of obedience for all that is not affected thereby; as the Church is subject to Christ, so, too, are wives subject to their husbands. It is expressly stated that this is to be in all things, the wife thus not being given permission to make arbitrary exceptions. But it is self-evident that the headship of man is confined to the matters of this life only. So far as the sphere of Christianity is concerned, there is neither male nor female for ye are all one in Christ Jesus, Gal 3:28.
On the part of the women it is a matter of voluntary submission in a relation to their husbands which is compared to that of the Church to Christ. Being coheirs with the men of the hope of salvation, they might be inclined to demand equality in the marital relation and life: in answer to such thoughts the headship of the husbands was emphasized. On the part of the men the danger consisted in assuming an overbearing lordship, in deeming themselves authorized to make use of severity. To them St. Paul saps: Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the Church and offered Himself up for it. The apostle wants the husbands to show their love for their wives in their actions at all times; it should be an active, willing love. The apostle does not introduce a reason for this love, since its presence is assumed on the basis of the order of creation, but he offers the highest example and comparison that could be conceived of. The chief proof of the love of Christ for the congregation consisted in this, that He offered up Himself, that He sacrificed His own life for the Church, in the interest of the Church, for the expiation of sins. The redemption was merited for the whole world, but only in the case of the believers is it actually realized; and so the vicarious work of Christ, the supreme proof of His love, is here represented as having taken place in the interest of the Church. And the result of this work, as it actually appears in the life of the believers, is: That He might sanctify it, cleansing it by the washing of the water in the word. It is not only justification that the apostle speaks of here, he is referring not merely to the righteousness and perfection which was imputed to every believer at the time of His conversion, but he is speaking of the sanctification which is going on in the Church, having been begun in the believers in their baptism to be perfected on the last day. Christ consecrated His Church, set it apart for Himself. And this He did by cleansing each member of the Church by the miraculous washing of water, by the sacrament of Holy Baptism. For this water is not simple water only, as Luther very correctly writes, but the water comprehended in God’s command and connected with God’s word. The water of Baptism cleanses from the corruption of inherited sin, it has the power to regenerate, to renew heart and mind, the nature of man. See Rom 6:3; Col 2:12; Tit 3:5.
The final object of the sanctifying done by Christ is given in the second dependent clause: That He Himself might present to Himself the Church, glorious, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any of such things, but that it should be holy and unblamable. Christ, as the Bridegroom, having purchased the Bride with His blood and having cleansed all believers, the members of the Church, by the water of Baptism, now presents or sets forth His Bride. The sanctification of this present time will reach its climax in the final glorification, when the Kingdom of Grace will become the Kingdom of Glory, when the Church Militant will become the Church Triumphant. “Christ presents the Church to Himself, He and no other, to Himself. He does it. He gave Himself for it. He sanctifies it. He, before the assembled universe, places by His side the Bride purchased with His blood. He presents it to Himself a glorious Church. That is glorious which excites admiration. The Church is to be an object of admiration to all intelligent beings, because of its freedom from all defects and because of its absolute perfection. It is to be conformed to the glorified humanity of the Son of God, in the presence of which the disciples on the mount became as dead men, and from the clear manifestation of which, when Christ comes the second time, the heavens and the earth are to flee away. God has predestined His people to be conformed to the image of His Son. And when He shall appear, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is, 1Jn 3:2. The figure is preserved in the description here given of the glory of the consummated Church. It is to be as a faultless bride; perfect in beauty and splendidly adorned. She is to be without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, i. e. , without anything to mar her beauty, free from every indication of age, faultless and immortal. What is thus expressed figuratively is expressed literally in the last clause of the verse, that it should be holy and without blame. ” (Hodge.)
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
Eph 5:22. Wives, submit yourselves, &c. The Apostle’s discourse on particular relative duties, is in the natural order in which the relations themselves commenced in the world, which was first between husband and wife; next, between parents and children; and, lastly, between masters and servants. The Apostle accordingly begins with the duties of the first of these relations in this chapter, and goes on to those of parents and children in the next; and he keeps the same order in his exhortations to all these in his epistle to the Colossians, ch. Eph 3:18, &c. and Eph 4:1. But it may be farther observed, that, in both these epistles he first insists on the duties of the inferior, and then on those of the superior relatives in every instance of them. And St. Peter proceeds in the same order, when he speaks of the duties of wives and husbands, 1Pe 3:1-7. The reasons of this may probably be, because the duties of wives, children, and servants, are most difficult in themselves, and most apt to be objected against, and not so readily attended to, and complied with; and because, if these relatives faithfully perform the duties on their part, it will lay a more endearing obligation upon husbands, parents, and masters, to treat their wives, children, and servants, with love and tenderness, and would leave them utterly inexcusable, were they to be wanting in their duty toward them. Hence St. Peter, in the place just referred to, exhorts believing wives to win their husbands by a becoming spirit and conversation.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
4. Special Christian duties in domestic relations.
Eph 5:22 to Eph 6:9.
Wives and husbands
(Eph 5:22-33.)
22Wives, submit yourselves42 unto [to] your own husbands, as unto [to] the Lord. 23For the husband is the head of the [Because a43 husband is head of his] wife, even as Christ is the head [as Christ also is head] of the church: [,] and he is [himself 24omitting and he is]44 the Saviour of the body. Therefore, [Nevertheless]45 as the church is subject unto [to] Christ, so let the wives [also] be to their own [omit own]46 husbands in every thing. 25Husbands, love your47 wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself [up] for it: 26That he might sanctify [it,] and cleanse [cleansing] it with the washing [laver] of [the] water by [in] the word, 27That he might present it to himself a glorious church [That he might himself48 present to himself the church glorious], not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; 28but that it should [might] be holy and without blemish. So [Thus] ought men [husbands also]49 to love their [own] wives as their own bodies. He that [who] loveth his [own] wife loveth himself. 29For no man ever yet hated [no one ever hated] his own flesh; but nourisheth it, even as the Lord [Christ50 also doth] the 30church: For [Because] we are members of his body, [being]51 of his flesh, and of his bones. 31For this cause shall a man leave his [omit his]52 father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife,53 and they [the] two shall be one flesh. 32This is a great mystery [This mystery is a great one]: but I speak concerning [I say it in33regard to]54 Christ and the church. Nevertheless, let every one of you in particular [Ye also severally, let each one] so love his [own] wife even [omit even] as himself; and [let] the wife see that she reverence her husband.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
To Wives; Eph 5:22-24. a. The exhortation, Eph 5:22; b. The basis of it, Eph 5:23-24.
Eph 5:22. The exhortation. Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands, .This section with its particular duties is so closely connected to the last sentence: submitting yourselves one to another, with its general duties, that the form is thus abbreviated. Accordingly the verb to be supplied should be imperative, as in some of the various readings, as is required also by the arrangement of the section itself (Eph 5:25; Eph 5:28; Eph 5:33). Bengel Inferiores priore loco ponuntur, deinde superiores 25, Eph 6:1; Eph 6:4-5; Eph 6:9; 1Pe 3:1, quia propositio est de subjectione: et inferiores debent officium facere, qualescunque sunt superiores. Multi etiam ex inferioribus fiunt superiores: et qui bene subest, bene prest. The term is almost invariably joined with husbands in the New Testament (Tit. 2:5, 17; 1Pe 3:1; 1Pe 3:5; 1Co 7:2 : : 1Co 14:35). We even find (Tit 1:12) marking in addition to the their, that no strange (antithesis: ) one is to be thought of. From this it follows that is not simply=husband (Harless), nor =, (Winer, p. 145). It has elsewhere its definite meaning=proprius, as Winer admits in regard to many passages, and the Apostle had in this one precept of obedience for the wife a good and sufficient reason for defining the husband with ; this justifies the sharpening by which the command appears a natural one.55 At the same time it points to the fact, that the wife is found to the husband in another way than he to her. She has here her calling, the avocation of the husband extends further. It is also to be noticed with Bengel: Mulieres obsequi debent suis maritis, etiamsi alibi meliora viderentur consilia. See Doctr. Notes.
As to the Lord, .The singular requires according to the context a reference to Christ (Eph 6:1; Eph 6:5-7), and as marks a reality; behind the husband stands the Lord Himself. Thus the obedience is characterized. The obedience is to be rendered not to the husband as man, but as own husband in and by whose person the Lord is honored who has established the relation, whom the husband himself must obey.56 Hence it is not the husband as lord (Thom. Aquinas, Semler and others).
The basis of the exhortation; Eph 5:23-24.
Eph 5:23. Because a husband is head of his wife [].The foundation of the exhortation is introduced by , because. , husband, without the article, designates generally every husband,57 who as such is head of the definite wife, chosen and won by him ( ). The position of the husband is thus marked as of an organizing, managing, controlling and deciding character, which is further set forth by the comparison immediately following:
As Christ also is head of the Church. places Him as parallel with the husband (Eph 2:3; Eph 4:17). On head of the Church, see Eph 1:22; Eph 4:15. The wife and the Church are thus placed as parallels.
Himself the Saviour of the body.This distinguishes Christ from the husband. emphasizes Christ: He and none other. , Saviour of the body, the Church, is He and He alone. It is thus explanatory of Christ, marking His peculiar dignity, and not in apposition to head. This is not applicable to the husband as respects the wife; for him also Christ is the Redeemer. [Alford thus expands the Apostles thought: In Christs case the Headship is united with, nay gained by, His having saved the body in the process of Redemption: so that I am not alleging Christs Headship as one entirely identical with that other, for He has a claim to it and office in it peculiar to Himself. So most.R.] It is incorrect to take this as referring to the man also, in order thereby to remind husbands that they should make their wives happy (Erasmus, Hofmann, Schriftbeweis, . 2, p. 133, and others); that thought belongs to the other part of the exhortation (Eph 5:25 ff.) and would weaken the notion of very much. Stier is over-refined in discovering in an etymological allusion, as Php 3:20-21.
Eph 5:24. Nevertheless as the Church is subject to Christ, , nevertheless, in spite of the difference between Christ and the husband, the resemblance between the Church and the wife remains. Hence the particle is adversative: habet quidem id peculiare Christus, quod est, est servator ecclesi, nihilominus sciant mulieres, sibi maritos presse, Christi exemplo, utcunque pari gratia non polleant (Calvin, Bengel and others).58 It is accordingly neither syllogistic=, (Beza [E. V.] and others), nor continuative= (Winer, p. 420), nor resumptive=inquam (Harless).
So let the wives also be to their husbands [ ].The strongly marks the analogy. The verb is to be supplied as in Eph 5:22. The emphasis rests on the final words: in everything, (1Co 1:5)= (Col 3:20; Col 3:22). From such a command we are not to infer that the reference is to Christian wedlock (Harless); this must indeed also be thoroughly correct. Neither the one (1Co 7:12-17) nor the other is to be accepted. In everything is limited by the context to that which the husband as such commands and which the wife as such has to do, but in neither contrary to the Lord. [Hodge: It teaches its extent, not its degree. It extends over all departments, but is limited in all,first, by the nature of the relation; and secondly, by the higher authority of God.R.]
To Husbands; Eph 5:25-31. a. The exhortation, Eph 5:25-28; b. The basis of it, Eph 5:29-31.
Eph 5:25. Husbands, love your wives, , . [See Textual Note6].Thus the husbands are exhorted, but a closer definition follows: Even as Christ also loved the Church. places the husbands in emphatic parallelism with Him, and the wives with the Church ( ). Si omnia rhetorum argumenta in unum conjicias, non tam persuaseris conjugibus dilectionem mutuam quam hic Paulus (Bugenhagen). [Comp. the apt quotation from Theophylact in Ellicott, and the beautiful remarks of Chrysostom, cited at length by Alford in loco.R.] , loved (Joh 13:34; Joh 15:12; 1Jn 2:8; 1Jn 3:14) is more closely defined by proof of fact.
And gave himself up for it,59 (Eph 5:2).Here also we should not supply in thought: unto death (Meyer), if by that is meant only the death on the cross; the reference is to the entire suffering including the last act as the extreme point. Thus the love required of the husband, a love self-devoting even unto death, gains a significant depth, while there still remains something important which is incomparable: Christ first created the Church through love, as His love made a reconciliation of the world with God, redemption from sin, and death, eternal life and salvation.
Eph 5:26-27. The end of the self-sacrificing love of Christ.
Eph 5:26. That he might sanctify it. defines the end: . There is here indicated a continued action and dealing towards and upon the Church, the result of which is expressed in Eph 5:27 (that it should be holy and without blemish); it is the positive activity, effecting the ethical form and demeanor which is well-pleasing to God. It is not merely segregare et sibi consecrare (Calvin [Eadie, but not to the exclusion of the idea of sanctification as a result.R.] and others). The modality is set forth in the participial clause: Cleansing it. as in Eph 1:9; Eph 1:13. This indicates the negative activity directed against the evil which is to be removed; both, the positive and the negative, advance together and undivided. Hence it is not: after he cleansed it (Olshausen, Meyer and others),60 nor, as though it were complete in a moment: and has cleansed it (Luther). It continues: it is not a single member of the Church that is spoken of, but the totality of Christians. By what means then is the Church cleansed from sin?
With the laver of the water, 61 .Unquestionably this means baptism; the readers must have thus understood it (Harless); insigne testimonium de baptismo (Bengel). The article () denotes something well known; besides and the connection with . Comp. Tit 3:5; 1Co 6:11; Heb 10:23; Act 10:47; Act 22:16. But the water does not give the cleansing which is spoken of, nor the bathing or washing. It is the baptism, not the bath in the water. Hence there is further added: in the word, , in order to designate Christian baptism as to its essence. The notion of baptism, as a means of cleansing beside the sanctifying (see Doctr. Notes 5, 6), as well as the position of this phrase require us to take both together, and the usage respecting the word ) and the connection by means of (like Eph 6:2 : ) admit of this. Paul uses (Eph 5:17; Rom 10:8; Rom 10:17; 2Co 12:4; comp. Heb 1:3; Heb 11:3; 1Pe 1:25) in a similar manner. [In all cases it refers directly or indirectly towards proceeding ultimately or immediately from God (Ellicott).R.] The conjunction of , , , Joh 13:10; Joh 15:3, is well known. The washing of water takes place in word, consists essentially therein, hence the reference to Gods Word in general, and in particular to the name of the triune God and His promise. [Alford is quite correct in referring it to the preached word of faith (Rom 10:8), of which confession is made in baptism, and which carries the real cleansing (Joh 15:3; Joh 17:17) and regenerating power (1Pe 1:23; 1Pe 3:21)so Augustine Tract. 80 in Joan. 3, vol. 3. p. 1840, Migne; where these memorable words occur, Detrahe verbum, et quid est aqua nisi aqua? Accedit verbum ad elementum, et fit sacramentum, etiam ipsum tanquam visibile verbum. So substantially Eadie, Ellicott, Hodge and others. Comp. Doctr. Notes.R.]
Hence it is incorrect to take , as a Hebraism=to the end thereby (Koppe and others), or as formula baptizandi (Greek. Fathers, Scholastics and others). Nor is it to be joined with (Bengel, Harless, Hofmann Schriftbeweis, II. 2, p. 135, who takes it as the word Mat 8:3; ), which would then have two means by the side of each other, or with (Jerome, Winer, p. 130, Meyer and others), for in that case it would of necessity have been immediately subjoined. [The connection with the participle is defended by Eadie, Alford and Ellicott (who more exactly suggests: rather with the whole expression). The absence of the article is strongly opposed to Braunes view, while the participle might well have two added qualifications, one an instrumental dative and the other specifying with the necessary accompaniment (Ellicott). Thus the word, preached and received, is the conditional element of purification,the real water of spiritual baptism;that wherein and whereby alone the efficiency of baptism is conveyed (Alford).R.]
Eph 5:27. That he might himself present to himself the Church glorious, This second depends on , the end and aim of which it introduces: He might himself present, etc. He and none other (), without the co-operation of others for Himself ()62 and not for others, the world or anything else, to His own good-pleasure presents the Church gloriously. The figure () is taken, as in 2Co 11:2, from the adorning of a bride; hence the emphatically placed , which in 1Co 4:10 is the antithesis of , is like Luk 7:25 ( ) to be applied to the glorious appearance, so that the Church thus appears worthy of the calling (Eph 4:1), or of the Lord (Col 1:10), of God (1Th 2:12; 3Jn 1:6), respondeat ide su tern (Bengel). The result of the is the both belong together: sanctitas est gloria interior, gloria est sanctitas emicans (Bengel)63.
The second clause beginning with is not to be placed as parallel to the first, nor is the figure of an offering to be substituted for that of adorning (Harless). But it is to be maintained, that this state of things for the Church is not attained in this life (Rudelbach), while at the same time we may say with Bengel: (id valet suo modo jam de hac vita). The vital process in the individual and in the whole is indeed that of a development from seed to harvest, is not complete atone stroke, has its stadia and phases. The consummation is really only at the conclusion (Second Advent). [So Alford, Eadie and most. Hodge has a full note on the question.R.]
Not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing, .Thus the Apostle describes more clearly .64 (2Pe 2:13; comp. Judges 12), parallel to , designates what clings to her from without, spot and stain, what is loathsome, the remains of the previous walk and conversation; , wrinkle, refers to internal emotions, which fix themselves in the countenance, and disfigure the face as it grows old. Other antitheses, as those of Grotius (the former applying to carere vitiis, the latter to vegetos semper esse, to what is good) are not justified by the language. The final phrase negatives the least spot or wrinkle or even what is similar, hence in general what can disfigure. [The terms are taken from physical beauty, health, and symmetry, to denote spiritual perfection (Eadie).R.]
But that it might be, instead of , in accordance with the liveliness of the Greek, who liked the transition from the participle into the finite verb. Winer, p. 537. This is parallel to the second one at the beginning of this verse. [Hence might must be substituted for should (E. V.), to indicate the parallelism.R.] The final end of the sanctifying is the being holy and without blemish.65To the wrinkle proceeding from within the holy corresponds, to the external spot without blemish (Eph 1:4).
Eph 5:28. Thus, points emphatically to what precedes, on which account Harless (with Estius: digressus nonnihil ad mysterium, nunc ad institutum redit) incorrectly excludes the definite comparison for wedded life, as though it were inappropriate, when only prudence, moderation are commanded. It is not to be referred to the following (B-Crusius). [So Alford. But Ellicott, Eadie and Hodge agree with Braune, in referring to what precedes, i.e., thus, in like manner as Christ, while indicates not the measure, but a fact, as they are, etc.R.]
Ought husbands to love their own wives [ .]The comparison with Christ is now especially denoted by before . presupposes a command for this, the new commandment (see Eph 5:25), which corresponds with nature, as God has ordained it,66 and, applying to fraternal fellowship, is then certainly valid for marital fellowship, as is indicated by the next phrase which introduces a motive: as their own bodies, .Here is evidently a designation of a reality, corresponding to the figure, that the man is the head of the wife (Eph 5:23; 1Co 11:3). [See Eadie for a lucid statement of the correct view respecting this particle.R.] It is not comparative (Grotius), hence not=as themselves.
The result of the view that the husband is the head of the wife, while the wife is the body of the husband, as the Church is Christs body is this thought: He who loveth his own wife loveth himself, , .Comp. Eph 5:33. On this general proposition what follows rests.
The basis of the exhortation; Eph 5:29-31.
Eph 5:29. For no one ever hated his own flesh, .The ground which follows is introduced by .67 In the first place a general fact is negatively expressed. No man ever is not limited; not even nisi scilicet a natura et a se ipso desciscat (Bengel). For all unsparingness of the body (Col 2:22) rests on self-deception. If he actually injures himself, it cannot even then be said that he hateth his own flesh. Paul did not choose here, because he already had in mind the quotation (Eph 5:31), which refers to the institution of marriage in Paradise before the fall; there as here all that is sinful is excluded from the , which is not of itself subject to sin. is chosen, because the disposition is spoken of; it is to be understood like 1Jn 3:15. Grotius aptly recalls Curtius, Eph 7: corporibus nostris, qu utique non odimus; Seneca, ep. 14: fateor insitam esse corporis nostri caritatem; De Clem. 1, Ephesians 5 : Si quod adhuc collegitur, animus reipublic tu es, illa corpum tuum, vides, ut puto, quam necessaria clementia sit. Tibi enim parcis, quum videris alteri parcere. Comp. Pro 11:15; Pro 11:17.
But nourisheth and cherisheth it [ ] naturally takes out of the subject , each one. The first verb, the strengthened , refers to the growing development brought about through nourishment (Meyer); it occurs only here and in Eph 6:4. The second verb (only here and 1Th 2:7) is stronger than (Jam 2:16) which is also more general, and denotes the warming upon and with ones self; hence it is used of brooding, Deu 22:6 (LXX.); it is more than fovet (Vulgate), pflegt (Luther). The two expressions are distinguished by Bengel so far correctly that he remarks on the former intus, on the latter ad extra, but he is faulty in thinking of victus in connection with the former, amictus with the latter. The one refers to the strengthening food, renewing the life, the other to the protection and preservation of the life. Harless incorrectly denies any distinction, taking both as descriptive of maternal love.
Even as Christ also doth the Church [
].What is of universal validity within the sphere of creation, is found also in the Redeemer as respects His Church (He nourishes and cherishes it). Stier applies it to the Lords Supper, which is indeed not to be excluded, thinking that after the nasci in the baptism (Eph 5:26) the pasci is here spoken of. It is more natural to remember how Christ calls Himself the bread of life (Joh 6:48; Joh 6:51), which nourishes, not in the Lords Supper alone, even though it takes place there in its most full and intense form, and also that He compares Himself to a hen (Mat 23:37) that covereth with her wings, thus protecting and cherishing () at the same time. Grotius (nutrit eam verbo et spiritu, vestit virtutibus) is correct only in the first part of his comment. Evidently the spheres of Creation and Redemption do not fall outside each other; the former finds in the latter its restoration and consummation, the latter in the former its basis and point of connection. What is unnatural is unchristian.
Eph 5:30 proves the action of Christ to His Church through her intimate union with Him:
Because we are members of his body [ ].Because connects with the foregoing thought: He nourisheth and cherisheth the Church. The Church is now the subject, which inheres in . Every individual is so, as the plural indicates. The Church as a whole as also individually, the members of the Church are then members of His body. Here is evidently= (1Co 6:15; 1Co 12:27), on which account Bengel is correct in saying: corpus hic dicitur non ecclesia, qu continentur in subjecto sumus, sed corpus ipsius Christi; hence this is entirely like 1Co 10:16 (Stier). The membership, which is designated by the emphatically placed , and which is conceived of as existing in the word , is designed to mark Christendom and Christians as integral parts of His body (Meyer). A closer definition follows.
Being of his flesh and of his bones, .First of all the repeated preposition must be noticed, marking as it does the origin and the appertaining to. The phrase denotes the personality and corporeality of Christ, in which the Church with her members originates. The connection with and origin from Christ, from the historical, incarnate Christ, from His personal body, is designated in such a way, that we as well as the whole Church are to be regarded as His production and possession; and this is expressed with the Scripture passage, or at least with a reminiscence of the passage, which refers to the creation of the woman out of the first Adam in Paradise (Gen 2:23 : LXX.: , ), because Christ is the second Adam (1Co 15:45; 1Co 15:47; comp. 1Ti 2:13), and the Church, as well as each of its members, is a creation (1 Cor. 5:19). Comp. the parable of the Vine and the branches (Joh 15:1 ff). Our life in Christ proceeds in its inmost nature from holiness, is really strengthened from Him, and affects the resurrection body.
Accordingly it is inappropriate to think only of the close union of Christ with us (Koppe), or the identity of our nature with His (Latin Fathers), or only of spiritual origin (Greek Fathers, Erasmus, Calovius, Hofmann, Schriftbeweis, II., 2, p. 137, Meyer and others), or only of the death of the cross (Grotius: ex carne ejus et ossibus cruci adfixis, i.e., ex passione ejus prdicata et credita ortum habuit ecclesia; Schenkel, who refers to Eph 5:24), or the Lords Supper (Kahnis, Harless, Olshausen, Stier and others), or the glorified body (Gess: Christi Person, p. 274 ff.). Bengel, who is followed, up to a certain point, by Stier, since he also finds in the creation of the woman out of Adam a type of the creation of the Church out of Christ, must be regarded as fanciful despite the several apt remarks he makes: Moses ossa prius, Paulus carnem prius nominat; naturalem quippe structuram, de qua ille, ossa potissimum sustinent; ut in nova creatione caro Christi magis consideratur. Porro Moses plenius loquitur; Paulus omittit qu ad propositum non que pertinent. Non ossa et caro nostra, sed nos spiritualiter (Stier: via spiritualiter in corporationem vergente) propagamur ex humanitate Christi, carnem et ossa habente. Rueckert is altogether perverted in his notion that the Apostle himself had no definite idea in his mind; if he waives an explanation of the passage, so he must waive first of all his own explanation.
[In agreement with the view of Braune, in the main, the following statement is appended. The Apostle here asserts a state () of Christians, originating from Christ (), analogous to the physical derivation of Eve from Adam and the consequent union subsequently between them. The direct reference to every nuptial union (Eadie) does not accord with the preposition or the immediate allusion. This is the mystical relation, implying as Hodge well contends, something more than that we derive our spiritual life from Christ, as Eve her spiritual life from Adam (Ellicott, Alford, following Meyer), since the peculiar language seems to involve more; and something else than that we are partakers of the substance of Christs body, as Eve was formed out of the substance of Adams body (Calvin, and with various modifications most strong sacramentalists), a view which tends to materialistic conceptions of the union, and, in attempting to explain one acknowledged mystery, creates confusion instead of clearness. This middle position accepts a connection with Him, not simply and generally by a spiritual union, but in some close and derivative way, which the Apostle calls a mystery (Eadie), leaving the matter there. As regards the secondary application to the Sacraments, which Ellicott and Wordsworth (with many German commentators) accept, it may be remarked, that these undoubtedly constitute signs and seals, and in a certain sense means of maintaining this union, but this passage, which speaks not of body and blood, but of flesh and bones, does not distinctly refer to these, so that nothing can be deduced from it in regard to the communication with Christs glorified, or transmuted, body in the Lords Supper. Comp. the full, clear and excellent discussion of Hodge, who opposes Calvins views most strenuouslyR.]
Eph 5:31. Paul in this verse proceeds with the passage which follows the saying of Adam respecting the woman brought to him (Gen 2:24, LXX.: ):
For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and the two shall be one flesh.The changes are inconsiderable: instead of , and , according to the best authorities, without the articles and pronouns, at least a various reading as Mat 19:5. Notwithstanding this, it is not a quotation, since there is nothing to indicate this. He merely continues in the words of Moses, which he uses with slight variations, while the Lord introduces them (Mat 19:5) with and Paul himself in 1Co 6:16, the last clause with . Further, this passage is not a part of Adams speech, since he could say nothing of forsaking father and mother, unless it be taken as a prediction (Stier) [Jerome: primus vates Adam]; in which case, however, he would still in the last clause have prophesied respecting himself. [Comp. Genesis, p. 209.R.] Hence it is not strange that the Apostle passes over the intervening clause, in which Harless unnecessarily finds a difficulty.
is then, if we compare (2 Thess. 2:19; Luk 1:2; Luk 12:3; Luk 19:44), for this, that the woman is taken from the man, he will cling to her; (Winer, p. 342). Paul unmistakably thus returns to the conjugal state, after he has finished the proof (Eph 5:30) for as Christ also (Eph 5:29). Hence it is not necessary with Bleek to supply after Eph 5:30 : we are of His flesh and bones, the following middle term: as the woman is not of the flesh and bones of the man, to which Eph 5:31 refers. is not to be referred to our origin from Christ, to whom the forsaking of father and mother does not apply, the forsaking of father not in the future at least (), and such a reference is foreign to the purpose, the clinging to the wife, the Church, since either this did not at all exist when He was born a man, or he already clung to it in love, without the necessity of first forsaking the Father. Indeed, the future () may be regarded here in this saying of Moses, analogously to the future [the ethical future] of the commandments (Rom 13:9 : , . . .), as the precept corresponding to the relations as established in Gods word.
refers to a gradual coining to pass of unity (hence with the accusative), and that, too, in the case of two different persons ( , , Gen 1:27), who from within becomes one in all external circumstances, non solum uti antea, respectu ortus, sed respectu nov conjunctionis (Bengel). Hence it is not necessary to find here only a prophecy of the Second Advent of Christ, who now as Betrothed and afterwards as husband, clings to the Church (Meyer), nor in the Mosaic passage a prophetic type of Christ and His Church (Stier), nor to refer the last clause to the Lords Supper (Calvin, Beza, Harless, Olshausen, Kahnis).
[The main difficulty is in regard to the connection. Meyer (and many others from Chrysostom to Alford) refers for this cause to Eph 5:30, thus applying our verse to the relation of Christ and the Church. But the Apostle is recalling a passage at the basis of which lies the fact of Eves being taken out of Adam, and the slight alteration he makes does not show an intent to apply it differently here. Besides the whole section treats of the relation of husband and wife, and this is, therefore, to be regarded as the leading reference unless the other is distinctly marked. This principle the Apostle himself assumes in Eph 5:32 : But I speak concerning Christ and the Church. At the same time we must accept a secondary application (Ellicott) to Christ and the Church, not simply because most commentators have done so, but because the whole tenor of the passage and the interpretation of Eph 5:32 seem to demand it. The view of Harless, Olshausen and Hodge, that the last clause alone refers to Christ and the Church, the early part being introduced merely for the sake of that clause, seems to be an exegetical make-shift. As the Apostle had left out a part of the original passage in Genesis, he might just as readily have omitted all that was irrelevant. Still less tenable is the special application, which Olshausen makes, comparing the Lords Supper and conjugal cohabitation, showing that allegory may serve to foster the coarsest materialistic conceptions. Meyers paraphrase is as follows: Wherefore, because we are members of Christ, of his flesh and bones, shall a man leave (i.e., Christ at the Second Advent) his father and his mother (i.e., according to the mystical sense of Paul: He will leave His seat at the right hand of God) and shall be joined to his wife (to the Church), and (and then the two) (the husband and the wife, i.e., the descended Christ and the Church) shall be one flesh. Such a view is to be expected from this commentator, whose grammatical exactness is exceeded only by his fondness for bringing in a reference to the Second Advent, but it fails to meet with general acceptance. JeremyTaylor: Christ descended from His Fathers bosom and contracted His divinity with flesh and blood, and married our nature, and we became a Church; but this confuses our nature with the Church, as well as, impliedly, the Bride and the offspring. Alford is safer in regarding the saying as applied to that, past, present, and future, which constitutes Christs union to His Bride the Church: His leaving the Fathers bosom, which is pastHis gradual preparation of the union, which is present, His full consummation of it, which is future. All these views may be held as partial elucidations of the matter in hand on the side of the application to Christ and the Church, which was doubtless in the Apostles mind, but we still insist that so detailed a passage has a primary reference to a union, where a mere man leaves his earthly father and mother, and is joined to his wife.With all these allegorical interpretations, one thought, which inheres in the passage, as referring to the human relation, has been too much overlooked, viz., that it is the man who forsakes father and mother. It is remarkable how true this is, and how it comes out in works of fiction, in homely sayings like this: My son is my son till he gets him a wife, but my daughters my daughter all her life, in the feelings, since mothers and sisters are rarely jealous of the man, but so often of the woman, who marries into the family. Nor does social custom fail to recognize this. The basis of all is the principle set forth in Eph 5:28-29.R.]
Comprehensive double conclusion; Eph 5:32-33.
Eph 5:32. This mystery is a great one, .The position of the words must be noticed. Winer (p. 163) remarks that usually comes before the noun, and after, and that accords with the nature of the case. Deviations have their ground in the context. Paul lays the stress here on mystery, the position after the noun weakens the demonstrative; it is not , does not refer to the last point alone. There is here a retrospect over the whole paragraph. Bengel is correct: mysterium appellatur non matrimonium humanum (Eph 5:33), sed ipsa conjunctio Christi et ecclesi. Mystery (Eph 1:9; Eph 3:3-4; Eph 3:9; Eph 6:19) is a fact, which either entirely or partially transcends the understanding, as the Divine will, a decree of God, the truth in its depth, etc. Here it is the union of the man and woman in wedlock, and of Christ and His congregation in the church, which the Apostle so presents that the latter is the pattern, and the former the copy. It is irrelevant to suppose a reference to a concealed sense in the words of Moses, so that , , is to be supplied (Grotius, Stier, Rueckert, Meyer and others). It is termed great, because Paul himself plus sensit, quam ii, ad quos scribebat, caperent; comp. Rom 11:33.
[Hodge seems inclined to refer this mystery to the union of Christ and the Church, in accordance with his view of Eph 5:31. Eadie agrees exactly with Braune, while Alford refers it to the mystery of the spiritual union of Christ with our humanity, typified by the close conjunction of the marriage state, alluded to in Eph 5:31. Ellicott applies it to the close conjunction of the married state: He adds: Eph 5:29 states the exact similarity of the relationship; Eph 5:30 the ground of the relation in regard of Christ and the Church; Eph 5:31 the nature of the conjugal relation with a probable application also to Christ; Eph 5:32 the mystery of that conjugal relation in itself, and still more so in its typical application to Christ and His Church. Eadie: Eph 5:25-28 introduce the spiritual nuptial relation, Eph 5:29 affirms its reality, Eph 5:30 gives the deep spiritual ground or origin of it, while the quotation in Eph 5:31 shows the authorized source of the image, and Eph 5:32 its ultimate application guarding against mistake. On mystery, see Eph 3:3R.]
But I. is used only with emphasis (Winer, p. 144), and must have an antithesis, which the context gives; here it is (Eph 5:33); you. , but, is merely metabatic (Meyer); therefore: I, the Apostle, the unmarried one.68Say it in regard to Christ and the Church ]. marks the aim of the discourse, as Act 2:25; Heb 7:14; Joh 8:26 (Winer, p. 370). Here is the expression of the opinion and view of Paul, who refers the mystery to Christ and the Church as the archetype and prototype for Christians in the marital fellowship. The repetition of the article is emphatic, containing a caution to consider this on account of the consequence for the copy, marriage. It is incorrect to take =I apply it (Stier), or, I cite it (Meyer; Luther, too, is wrong: of Christ and the Church, and the Vulgate: in Christo et in ecclesia. On the Romanist error, which regards marriage as a Sacrament, to which the Vulgate gives occasion, see Doctr. Note 7.69
Eph 5:33. Nevertheless ye also. (from ) precisely: further, beyond this, that is beyond the saying on my part, . There is, therefore, no digression to be accepted, from which he now returns to the subject, Eph 5:28 (Bengel: quasi oblitus proposit rei nunc ad rem revertitur; Harless, Bleek), nor is it: in order to enter no further upon this mystery (Meyer).70
Severally, let each one, , vos singuli, each one without exception; the masculine and the context point to husbands.So love his own wife as himself, .Loving as ones self is a conception, which is compared () with the love of Christ to the Church. [Not so love his wife as he loves himself, but: in this manner (like Christ) love his own wife as being himself; comp. Eph 5:28R.]
And let the wife see that she reverence her husband.The construction: , presupposes something to be supplied: volo aut simile quid piam (Gal 2:10; Gal 5:13; 1Co 4:2; 1Co 7:29; 2Co 8:7). Bengel, and answers to an imperative, as indeed one precedes (Winer, pp. 295, 537). It is stronger, however, than an imperative; stands first emphatically. [See Ellicott, who accepts a nominative absolute, reaching the same conclusion as Braune. Let the wife see, brings out the emphasis quite well.R.] Particula vim habet, vim temperat ellipsis morata (Bengel). Thus a special weight for house and husband is laid upon this, that she does her duty, which is summed up in and traced to its inmost ground in Eph 5:22-24. cumenius: . . See Doctr. Note 1, 3, 4. Optime cohrebit concordia, si utrimque constabunt officia (Erasmus). [Eadie well remarks: What is instinctive on either side is not enforced, but what is necessary to direct and hallow such an instinct is inculcated.R.]
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL
1. The fundamental features of the moral conduct of man and wife towards each other are the principal points in this section. The Apostle refers the subject, with wholesome words and grand freedom from all casuistry, back to the main point, to its briefest expression: As regards the wife, to be subordinate to the husband (Eph 5:22; Eph 5:24), to reverence him (Eph 5:33); as regards the wife, to love the husband (Eph 5:25; Eph 5:28; Eph 5:33). The former is in force since Gen 3:15 : Thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee; it is not, however, merely a consequence of the fall and a punishment, but inheres in the position of the woman and her corresponding endowment and nature, since she was to be a help-meet for the man, that he should not be alone (Gen 2:18). In this is at once implied that there is here meant no servile subjection, no forced, legal obedience, no loveless, joyless fear, by indicating that the man as the head of the wife, in his mind, character and activity is placed as the representative and provider for his own in circles outside that of the house, the context defines the subordination and fear to this extent, that, as soul, heart, disposition and honor of the household, she submits herself to the regulations established by the husband in virtue of his office, and in tender thought avoids disturbing, injuring or destroying his work. Above the house stands the mans avocation, which is from God, for which God has appointed him; hence it stands higher than the house, the character and life of which should subserve his avocation in the house alone. It is therefore in substance commanded that the wife should be subject, and in tender solicitude should fear to oppose the husband, to undervalue his arrangements, to make him discontented or angry while tarrying in the house to strengthen himself for his avocation.71
The wife who refuses this subordination and considerate respect, who does not see and seek her mission in the house, in the service of her husband, becomes an offensive caricature: from discontent there is bad progress to growling, managing, seeking the mastery, scolding, and finally to emancipation. Thus is stripped off and destroyed, not only what is Christian, but what is germanic, even what is womanly, especially what is peculiar and individual, the special gift of the Creator. Jezebel and Herodias are examples of this kind. The true character shines in Sarah (1Pe 3:1-6).To the husband one command is given, and in this one three requirements: Love even unto self-sacrifice, with the consequence and purpose of sanctification (Eph 5:25-27), and this with such energy, purity and constancy, that more is required of the husband than of the wife. The wife should love the husband, as the Church loves Christ, in entire, exclusive, indissoluble and ministering love, and the husband should love the wife, as Christ the Church, in entire, exclusive, indissoluble and protecting love. It is more difficult to love the wife, without egotism, without tyranny and despotism, without any severity to be the master in the house in true affection, than to be subject to the man in tender respect for his dignity as husband, and his avocation as man.
2. The combination of marriage and Church (Kirche), which appears as the main thought in this section, has a twofold reference.
a. The two are to be compared with each other: As the wife should conduct herself to her husband, so should the Church to Christ; as the husband should conduct himself to the wife, so does Christ to the Church. Marriage, like the Church (Kirche), is a life-fellowship between a head and its body; the former Christ is for the Church (Gemeinde) and the man for the wife; the latter, the Church, is for Christ, and the wife for the husband. From the relation and the demeanor between Christ and the Church light falls upon the relation and demeanor of married people to each other, just as from the latter upon the former. Thus marriage and Church serve each other for the rendering clear of that which is normal in the two. But we must guard against descending in this parallelism to small and belittling particulars: such as conjoining winning the bride, baptism, and time of betrothal and the temporal period of the Church, leading home the bride and the Second Advent of the Lord as Bridegroom, sexual fellowship and unio mystica. But we may with right speak of the religion of marriage and of the marriage of religion; on this is based, too, the position in the canon of the Song of Solomon, which is a hymn of holy love. The Church should not keep at a distance what appertains to the creature, what is natural, or even turn a disapproving countenance upon it; that would be a wrinkle in the face of the Church, thus despising her Lords work and so growing old on one side, instead of being glorified. From the wife, who in her husbands house is never to be regarded lightly, but must manage and mould, the Church may and ought to learn how to become at once deiformis and mundeformis.
b. The two, however, stand in such close relation to each other, that from the Church proceeds the power for the proper direction of marriage, the proper conduct of married people. The wife should belong to the Church in order to receive from Christ His gifts, that thus she may be to her husband what the Church is to Christ, and quite as much must the husband be sanctified in the Church, taken hold of by Christ and permeated by His love, in order to treat his wife, as Christ does His Church. Thus the Christian Church is the foundation for a normal marriage, as the natural life becomes in the life of regeneration that which is according to Gods will.
3. Marriage and Nature. Our section points into the sphere of creation. The man is from the beginning made for marriage (Gen 1:26-28 : male and female), and in Paradise the first human pair was brought together for wedlock, were wedded pair by the grace of God, before father and mother, and children existed. Marriage is the first union in point of time. And in point of dignity as well: from it proceeds the dignity of father and mother, through it alone comes family life, the basis of all blessing in human life. As to its nature it is the fellowship of one man and one woman, in which both more and more live together ( ), chiefly moral, then however sensuous vital fellowship even to sexual fellowship; it is the fellowship of the body and of the worship of God, of all worldly goods, of all intellectual gifts, and, as far as it is possible with personal reason and conscience, of spiritual gifts also; the religious side of the fellowship should predominate, the moral side operate, the sensuous side may never override and repel the others, would enter only but not be repressed.72
4. Marriage and Bible are joined together also by our section, since it refers back to the oldest Scripture, deriving thence these thoughts: God has created mankind for marriage; the desire, the initiative, is on the side of man, the being desired is the part of the woman; marriage unites only one man and one woman (Monogamy); is first of all and as to its deepest ground directed to moral fellowship of life, includes in itself sexual fellowship, is directed thus towards the establishment of the family and family life, toward the bringing up and education of children; has such an inwardness and fervor, that devoted conjugal surpasses filial love, even fathers and mothers love, that the marriage tie is indissoluble, unless sin should rend it asunder.73 Monogamy is established from the beginning as self-evident. A Cainite, the bold and sensual Lamech, who first took two wives, Ada (=ornament) and Zillah (=shadow of the head of hair), from whom the master of fiddlers and fifers, and the master of workers in brass and iron, made the transition from monogamy to polygamy, and in the progress of civilization forsook the Divine institution (Gen 4:19-24). The impatience of Sarah for an heir caused her to forsake her position and conduct so far as to lead Hagar to Abraham, and the selfishness of Laban made use of the love of Jacob for Rachel, so that he took Leah first, but the promised blessing came only on the child of the legitimate wife (Isaac, not Ishmael) or of the first one (Judah, not Joseph). See Harless, Ethik., 52, p. 5, 7 ff. Hence it should not be said, that in the Old Testament marriage only gradually lifted itself to monogamy (Schenkel); on the contrary the latter was recognized as the original institution appointed by God, and the defections from it are referred to sinful tendencies, to the dominion of sin, are not approved. Christianity however has glorified marriage, establishing it firmly and securely in its nature, dignity and blessing. Redemption goes back to the natural institutions established in creation, removing the perversions and degradations introduced by sin into the heathen world and the people of Israel; what is new in Christianity is what is primeval restored. This appears especially prominent in the matter of marriage and family life, so strongly that all which is anti-christian and anti-scriptural is at the same time unnatural and inhuman, just as the impulse of anti-christian Atheism, Materialism, Satanism has led thither. Interest attaches to the view of Melancthon, who, much as he has prized his excellent betrothed, was afraid of married life, lest he might thereby be drawn too much away from his studies, and yet afterwards despite a wife suffering from hypochondria and a numerous family called the marriage state a kind of philosophy, which required duties the most honorable and most worthy of a noble man. [So Jeremy Taylor: Single life makes men in one instance to be like angels, but marriage in very many things makes the chaste pair to be like Christ (Sermon on the Marriage Ring).R.]
5. Beside the conduct of married people to each other and the relation between Christ and His church and the husband with his wife, there is also marked, through the purpose of Christ or the aims of the church, the end of marriage, viz., the sanctification of the personality (Eph 5:26-27). This is a process of development, ever deepening and extending through the whole life, with two sides: internal, moral perfection, through growth and unfolding of talent and strength granted () and ever wider and clearer emancipation from all evil imposed and entering or clinging from without (). The former is based upon the internally and correctly established relation of the person to God and His kingdom, the latter upon the conduct of the same, externally corresponding to the given noun, in all the relations of life from work to word and its source in thought and temper. Hence the sanctification of the sexual appetite can be regarded as only a single purpose, for which there is not even a point of resemblance in the parallel with the church and her Head, not as the principal task of Christian family morals (Schenkel), as if marriage were ordained as a safeguard against whoremongery or carnal excess, when this is but a single object, or rather a coincident result, even though the main matter in this work of sanctification. From the very seeking and consummating of the marriage, the morality of the fellowship not its sensuousness, the religiousness of the married pair not the sexual fellowship, should show itself to be the decisive and impelling feature. The proper sexual pleasure to be allowed by man and wife must like every other pleasure within a social relation find its norm in accordance with the moral end of marriage.
6. On the phrase respecting baptism (Eph 5:26) rests with full right the explanation of Luther in the smaller catechism, 4 main part, Ephesians 1 : Baptism is not mere water, but it is water taken in Gods command and united with Gods word. For it is a pledge of the power of the atonement efficient through awakening and growing faith, an assurance of the forgiveness of sins, a guarantee of the new relation to God, of sonship with Him (Mat 28:19 : ; Act 2:38; Act 22:16; Heb 10:22) and an assurance of the power, to be received in faith, of the new life in the gift of the Holy Ghost (Joh 3:5; Tit 3:5); both together, Rom 6:3-11; Col 2:12. Chemnitz: Pater salvat, filius emundat, spiritus regenerat (Harless). Mundatio prcedit donationem glori et nuptias (Bengel).Thus both the mechanical view of baptism as a mere initiatory rite among the nationalists, and the Baptist sundering of sanctification and cleansing, which makes of baptism merely a seal of entire conversion, are here opposed; it stands at the commencement of sanctification, which begins with it. [The reference to baptism is undeniable, and such a reference seems to contradict at once the very low view of the ordinance which is quite prevalent among many Pedo-baptists, just as the obvious reference to the mystical union of Christ, and His Church in this section implies that the Lords supper is more than a mere memorial service. As a specimen of the Reformed or Calvinistic views on this subject (though Calvin himself was more of a Sacramentalist than those who moulded the Reformed confessions), the remarks of Dr. Hodge are presented: When the Scriptures speak of baptism as washing away sin, they do not teach (1) That there is any inherent virtue in baptism, or in the administrator, to produce these effects; nor (2) That these effects always attend its right administration; nor, (3) That the Spirit is so connected with baptism that it is the only channel through which He communicates the benefits of redemption. Positively he remarks: (1) Baptism is a Divine institution. (2) One of the conditions of salvation, not sine qua non, but having the necessity of precept. (3) A means of grace, that is, a channel through which the Spirit confers grace; not always, nor upon all recipients, nor is it the only channel, nor designed as the ordinary means of regeneration. (4) Infants are baptized on the faith of their parents; and their baptism secures to them all the benefits of the covenant of grace, provided they ratify that covenant by faith.R.]
7. Here, as also in Eph 1:8; Eph 3:3; Eph 3:9; 1Ti 3:16; Rev 1:20, the Vulgate has rendered sacramentum. This translation has been used to support the view of the high dignify of marriage recognized in this section, which exaggerates it to such an extent that the Roman Church, in opposition to her own doctrine of the celibacy of the clergy and the virginity of the saints, proclaims it a sacrament. Comp. Conc, Triden., Less. 24, cap. 1; Si quis dixerit, matrimonium non esse vere et proprie unum ex septem legis evangelic sacramentis a Christo domino institutum, sed ab hominibus in ecclesia inventum, neque gratiam conferre: anathema sit.
This church (Catech. Rom. ii., 8, 23 sqq.) accepts three gracious gifts [in this so-called sacrament]: proles, fides, fidelitas qudam und vinculum, quod nunquam dissolvi potest. As respects the matter and form the schoolmen vacillate in consequence of the novelty of the subject. Bonaventura finds the material of the sacrament in the sexual acts, others in the partners themselves, others in their consensus. To regard and treat matrimony as a Sacrament, but only for the laity, who do attain to the perfection of the saints, while celibacy is demanded of the monk and priest, that they may be able to boast of sanctity, of actual renunciation of sexual desire, was only possible, because the antithesis between heaven and the world, from which Paul proceeds in speaking of celibacy as respects his own office, age, and individuality (1Co 7:25-40), was changed into an antithesis of spirit and flesh in such a way that a false dualism was established between Divine and human, spiritual and carnal, moral and natural. This dualism the church has overcome. Very apt are the remarks of Harless (Ethik, p. 512): Marriage is the divinely appointed ordinance and form, within which the spirit of Divine love can find on earth according to the nature of the case its most unhampered rule, and in such efficiency can best give a measure of the fulness of the Divine love; but the marriage itself does not bring or become the medium of this Spirit of pure Divine love. It is only the vessel which is prepared for this Spirit; the spirit and the power do not come from the earthly copy of the Divine fellowship of love. The Christian perceives rather, that the institution in itself does not at all protect against violation and desecration through selfishness of every kindbut that [the Spirit and the power] come from the graces of the New Testament, that these graces do not come to him by means of marriage, but through the word, baptism, the Lords Supper, repentance and faith, on which account it is impossible for him, under a misunderstanding of Eph 5:32 to call the Divine institution of matrimony a sacrament in the sense, in which Baptism and the Lords Supper are thus termed.Still the evangelical church down to the latest times has not been free from Romish distortions, of a mystical, theosophic tendency; Gottfried Arnold held the marriage state to be incompatible with true wisdom, though he himself afterwards married; with him agreed Michael Hahn, who with his followers remained unmarried, and Pastor Culmann (Ethik, i. p. 42). Luther himself did not regard the sexual propensity and its gratification as in itself God-willed (Koestlin: Luthers Theologie, III., p. 483). On the other hand Zinzendorf attempted to place the marital obligation under ideal points of view.If from the Roman I Catholic side attacks are still made upon the convenience of Luther and Melancthon for their approval of the bigamy of Landgrave Philip after the example of Abraham, who had however to suffer severely on this account, it may be replied that the Catholic Church not only permitted Abbe Sieyes and Bishop Talleyrand to marry, and dissolved Napoleons first marriage with Josephine, but even helped him to the second marriage with the Austrian Archduchess.
8. In the 13th century the Old Testament age, and the Old Testament Scriptures were often termed the die alte Ehe (the old marriage). This points to a mystery of marriage, like that of the communion of Christ and His Church. The former is a mystery on its natural side from the very creation; in it creative powers for soul and body are active; a mystery on the side of redemption: in it wonderful confiding love and consecrated fidelity are manifested; on the side of sanctification: in it operate sanctifying powers for eternity.Comp. Paul Gerhart: Voller Wunder, voller Kunst, voller Weisheit, voller Kraft, voller Hulde, Gnad, und Gunst, etc.
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
Comp. the foregoing Doctr. Notes and Braune, Die heiligen 10 Gebote, pp. 147, 177.The husband has a great advantage over his wife: he is the older, more mature part, has the choice of the wife, possesses greater power and culture for civil life, must represent his wife and household in these matters (1Co 11:7-9). So at least it should be. But he has no advantage as regards the Divine image and moral worth over her, the fellow-heir (1Pe 3:7). Both must have patience with each other, but no wife should be ever for having the last word without yielding! She who patiently bears puts to shame the despotism of a husband. Nor should they spoil each other by a weak and false silence respecting unpleasantness; they should inure themselves in the draught of truth, should be confiding without inconsiderateness; neither dare cease to be a lover of the other. Even if the husband should be lacking in what is necessary to fill personally his position, the wife should not in boast-fulness despise the social dignity of the husband, but above and beyond him seethe Lord. Have you given your yes, then it must be held good to the end; even if it is hard, the difficulty does not dissolve it; life must fulfil it, death alone dissolve it.You may be married and yet not truly wedded, may have one household and yet no matrimonial fellowship; may be with him or her one flesh, but not one heart and one soul; you live together under one roof, but may have no common foundation, may walk united on earth, but heaven is wanting to your union.No one ought to rejoice so much in Christ and His church as the wife: she and her children have gained most by Christianity; this is a reason why women and children have and ought to have so strong an attraction to Him in the church; there is gratitude involved. Submission, ministering subordination is no misfortune, but a joy, exercising a triumphing, pacifying power.In one sense every man must die for his wife: he must die to himself, to his sinful Ego, mortify his selfishness and egotism, not his peculiarity, which he should still exercise without self-will. The man is most apt to do this as betrothed and in the honeymoon, as if once Were enough. But this should occur throughout life: before death no one is entirely done with it.Wo to him who chooses before he has to choose, when he knows neither why nor wherefore, or before he knows how to choose, when he does not know what it means, or who chooses arbitrarily, before he has bethought himself what his position requires or proved her whom he chooses! Wo to such, especially if they are or become ministers of the church. Sin separates from God, disturbs the union with Him, grieves the Holy Spirit. Sin does this also to the Divine institution of marriage. All separation of dispositions, all disturbances and discord of soul come from sin, and never merely from that of the other, but from your own sin also. The guilt in unhappy marriages, or even in the disturbance of otherwise happy ones, is on both sides, demands at least an examination of ones own sins. When there is discord and even when the other is wrong, do you listen attentively to what is said against you, and then try it as a judge upon yourself.Never forget this: what is yours does not merely belong to you, you belong to it also.
Starke:How then can a godless man with alacrity be the head of his wife and require obedience of her, when he neither clings nor listens to Christ, his head?Pious widows, you have lost one head, but the other Head (Jesus) death cannot take from you; He watches and. cares for you.Is Christ the Head of the church, then the Pope cannot be it, else the church would have two heads and so be a monstrosity.In Christ there is at once a Head and a Saviour; the two characters must unite also in a husband who should use his dominion for the blessing, never for the oppression and damage of those whom he rules.The fellowship of believers with Jesus gives them that great dignity, noble advantage and blessed consolation.Without love marriage is a bitter state, with love it is sweet.The love of Christ to His church is both cause and standard of the love of husbands towards their wives.Love and fear stand beside each other in a well-ordered marriage: the former must sweeten the latter, the latter must ever more incite the former.
Rieger:The Apostle begins with married people, because, if things go wrong between them in the household, the trouble soon extends itself from them to the children and dependents. In each relation the Apostle begins with the weaker side.Proper distrust of ones self and what is doubtful in ones natural gifts, willingness to be told what to do rather than to lead the other into temptation, is the root of this subjection.The rule of the household is not to be put on a magisterial footing, but to be conducted by a mild and yet efficient influence, like that of the head upon the members.What is set before the husbands: love your wives, is not easier than the being submissive. Whoever knows human nature, how loveless, changeful, easily wearied by faults, quickly angered it is, will notice how deep the foundation must be laid for a love which is not puffed up, seeketh not her own, etc.
Heubner:Even with love and similarity of hearts there must be subordination. The household needs guidance and government. The wife should submit. The wifes government reverses the proper order.Nothing can frighten a Christian heart from divorce more than this thought: It is as if you separated from Jesus, Unbelief, coldness toward Jesus has terribly wasted our married life.
Passavant:The Greeks acted more humanly, the Romans and Germans more magnanimously; elsewhere we see everywhere in the history of humanity the mothers and daughters of the nations, the weaker part, despised and oppressed by the stronger, often most cruelly degraded; and we should have, in such traits of ancient and modern heathen, and of all infidel nations and races, enough to perceive how deeply the whole human race has fallen from its original nature and destiny and what rudeness and wickedness of sin has permeated all nations and men, seeing they all have sinned.With the appearance of the Redeemer, however, a new hour of Redemption struck also for this so misunderstood and oppressed half of the human race.The more true, wise and manly the husband is in his cherishing of his wife, as his own body, the sooner, and if the wife is not altogether unholy in heartthe more faithfully, tenderly and sacredly will all be returned to him by the wifes sacredly affectionate care and solicitude, and he be richly recompensed.
Stier:The church should never demean itself as merely parallel to other circles of fellowship, for she is called to become the inmost of all.From out of the family, the concentrated life of the household, where a filial spirit is born of wedded love and household dependents regulate themselves accordingly, the moral life of a nation also grows.The emancipation of the strong-minded woman, that most repulsive miscreation of natural corporealness, destroys not only what is Christian but what is germanic.Love is the only right dominion; there is then in every house a church in parvo.The Word is the proper, continuing baptism.The mystery of marriage is a portico to the mystery of the sanctuary; from the latter too a light streams into the former.
Schleiermacher: On the Christian conduct of marriage: 1. In marriage there is something earthly and something heavenly, which are one. There is marriage in an anxious form, when only one is satisfied, the other constrained; merely a carefully kept contract. There is marriage in a repulsive form, when the parties are accustomed to each other making as few claims as possible on each other, seeking their pleasure outside. There is a marriage in a loathsome form, when there is mutual anger and bitterness.Ever more aroused in spirit, mollifying each other, and that in household, social life with its possessions, joys and sorrows.2. In it there is an inequality, which loses itself in perfect equalityin perfect oneness of life.
Becher:Look at your households, fathers and mothers, for you are priests; your congregations impose a hundredfold greater responsibility than mine. Your priesthood is from Gods own hand.Hofmann (Eph 5:22-24): The marriage state the school of Christian obedience; its ground, character, measure and aim.(Eph 5:25-29): The marriage state the home of love on earthof born, free, heavenly love.
[Hodge:
Eph 5:22. The obedience of the wife terminates on the Lord, and therefore is religious, because determined by religious motives and directed towards the object of religious affections. This makes the burden light and the yoke easy; for every service which the believer renders to Christ is rendered with joy and alacrity.
Eph 5:26-27. The church the bride of Christ. 1. The object of a peculiar and exclusive love. 2. She belongs exclusively to Christ. 3. The relation more intimate than between Him and any other order of creatures. 4. The church the special object of delight to Christ.
Eph 5:29. A man may have a body which does not altogether suit him. He may wish it were handsomer, healthier, stronger, or more active. Still it is his body, and he treats it as tenderly as though it were the best and loveliest man ever had. So a man may have a wife whom he could wish to be better, or more beautiful, or more agreeable; still she is his wife, and, by the constitution of nature and ordinance of God, a part of himself.
Eph 5:33. The sentiments which lie at the foundation of the marriage relation, which arise out of the constitution of nature, which are required by the command of God, and are essential to the happiness and well-being of the parties, are, on the part of the husband, that form of love which leads him to cherish and protect his wife as being himself, and on the part of the woman, that sense of his superiority out of which trust and obedience involuntarily flow.R.]
[Eadie:
Eph 5:22. In those days wives when converted and elevated from comparative servitude, might be tempted, in the novel consciousness of freedom, to encroach a little, as if to put to the test the extent of their recent liberty and enlargement.The insubordination of wives has always been a fertile source of sorrow; and yet Christian ladies in early times drew forth this compliment from Libanius, the last glory of expiring paganism: proh, quales feminas habent Christiani!
Eph 5:23. There is only one head; dualism would be perpetual antagonism. Each sex is indeed imperfect by itself, and the truest unity is conjugal duality.
Eph 5:24. In the domestic economy, though government and obedience certainly exist, they are not felt in painful or even formal contrast; and, in fact, they are so blended in affectionate adjustment, that the line which severs them cannot be distinguished. The law of marital government is an unwritten law.
Eph 5:25. Husbands are not to be domestic tyrants; but their dominion is to be a reign of love.The church did not crave Christs love: He bestowed it. It was not excited by any loveliness of aspect on the part of the church, for she was guilty and impure, unworthy of His affection. Who can doubt a love which has proved its strength and glory in such suffering and death?
Eph 5:27. As He originally loved her in her impurity, how deep and ardent must be His attachment now to her when He sees in her the realization of His own gracious and eternal purpose!
Eph 5:31-32. So close and tender is the union between Christ and His church that the language of Adam concerning Eve may be applied to it. These primitive espousals afforded imagery and language which might aptly and truly be applied to Christ and the church, which is of His flesh and of His bones; and the application of such language is indeed a mysterya truth, the secret glory and facility of which are known but to those who are wedded to the Lord in a perpetual covenant.
Eph 5:33. He rules her by authority, and she rules him by lore: she ought by all means to please him, and he must by no means displease her (Jeremy Taylor). When this balance of power is unsettled, happiness is lost, and mutual recrimination ensues. A masterly wife, as Gataker says, is as much despised and derided for taking rule over her husband as he, or yielding to it.R.]
[In view of the well-known fact that an immense proportion of the conversation of many women is about their husbands, their children and their servants, showing how their lives are bound up in these relations, it would be welt for them to study (and for pastors occasionally to teach in a prudent way) what the Apostle says in this part of the Epistle (Eph 5:22Eph 6:9) about their duties as wives, mothers and mistresses.R.]
Footnotes:
[42]Eph 5:22.[The Rec, with K. L., many versions (Chrysostom, Scholz) inserts after , while in D. E. F. G., Syriac it is placed after . Lachmann accepts after on the authority of N. A., 10 cursives, Vulgate, other versions, some fathers. B. omits the verb altogether, and this reading is accepted by Tischendorf. Harless, Meyer, De Wette, Alford, Ellicott and recent editors. While one uncial manuscript would not be decisive for the omission, the variations in form and position suggest an interpolation, (comp. Col 3:18) and when to this is added the testimony of Jerome, who asserts that there was nothing in the Greek MSS. to correspond with his subdit sint remarking that it was less necessary in Greek than in Latin, the evidence is conclusive. Still we must supply the verb n English.R.]
[43]Eph 5:23.[The article is wanting in all uncial MSS., the Rec. inserts it on altogether insufficient authority. The meaning is not altered by the correct reading, yet the literal form adopted in the above emendation is on the whole preferable.His wife is to be insisted upon, since the article is very definite here. We might render His Church, were there any other than the one Church.R]
[44]Eph 5:23.[The briefer reading is accepted by nearly all recent editors on the authority of .1 A. B. D.1 F. (Rec.) is found in .3 D. 2 3 K. L., most cursives, good versions and many fathers; but seems to be an explanatory gloss. As regards punctuation the colon of the E. V. might be retained to indicate the independence of the clause. We can render: He is Saviour of the body, or He Himself is the Saviour of the body, or Himself the Saviour of the body, but the latter which is most literal requires a substitution of a comma for the colon of the E. V.R.]
[45]Eph 5:24.[A must be thus rendered to give clearness to the sense. The Rec. reads , but on insufficient authority; is well attested (. A. D.1 F.) and generally received.R.]
[46]Ver.24.[The Rec. inserts on the authority of A. D.3 K. L., many cursives, versions and fathers, but it is omitted in . B. D.1 F., etc., so that the weight of external authority and the suspicion of an interpolation from Eph 5:22 are decisive against it. Rejected by recent editors.R.]
[47]Eph 5:25.[The Rec. inserts , with D. K. L., most cursives; F. G. read ; while N.A. B., cursives and fathers have simply . The briefer reading is accepted by Lachmann, Tischendorf, Alford, Ellicott. Braune, however, follows Meyer in defending , on the ground that would have been a more natural interpolation, if an explanatory gloss were added. This is plausible, but scarcely decisive.R.]
[48]Eph 5:27.[Instead of (Rec. D.3 K.) recent editors accept the better supported and emphatic (. A. B. D.1 etc.).The emphasis resting one is best presented by the order given above, though Ellicott gives: in glorious beauty.R.]
[49]Eph 5:28.[There is a doubt as to the correct order as well in regard to the reading. is omitted in the Rec., . K. L., nearly all cursives, fathers and versions (Ellicott), but found in A. B. D. F., very good versions, and generally accepted since Lachmann.The verb comes first in . B. K. L. and other authorities (Alford, Ellicott), but Lachmann Meyer, Eadie, Braune and most put it after , with A. D. F., good versions, fathers. The longer, noninverted reading: is perhaps preferable.The inversion of the E. V. need not be altered however. Husbands is more correct here, though in the older English man meant husband also, as in Greek and German, a philological fact not without interest in the exegesis of this paragraph..1 has instead of , but it is correct.The E. V. omits own twice, apparently for the sake of elegance, but improperly since the emphasis is thus lost.R.]
[50]Eph 5:29.[The Rec. (with D.3 K. L., majority of cursives) reads: , but the authority for is so decisive, that it is accepted by nearly all modern editors.R.]
[51]Eph 5:30.[Lachmann, on the authority of .1 A. B., good cursives, a few versions and fathers, omit . Alford brackets them. They are found in .3 D. E. F. G. K. L., nearly all cursives, versions and fathers; accepted by Tischendorf (ed. 7), Harless, Meyer, Eadie, Ellicott. Wordsworth. The recurrence of would readily occasion the omission, while the citation is not exact enough to suggest an interpolation from the LXX.We must insert being, to avoid the connection: members of his flesh, which the E. V. suggests.R.]
[52]Eph 5:32.[The articles, , (so LXX Gen 2:24), found in the Rec. . A. D.3 K. L., most cursives, good versions, are rejected by Lachmann, Tischendorf, Meyer, Ellicott, Alford and most, on the authority of B. D.1 F., good cursives, and distinct statements of Origen and Jerome.So after on the same authority (.1 in addition) and for the same reason.R.]
[53]Eph 5:32.[Here instead of (LXX, .1 A. D.1 F) the best editors accept on the authority of .3 B. D.3 K. L., nearly all cursives, Origen, Chrysostom, Theodoret.R.]
[54]Eph 5:33.[Lachmann and Alford bracket , but the external authority (B. K., a few cursives) against it is slight, and it might have been omitted because not understood.R.]
[55][The duty of submission is plainly based on that tenderness specialty, or exclusiveness of relationship which implies (Eadie). So Alford, Ellicott, following Bengel and Meyer, against De Wette, Harless, Olshausen.R.]
[56][Ellicott: Viewed in its simplest grammatical sense as the pronoun of the relative, the meaning would seem to be, yield that obedience to your husbands which you yield to Christ. As, however, the immediate context and still more the general current of the passage (comp. Eph 5:32) represent marriage in its typical aspect, will seem far more naturally to refer to the aspect under which the obedience is to be regarded (quasi Christo ipsimet, cujus locum et personam viri representant, Corn. a Lap.), than to describe the nature of it (Eadie), or the manner (De Wette) in which it is to be tendered. Still less probable is a reference merely to the similarity between the duties of the wife to the husband and the Church to Christ, as this interpretation would clearly require . .: See Meyer.R]
[57][Or better a husband, as an example of the class, would be every husband in each case, every one of the class (see Winer, p. 113): but the article with means his in this case.R.]
[58]This view is simple, grammatical and introduces neither a truism (Eadie), nor an unnecessary limitation (Winer). It is accepted by Alford, Ellicott, Hodge and others. Eadie supposes an ellipsis, which is very objectionable. Alford: But what I do say is, that thus far the two Headships are to be regarded as identical, in the subjection of the body to the Head. Nevertheless is on the whole the best rendering of R.]
[59][It would be more literal and perhaps better accordant with the comparison to substitute the feminine pronoun (her, she) for it in Eph 5:26-27, but our language is very stiff in its rules for gender.R.]
[60][Grammatically the participle may indicate either an act antecedent to or synchronous with that of the leading verb, either having cleansed or cleansing. The former is the view accepted by Ellicott, Alford, Eadie and Hodge, mainly on doctrinal or logical grounds derived from the reference to baptism which immediately follows.R.]
[61][This word occurs only here and in Tit 3:5. It means not washing, but laver, (lavacrum, Vulgate); comp. Ellicott in loco. Dr. Hodge is scarcely justified therefore in finding an argument in favor of a particular mode of baptism in our phrase, which does not mean: a washing with water, as he implies. The allusion to the brides bath before marriage is accepted by Eadie, and most.R.]
[62][More literally and correctly to Himself, He alone presents, He receives (Ellicott).R.]
[63][Ellicott: The Church glorious; the tertiary predicate (Donaldson, Gr. 489) being placed emphatically forward and receiving its further explanation from the participial clause which follows. The reading of the Rec., giving as the direct object of the verb, necessarily led to the obscuration of the force of the word, disturbing the grammatical structure by making the tertiary predicate.R.]
[64][The German editors and commentators (Tischendorf and Meyer, Braune also) accent this word: , but Eadie, Alford and Ellicott adopt: . The iota is short apparently, hence the latter is correct. The word belongs to later Greek.R.]
[65][Blameless (Ellicott, Alford); but without blemish retains the etymological reference, thus according better with the figurative current of the verse.R.]
[66][From this passage Dr. Hodge correctly infers the falsity of the Hopkinsian view that all love and all holiness is disinterested benevolence, proportioned to the capacity of its object. We do love ourselves, and our bodies, and it is not only natural, but according to Scripture so to do.R.]
[67][The whole tenor of the argument is thus stated by Ellicott: Men ought to love their wives as Christ loves His Church, as being in fact (I might add) their own () bodies; yes, I say the man who loves his wife loves himself (); for if he hated her he would hate (according to the axiom in Eph 5:28) his own flesh, whereas on the contrary, unless he acts against nature, he nourishes it, even as (to urge the comparison again) Christ nourishes His Church.R.]
[68][The reference is apparently not so much to his celibacy, as to the subjective character of the application and comparison, while the slightly adversative contrasts it with any other interpretation that might have been adduced: the mystery of this closeness of the conjugal relation is great, but I am myself speaking of it in its still deeper application, in reference to Christ and the Church (Ellicott).R.]
[69][Our English and American commentators do not fail to notice this blunder of the Council of Trent, but some people who speak English treat the Authorized Version with the same reverence; ministers preach from the sound of the E. V., not the sense of the Word of God. The Romanist can cover his blunder by the sanction given to the Vulgate by his church, but Protestants have no such excuse.R.]
[70][The view of Meyer is accepted by Eadie, Hodge, Ellicott, Alford, and seems perfectly tenable. Braunes view results from the effort to maintain a decided antithesis to I in ye, when most commentators find the antithesis to ye also in Christ.R.]
[71][Hodge: The ground of toe obligation as it exists in nature is the eminency of the husband; his superiority in those attributes which enable and entitle him to command. He is larger, stronger, bolder,has more of those mental and moral qualities which are required in a leader. This is just as plain from his history as that iron is heavier than water. The superiority of man, in the respects mentioned, thus taught in Scripture, bounded in nature, and proved by all experience, cannot be denied or disregarded without destroying society and degrading both men and women. The superiority of the man, however, is not only consistent with the mutual dependence of the sexes, and their essential quality of nature and, in the kingdom of God, but also with the inferiority of men to women in other qualities than those which entitle to authority. The Scriptural doctrine, while it lays the foundation for order in requiring wives to obey their husbands, at the same time exalts the wife to be the companion and ministering angel to the husband. As a proof that this is the position assigned to woman by her own mind and heart, we may cite the works of imagination written by the most brilliant of the sex. Their ideal of man, even when they write, personating the other sex, is one who demands from his nature their loving obedience. If it be said that many a woman is joined to a man, whose character does not thus demand the obedience of the superior mind, we must consider how often women accept the relation of wife, with a full knowledge of the right position, as taught by God in nature and in His word, and yet conscious that they neither can nor will occupy that position to the man who becomes their legal husband. Such are punished in this life, and the cry about the subjection of woman is often the wail of distress resulting from such punishment.As regards the relation of the sexes in general, though nothing is expressly said in this section, much may be interred. No doubt great mistakes have been made in drawing such inferences, but it is perfectly obvious that a distinction between the sexes is here assumed, which distinguishes, if it does not sharply divide, the sphere of duty belonging to each respectively. Womans work is different from mans work, though care should be taken neither arbitrarily to exclude her from certain kinds of labor, nor to deprive her of her just recompense for her work. The Church, too, should find work of a certain kind for many who are not wives, by constituting them Bible-readers, deaconesses; the mere office of Sunday-school teacher will not satisfy many such, since for that many are not adapted.In regard to the question of suffrage, it is a fair inference from our passage, that for a wife to vote independently would be a disturbance of the relation as ordained by God; the question assumes a slightly different phase in regard to unmarried women of full age. Still even in the case of such, the passage at least lays the onus probandi on those who advocate the right. One popular argument urged in favor of women suffrage is that thus drunkenness could be stopped by force of law. But not only is that method of doubtful justice, legality and expediency, but the question fairly arises how many men are driven to drunkenness by the failure of their wives to heed the spirit of the Apostles words.R.]
[72][Dr. Hodge remarks on the true expression of the Apostle as their own bodies, (Eph 5:28): (1) It does not refer to any material identification. (2) It implies nothing inconsistent with the separate subsistence of husband and wife as distinct persons. (3) The marriage relation is not essential to the completeness or perfection of our nature in all states of its existence. It is to cease at the resurrection. (4) It is not however merely a union of interests and feelings. In a certain sense husband and wife complement each other. (5) There is doubtless involved a oneness of life which no one can understand.R.]
[73][Here Dr. Hodge is excellent: (1) Marriage is a union for life between one man and one woman; consequently bigamy, polygamy, and voluntary divorce are all inconsistent with its nature. (2) It must be entered into freely and cordially by the parties, i.e., with the conviction that one is suited to the other (and it may be added, to take the positions involved in the natural and scriptural view of the relation). All coercion on the part of parents is contrary to the nature of the relation; and all marriages of mere convenience are opposed to the design of the institution. (3) The State can neither make nor dissolve the marriage tie. It may enact laws regulating the mode in which it shall be solemnized and authenticated, and determine its civil effects. It may shield a wife from ill-usage from her husband, as it may remove a child from the custody of an incompetent or cruel parent. When the union is, in fact, dissolved by the operation of the Divine law, the State may ascertain and declare the fact, and free the parties from the civil obligations of the contract. It is impossible that the State should have authority to dissolve a union constituted by God, the duties and ordinances of which are determined by His law. (4) According to the Scriptures, as interpreted by Protestant churches, nothing but the death of one of the parties, or adultery, or wilful desertion can dissolve the marriage contract. When either of the last-mentioned causes of dissolution is judicially ascertained, the injured party is free to contract a new marriage. The greatest social crime, next to murder, which any one can commit, is to seduce the affections of a wife from her husband, or of a husband from his wife: and one of the greatest, evils which civil authorities can inflict on society is the dissolution of the marriage contract so far as it is a civil contract (for further the civil authority cannot go), on other than Scriptural grounds.R.]
Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange
(22) Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. (23) For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. (24) Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything. (25) Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; (26) That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, (27) That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. (28) So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. (29) For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church: (30) For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. (31) For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. (32) This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church. (33) Nevertheless let everyone of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband.
I comprise all that is here said into one view, for it leads but to one and the same subject: and the sweetest of all subjects it forms; namely, Christ’s marriage with his Church. We cannot be sufficiently thankful to God the Holy Ghost for it, as it so fully explains the soul-comforting subject, and throws such a beautiful light over many parts of Scripture which refer to the same.
Who should have thought, but from what God the Holy Ghost hath said here, that the institution of the marriage in Eden, between our first Parents, was a shadow of an union, long before formed in substance, between Christ and his Church ? But Paul so saith. This is a great mystery, (saith he,) but I speak concerning Christ, and his Church! Who would have conceived, that when at the creation of the first woman, the Lord said it is not good for the man to be alone, I will make him an help meet for him; Gen 2:18 . and the Lord formed the woman from one of his ribs: that this had a much higher, and a far more early allusion, to the God-man Christ Jesus; concerning whom, it was not good, for the promotion of Jehovah’s designs in the glory of Christ, that he should be alone, but that a Church should be raised up for him, and taken from himself; which might be his Spouse, his Partner, in all communicable grace here, and glory hereafter? Who would have seen Christ in that Scripture, when Adam, beholding his wife, called her bone of his bone, and flesh of his flesh; Gen 2:23 . had not God the Holy Ghost un folded its spiritual meaning, when here he tells us, that we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones? Precious Jesus! it was thou, and not Adam, for he had no father of the earth to leave, which didst leave thy heavenly Father, to cleave to thy wife, the Church; and thy Church is now one flesh with thee, in thy human nature, forever. Gen 2:24 .
Paul might well call this a mystery, yea, a great mystery, for all the shadows of it sink to nothing, in comparison of the substance. And, indeed, all the affections, and relations of life, between man and man, are less than nothing, when we look to our relationship in Christ. I would beg the Reader’s indulgence yet a little further, to consider one or two points more, of this great mystery, and seek the teaching of the Lord, that we may have a right understanding on a subject so truly beautiful and interesting.
And here let us take up the matter from the beginning. It appears then, from several parts of the Holy Scripture, that the marriage of Christ and his Church, took place from everlasting. For there can be no period, either in time, or in eternity, to which a date can be fixed, so as to say, that then it began. When Christ was set up, as the Head, and Husband of his Church, the Church must have been set up with him. For there could not have been an head, without a body: neither an husband without a wife. For, on the supposition that Christ, as Christ, that is, God and man in one Person, might have been before all others; yet not in his relative characters. He could not have been the everlasting Father, before he had children neither the Head, without a body: neither the Husband, without a wife. So that Christ and his Church, as Husband, and wife, are from everlasting together. And to this agrees all the Scriptures. Jesus, under the character of wisdom saith, that he was set up from everlasting. And that then his delights were with the sons of men. Pro 8:31Pro 8:31 . He saith also himself, as the Husband of his people: I will betroth thee unto me forever. Hos 2:19 . And, the Prophet agrees to the same, when he saith to the Church: For thy Maker is thine husband, the Lord of Hosts is his name: and thy Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel, the God of the whole earth shall he be called. Isa 54:5 .
Secondly. It appears equally, plain from the Scriptures of truth, that God, when he chose the Church in Christ, before the foundation of the world, chose her to be holy and without blame before him in love. Eph 1:4 . Hence it must follow, that when the Church was presented to Christ, she was as the King’s daughter all glorious within. Psa 45:13 . And, though she hath since fallen into poverty and wretchedness by sin; yet, when Christ married her , she was holy, and without blame before him in love. And such she is again when washed from her sins, in his blood. And such will she be, as this Chapter states, when Jesus comes to present her to himself, at the last day, a glorious Church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing, but to be holy, and without blemish. Oh! who shall conceive the glories of that day, when Jesus shall bring home his church; and when all the members, being fully prepared, in body, soul and spirit, for the everlasting enjoyment of her Lord in glory, s hall enter with him, into the marriage-supper of the Lamb, and be forever with the Lord!
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
XV
THE CHURCH IN GLORY
Eph 5:22-33
This chapter closes the exposition of the letter to the Ephesians, elaborating the twelfth and thirteenth items of our analysis, to wit: Christ and the bride, or the church in glory. The Christian’s enemy, warfare and armor.
First, we will expound the relation between Christ and his church, so far as set forth under the figure of husband and wife. We need to recall so much of the first part of our definition of the word “church” in New Testament usage as applied to our subject: “In the divine purpose from eternity and in its consummation in glory, the whole number of the redeemed are conceived of as a unit, set forth in the Scripture under the figure of the bride, or wife, of the Lamb.” This divine conception was foreshadowed in Eve, the first woman, derived from Adam, the first man, so as by derivation to be bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh. As Adam was the head, or lord, over Eve, so is Christ head, or Lord, of the church. As Eve was derived from Adam, being made a part of himself, extracted from his side in a deep sleep, so the church is derived from the body of Christ in the sleep of vicarious death on the cross. As Eve, when fashioned gloriously, was presented to Adam and united to him in marriage, to be his companion, so the church, when complete as to its number, and complete as to the glorification of each member, will be presented to Christ and married to him, to be his companion forever. Under this imagery the church is the mystical bride of the Lamb.
The reader will readily see that the church in this mystical sense has no real existence now except in the continuous preparation of its members. It is not yet a church except in purpose, plan, and prospect. It is called a church by anticipation. Some of its members are already prepared in both soul and body, for example, Enoch and Elijah, and perhaps those who rose after Christ’s resurrection (Matthew 27-53). Some are prepared in spirit, and constitute the “spirits of the Just made perfect,” whose bodies yet sleep. Some on earth yet are prepared so far as regeneration, justification and adoption go, but are not yet sanctified in spirit or glorified in body. By far the greater number are not yet even born. To be a church they must be assembled and organized. What is called the “presentation and marriage” is a definite transaction yet for the future.
We hear much of the “universal church.” The word, katholikos (“universal”), is not found in the Greek Bible in either the Old or the New Testament. When those so fond of this phrase as expressive of a now existing church are called on to define it, they go to pieces. Some of them say it means all existing denominations, which are branches of the church. Others say that it means all the particular churches collectively. Yet others, that it means all living Christians, whether or not they are members of the church. And so they go. In all probability, i.e., judging from the prophecies of the uncountable number that will ultimately be saved, not one thousandth part of the elect are yet in existence. How can a thousandth part of the whole be universal?
It has no actual existence beyond the preparation of material for it, constantly going on. One may say, “I believe in the Catholic (universal) church,” just as he may say, “I believe in the judgment to come,” “I believe in the second advent,” “I believe in the regeneration of the earth.”
The whole of the modern Baptist idea of a now existent “universal, invisible church” was borrowed from pedobaptist confessions of faith in the Reformation times, and the pedobaptists devised it to offset the equally erroneous idea of the Romanist “universal visible church.” We need to be well indoctrinated on this point, because the error is not harmless. It is used to depreciate Christ’s earth church, “the pillar and ground of the truth.”
Let us carefully analyze the paragraph before us:
1. “Christ loved the church,” that is, he loved the people who were to be given to him all of them. In eternity a joy was set before him a future reward.
2. “He gave himself for it,” that is, he died for his promised people. They in prospect constituted the travail of his soul. It was promised that he should see the travail of his soul and be satisfied.
3. He will cleanse it in order to its holiness. Our text reads, “that he might sanctify it, having cleansed it.”
4. This cleansing is to be by “the washing of water with the word” that is, a method of cleansing was established. In the Old Testament time this cleansing was by the water of purification, which was the sprinkling on the unclean the ashes of the red heifer mingled with water. The sprinkling was done with a bunch of hyssop. (See Num 19 ; Psa 51:7 ; Eze 36:25 ). This typical water of purification finds its antitype in the blood of Christ (Heb 9:13-14 ). So that the washing of water in our text means simply the application of the blood of Christ by the Holy Spirit in regeneration. Hence it is called “the washing of regeneration” (Tit 3:5 ). In regeneration there are always two elements: (1) Cleansing by the application of Christ’s blood; (2) Renewing or changing the heart, or nature (Eze 36:25-26 ; Tit 3:5 ) : Christ gave himself for his people that he might cleanse them by washing them in his blood. (See revised text of Rev 7:14 ; Rev 22:14 .) This cleansing is also, of course, “by the word.” It is the gospel preached that leads to regeneration. (See Joh 1:9 ; Joh 1:13 ; Joh 1:15 ; Jas 1:18 ; 1Pe 1:23 ; 1Co 4:15 .) The word of God is not only an instrumentality of the cleansing part of regeneration but also of the continued sanctification. It includes all expressed in the prayer for the Thessalonians (1Th 5:23 ), “body, soul, and spirit” and “wholly.” It includes the glorification of the body. So that when complete it is a glorious church, not having spot nor wrinkle nor any such thing, but that it be complete in the presence of all its members, and complete in the full salvation of every member.
5. He makes it holy. Our text says, “That he might sanctify it, having cleansed it.” Cleansing or regeneration first, then holiness. “Sanctify” here may not mean to set apart, to consecrate. The glorified church is set apart to its eternal mission, but more naturally “to make holy,” as is implied by the next thought.
6. “That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle, or any such thing, but that it should be holy and without blemish.” This means complete holiness as God is holy. This presentation is the offering of the Bride to the Groom at the marriage altar. She is adorned as a bride for her husband. Psa 45 , which is intensely messianic, anticipates this presentation thus: Hearken, O daughter, and consider, and incline thine ear; Forget also thine own people, and thy father’s house: So will the king desire thy beauty; For he is thy Lord; and reverence thou him. Psa 45:10-11 The king’s daughter within the palace is all glorious: Her clothing is inwrought with gold. She shall be led unto the king in broidered work. Psa 45:13-14 a
7. Then follows the marriage. Let inspiration describe it: “And I heard as it were the voice of a great multitude, and as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of mighty thunders, saying Hallelujah: for the Lord our God, the Almighty, reigneth. Let us rejoice and be exceeding glad, and let us give the glory unto him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready. And it was given unto her that she should array herself in fine linen, bright and pure: for the fine linen is the righteous acts of the saints. And he saith unto me, Write, Blessed are they that are bidden to the marriage supper of the Lamb” (Rev 19:6-9 ).
The event here described is the crowning glory of the future. It follows the advent of our Lord. He will come in glory. He will bring with him the spirits of the just made perfect. He will raise and glorify their bodies. He will transfigure the living saints. He will catch up all the redeemed to himself in the air and thus separate between the sheep and the goats. He thus assumes his mystical body, the church, as at his first advent he assumed the body of his humiliation, and as in his second advent he assumed the resurrection body of his glory.
How vivid the picture in Mat 25:5-12 : “Now while the bridegroom tarried, the virgins all slumbered and slept. But at midnight there was a cry, Behold the Bridegroom! Come ye forth to meet him. . . . And they that were ready went in with him to the marriage feast, and the door was shut. Afterward came also the other virgins, saying, Lord, Lord, open to us I But he answered them and said, Verily I say unto you, I know you not.”
On this great day is fulfilled the scripture: “He shall see of the travail of his soul and shall be satisfied.” Now to the universe appears “the riches of his inheritance in the saints.” “When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be marveled at in all them that believed.”
We thus see in these prison letters of Paul the several meanings of the word “church,” all illustrated:
As an institution, it is one new man made out of the Jew and Gentile; it is one commonwealth in which both alike are citizens. It is one temple. It is one body. It is one bride. As an institution it is appointed to instruct angels, and to be the depository of the divine glory unto all generations.
As a particular church, in which alone this institution finds expression, “each several building fitly framed together groweth into a holy temple of the Lord for a habitation of God in the Spirit.” Each particular church is a body “fitly framed and knit together through that which every joint supplieth, according to the working in due measure of each several part.”
As a glory church it includes all the redeemed, and each one of the redeemed saved fully, in body, soul, and spirit. The use of the word “church” in a sense too broad for application to a particular church must be found in this letter, if anywhere. In view of this fact, it is fortunate that we have such historical passages touching the Ephesian church as appear in Act 20:17-38 and 1Ti 3:14 . In both these passages there can be no doubt that the address concerns the particular church at Ephesus, and yet these broad terms are used: “Take heed to all the flock in which the Holy Spirit hath made you bishops to feed the church of the Lord which he purchased with his own blood.” “These things write I unto thee . . . that thou mayest know how men ought to behave themselves in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.” There is no term so broad, whether house, temple, body, flock, bride, but may be applied to a particular church, because each particular church in itself alone foreshadows the church in glory.
The several steps which lead up to the assembling, organization, visibility, and locality of the universal church the steps which lead to its constitution are as clearly set forth in the Scriptures as the steps looking to the constitution of any particular earth church. These steps are as follows:
1. Jesus will come, bringing with him the souls in heaven ( 1Th 4:13-14 ).
2. He raises and glorifies their bodies ( 1Th 4:16 ).
3. He glorifies without death the Christians then living, ( 1Co 15:51-55 ).
4. Both classes are caught up in the clouds with the Lord ( 1Th 4:17 ). This is the separation of the righteous from the wicked (Mat 13:24-30 ; Mat 24:27-31 ; Mat 25:10 ; Mat 25:31-32 ). They are now for the first time an assembly an organization and they can discern between the righteous and the wicked (Mal 3:17 ).
5. At this time the world is purified by fire (Mal 4:1-3 ; 2Pe 3:4-12 ; Rom 8:19-23 ).
6. Presentation and marriage of the bride (Eph 5:27 ; Psa 45:10-15 ; Rev 19:6-9 ).
7. The church then sits on the throne and with Christ judges the evil man and angels (Rev 3:21 ; 1Co 6:2-3 ; Mat 19:28 ). This judgment is final (Mat 25:41-46 ; Rev 20:11-15 ).
8. There is now a redeemed earth, purified by fire (2Pe 3:13 ; Rev 21:1 ) and the glorified church rules therein (Rev 21:2-27 ); so that lost paradise with its tree of life is regained (Rev 22:1-15 ) and at last “the meek inherit the earth” (Mat 5:5 ).
9. The wicked, both men and angels, having bowed the knee and confessed Christ’s sovereignty (Phi 2:10 ), are isolated forever in their final prison (Rev 20:14-15 ; Mat 25:41 ; Mat 25:46 ) and so the pacification is complete and then cometh the end ( 1Co 15:24-28 ).
The entrance qualifications for the church in glory may be summed up in one sentence: The complete and eternal salvation of the entire man body, soul, and spirit. That derivation of the woman from the man, and God’s uniting them in marriage, while a historical fact, foreshadowed a greater mystery the derivation of the church from the Lord, and their final marriage in heaven.
The latter part of this book commences with Eph 6:6 and goes to the end of the chapter. This paragraph presents to us the Christian’s warfare, the Christian’s enemies, and the Christian’s armor. We make a very great mistake if we think that in the happy hour of our conversion all trouble, battle, and strife are over. They have just commenced. That is the day we enlisted. The whole war is ahead of us not a war for our salvation, but a war in Christian service. The writer brings out very clearly the nature of the enemies with which the Christian has to contend. He expressly says that they are not human enemies not flesh and blood. He must not be understood as denying that “the flesh” is an enemy, for that enmity has been clearly expressed in Rom 7 , but “flesh and blood” as here used mean simply human enemies who are unimportant when compared with the superhuman enemies of whom he speaks. He refers to these greater enemies and specifies thus: “Our wrestling is not against flesh and blood (human enemies), but against principalities, against powers, against the world rulers of this darkness, against the spiritual hosts of wickedness in heavenly places.” These are the enemies in his mind. He tells us who is the leader of these enemies: “That we may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.”
It is the teaching of the Scriptures that Satan, a distinct angelic person, sinned in heaven and led away with him a great number of angels. My own judgment of the occasion of that sin is that he revolted against being put lower than man. God having announced that the new creature, which at first was made for a season a little lower than the angels, would ultimately be put above the angels and that the angels should be ministering spirits unto them. That caused the revolt of Satan in heaven. That was the cause of his downfall, and it also accounts for his enmity to the human race.
Having been expelled from heaven because he refused to submit to this divine enactment, he determined to wage a perpetual warfare against man to thwart the purpose of God that man should be put above the angels. That accounts for the introduction of sin on earth, in the garden of Eden. He determined to bring about the downfall of the human race. If he could make them enemies to God, and God an enemy to them, they would become his subjects, and he would still be over them.
He certainly did win his fight in the garden of Eden. He captured the whole world in capturing the head of the human race, and from that time on the whole human race has been in bondage to Satan. He and his evil spirits are the world rulers. He dictates its maxims of pleasure and business. Of course, when grace comes in to destroy the work of the devil and to rescue the human race from his dominion, and people were converted into the power of this grace, the devil did not give up the fight. If he cannot destroy Christians who have escaped from him, he at least can worry them, and he will wage a warfare against Christian people who, as he calls them, are rebels against him. They were in his kingdom, and are now trying to pull down his strongholds, lessen his empire, and spread revolt in his kingdom.
It is to the reality and intensity of this struggle that the apostle calls attention here. He is very careful to teach that Christians unaided are unable to cope with such adversaries that if they go into this fight, they need to go into it protected in every possible way defensively, and equipped with effective offensive weapons.
In a most beautiful allegory Bunyan brings out the whole thought. As soon as Christian gets rid of the burden of sin at the cross, he is led to the Interpreter’s house (the house of the Holy Spirit), where many things are explained to him, and before he starts off on his pilgrimage to heaven he is led into the armory, where he puts on the armor which God has provided for his people. Long before a child can appreciate the spiritual significance of the book, he is delighted and carried away with its imagery of warfare. Christian soon, in going down the hill Difficulty, commits a sin and meets Apollyon, who straddles his pathway. There ensues a terrible conflict. The book in its allegorical form describes the victory which Christian won over Apollyon.
Our text says that in view of these enemies, in view of the wiles of the devil and his demons, on account of their cunning, on account of their malice, on account of the hold that they have on the Christian through the remains of his carnal nature yet with him, for he is not yet sanctified, and in going out to this battle he needs an armor, or panoply. The idea is doubtless suggested to Paul by the fact that even as he wrote he was chained to the soldier of the Praetorian guard, the most formidable of Roman soldiers. The soldier has on a helmet, breastplate, a military girdle, war sandals, and has a sharp two-edged sword, certainly the most formidable weapon ever devised for warfare, and a long shield with which, when he goes out into battle, he protects himself. So Paul takes this imagery to show how the Christian must guard against the wiles of the devil that the Christian must be panoplied.
As has been said, Paul illustrates by the armor of a Roman soldier, so familiar to him from being chained to one of the Praetorian guard every day. The pieces of armor specified are all defensive, except the sword and prayer, which are offensive weapons. The office of the girdle was to gather up and hold together both the loose dress and parts of the armor. In the place of this girdle he offers truth, that is, the truth of the gospel. In the place of the breastplate, whose office is to protect the heart, he offers righteousness. Of course this raises the question, Whose righteousness Christ’s as imputed, or the Christian’s own right doing? Something May be said for the second, but more for the first. It is true that right doing is a conscious defense against false charges. But the devil is not apt to confine himself to false charges. He will hurl the fiery dart of true charge against some weakness, infirmity and sin of the Christian. The imputed righteousness of Christ is impervious to any missile whatever.
The office of the spiked sandal was to insure safe footing on slippery or treacherous ground. For this he offers the preparation of the gospel of peace. Being justified by faith, we have peace with God, and if God be for us who can be against us? Peace in the heart, the peace of God which passeth all understanding, will aid to step surely and stand firmly.
The office of the helmet is to protect the head, another vital part, and for this Paul offers salvation. He means salvation so far as justification goes, and all its pledges. The thought is: “He that believeth hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation.” If God justifies, who can condemn? Who can lay any charge to God’s elect? This thought nourished in the heart protects from any fiery dart of doubt Satan may hurl at the mind.
The office of the shield is more general. It is carried on the left arm and covers the whole vital part of the body. In the place of this, Paul offers faith. But the question arises: Is faith itself a shield, or is it the hand that interposes the true shield? In Gen 15 , where, in giving an account of Abraham’s conversion, so many new words appear for the first time in the Bible, among them, “shield,” “believe,” “imputed righteousness,” God says, “I am thy shield.” God, then, is the shield of faith the shield that faith lays hold of and interposes between the soul and danger. We are not equal to Satan. God is greater than Satan. When we see Satan coming faith puts God, the shield, between our weakness and Satan; we hide behind God. One of Aesop’s fables says. “A kid standing on the roof of a house railed at a wolf passing by, to whom the wolf replied: Not you, but the roof raileth at me.” This fable teaches that time and place often make the timid brave. A timid little fellow gets behind a big brother and valorously shakes his fist at an opponent from whom he had just fled.
One of the great magazines-illustrated that point. Andrew Johnson wanted to get rid of Secretary Stanton. Stanton refused to resign or to be removed, and defied Johnson, whereupon Johnson appointed U. S. Grant war secretary. Stanton dared not defy him. The magazine, in telling the illustration, pictures the irate and terrible Stanton charging on the little President, but just before he get to him, Johnson reaches back and pulls Grant in front of him. Under the picture it reads: “Let me see you hit him!” So faith puts God, its shield, between us and the devil.
The office of the sword is offensive. With it an enemy is thrust or smitten. Paul commends as the Christian’s sword the Word of God. This is called the sword of the Spirit, not merely because the Spirit inspired it, but also because the Spirit gives it point and edge when rightly used. Just here we need to connect Heb 4:12 : “For the word of God is living, and active, and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing even to the dividing of the soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and quick to discern the thoughts and intents of the heart.” With this compare Isa 49:2 and Hos 6:5 . The most striking example for us in the right use of this sword against Satan is our Lord’s use of “It is written” in replying to Satan’s temptation. Another one is the case of Michael mentioned in Jud 1:6 .
The second offensive weapon of the Christian is prayer: “With all prayer and supplication, praying at all seasons in the Spirit, and watching thereunto in all perseverance and supplication for all the saints.”
This praying covers a wide field: (1) All prayer and supplication. (2) At all seasons. (3) In the Spirit. (4) Watching thereunto. (5) In all perseverance. (6) For all the saints.
Helmet, breastplate, girdle, sandals, and shield are defensive they protect us. The Word of God, and prayer, are offensive weapons; with them we smite Satan. Satan trembles when he sees The weakest saint upon his knees. Cromwell’s Ironsides, about to join battle, first prayed, then, singing a battle song, they smote with the sword.
QUESTIONS
1. Give so much of the definition of the word “church” as relates to Christ as bridegroom and the church as bride.
2. In what sense only does this glory church now exist?
3. Why must we call it a church in prospect, and not an actuality?
4. What is the Greek word for “universal,” and how often is it used in Greek Old Testament and New Testament?
5. Where do all break down who claim that there is now a universal church? Cite examples.
6. Who invented the phrase, “A universal, spiritual, invisible, church,” and why, and how did Baptists obtain it?
7. In analyzing the paragraph, point out what Christ did or will do.
8. Expound the cleansing, showing Old Testament type and New Testament type, giving scriptures.
9. What the instrumentality employed, and what the scriptures?
10. When is this marriage between Christ and the church, and what scriptures?
11. As this letter, more than any other, gives the usage of the word “church” in broad senses, show from Acts and Timothy the application of these broad terms to the particular church at Ephesus.
12. Cite every use of the word “church,” or any corresponding in this letter, and locate each use under one of three heads the church as an institution, a particular church, the glory church.
13. Give carefully all the steps of the constitution of the glory church.
14. What is its entrance qualifications?
15. Who is the Christian’s most formidable adversaries?
16. How are Christians qualified to cope with them?
17. What great Baptist author illustrates all this in an allegory?
18. Name and explain each piece of defensive armor.
19. Give the offensive pieces, and an illustration of each.
20. What are the circumstances of Paul’s prison condition suggested the imagery?
Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible
22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
Ver. 22. Wives, submit, &c. ] This includes reverence, obedience, &c. God hath scattered the duties of husbands and wives up and down the Scriptures, that they may search, and by learning to be good husbands and wives, they may learn also to be good men and women.
As unto the Lord ] Who taketh himself dishonoured by wives’ disobedience. And though husbands may remit the offence done to them, yet they cannot remit God’s offence, but there must be special repentance.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
22 33 .] Mutual duties of wives and husbands arising from the relation between Christ and the Church.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
22 .] Wives (supply, as rec. has inserted, , seeing that the subsequent address to husbands is in the 2nd person), to your own husbands ( , as we often use the word (e.g. ‘He murdered his own father’), to intensify the recognition of the relationship and suggest its duties: see 1Co 7:2 : also Joh 5:18 ), as to the Lord (‘quasi Christo ipsimet, cujus locum et personam viri reprsentant.’ Corn.-a-lap. in Ellic.: i.e. ‘in obeying your husbands, obey the Lord:’ not merely as in all things we are to have regard to Him, but because, as below expanded, the husband stands peculiarly in Christ’s place. But he is not thus identified in power with Christ, nor the obedience, in its nature, with that which is owed to Him): for a husband (any husband, taken as an example: the same in sense would be expressed by , the husband in each case, generic: sing. of ) is head of his wife, as also ( , introducing identity of category) Christ is Head of the church (see for the sentiment, 1Co 11:3 note), ( being , in His case see below) Himself Saviour of the Body (i.e. ‘in Christ’s case the Headship is united with, nay gained by, His having SAVED the body in the process of Redemption: so that I am not alleging Christ’s Headship as one entirely identical with that other, for He has a claim to it and office in it peculiar to Himself.’ ‘Vir autem non est servator uxoris, in eo Christus excellit: hinc sed sequitur.’ Bengel. Stier remarks the apparent play on , in reference to the supposed derivation of from ( ); and has noticed that in the only other place (except the pastoral Epistles) where St. Paul uses , Phi 3:20-21 , it is also in connexion with ): but (what I do say is, that thus far the two Headships are to be regarded as identical, in the subjection of the body to the Head) as the church is subjected to Christ, so also (again, identity of category in the . ) let the wives be to their husbands (not now, as it would disturb the perspicuity of the comparison) in every thing (thus only, with Calv., Beng., Mey., Ellic., can I find any legitimate meaning or connexion in the words. All attempts 1) to explain . also of the marriage state (Bulling., Beza, ‘viri est qurere quod mulier conservet’), or 2) to deprive of its adversative force (Rck., Harl., al.), or 3) refer it to something other than the preceding clause (De W., Eadie), seem to me unsatisfactory).
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
22 6:9 .] The Church, in her relation to Christ, comprehending and hallowing those earthly relations on which all social unity (and hers also) is founded, the Apostle proceeds to treat of the three greatest of those : that of husband and wife ( Eph 5:22-33 ), that of parent and child (ch. Eph 6:1-4 ), that of master and servant ( Eph 6:5-9 ). See this expanded by Stier, in his very long note, ii. 316 329.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Eph 5:22-33 . A paragraph which, in dealing with the duties of wives and husbands as seen in the new light of Christian truth, gives the Christian ideal of the marriage-relation. It is the loftiest conception of that relation that has ever come from human pen, and one than which no higher can be imagined.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
Eph 5:22 . , [ ]: Wives, be in subjection to your own husbands . The great Christian law of mutual subjection or submissive consideration is now to be unfolded in its bearing on three particular relations which lie at the foundation of man’s social life those of husbands and wives, parents and children, masters and servants. The relation of husbands and wives, as the most fundamental, is taken up before the others, and the Christian duty of the wives is set forth first. The reading is somewhat uncertain. The TR inserts , with [597] [598] , most cursives, Syr., Chrys., etc. A few manuscripts ( [599] [600] ) place the after the . In some important authorities ( [601] [602] [603] 17, Boh., Goth., Vulg., Arm., etc.) we find ; which is accepted by LTr and given a place in the margin by WH. The clause is given without any verb by [604] , Clem., and Jer., which last states that the verb was not found in his Greek codices. This shortest form is adopted by WH in their text . The verb is easily supplied from the preceding , and such constructions are quite in Paul’s style. The (which is omitted in the parallel passage in Col 3:18 ) is here, as often if not always in the NT, something more than a simple possessive. It conveys the idea of what is special , and gives a certain note of emphasis or intensity, = husbands who as such are peculiarly and exclusively theirs ; see 1Pe 3:1 , and cf. Ell. in loc. ; Blass, Gram. of N. T. Greek , p. 169. : as to the Lord . That is, to Christ ; not to the husband as lord and master. If the husband’s supremacy had been in view, it would have been expressed by . The denotes more than similarly , and more than “just as they are submissive to Christ so should they be to their husbands”. The next sentence, and the whole statement of the relation between husband and wife in the following verse in terms of the relation between Christ and the Church, suggest that the point of the is that the wife is to regard the obedience she has to render to her husband as an obedience rendered to Christ, the Christian husband being head of the wife and representing to her Christ the Head of the whole Christian body.
[597] Codex Mosquensis (sc. ix.), edited by Matthi in 1782.
[598] Codex Angelicus (sc. ix.), at Rome, collated by Tischendorf and others.
[599] Codex Claromontanus (sc. vi.), a Grco-Latin MS. at Paris, edited by Tischendorf in 1852.
[600] Codex Boernerianus (sc. ix.), a Grco-Latin MS., at Dresden, edited by Matthi in 1791. Written by an Irish scribe, it once formed part of the same volume as Codex Sangallensis ( ) of the Gospels. The Latin text, g, is based on the O.L. translation.
[601] Codex Sinaiticus (sc. iv.), now at St. Petersburg, published in facsimile type by its discoverer, Tischendorf, in 1862.
[602] Codex Alexandrinus (sc. v.), at the British Museum, published in photographic facsimile by Sir E. M. Thompson (1879).
[603] Codex Porphyrianus (sc. ix.), at St. Petersburg, collated by Tischendorf. Its text is deficient for chap. Eph 2:13-16 .
[604] Codex Vaticanus (sc. iv.), published in photographic facsimile in 1889 under the care of the Abbate Cozza-Luzi.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Eph 5:22-24
22Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body. 24But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything.
Eph 5:22 “wives, be subject” There is no verb in the Greek text of Eph 5:22. It is supplied from Eph 5:21 (which is one of five present participles describing the spirit-filled life). In this context it is not a command, but a present middle or passive participle. The only command was directed toward husbands in Eph 5:25 (present active imperative)! Husbands are to act in sacrificial, self-giving love toward their wives, who then voluntarily submit.
However there are several parallel passages which urge the submission of wives to husbands:
1. a Present passive imperative in Col 3:18
2. a present passive participle in Tit 2:5 used as an imperative
3. another present passive participle in 1Pe 3:5 used as an imperative
These parallel passages force interpreters to take the participle in Eph 5:21 as a present passive participle used as an imperative (cf. 1Pe 3:1). It is still significant that the voice is passive. Wives must allow the Spirit to perform this task in their lives.
Both the Analytical Greek New Testament by Barbara and Timothy Friberg and An Analysis of the Greek New Testament by Max Zerwick and Mary Grosvenor call this verb a passive voice, but The Analytical Greek Lexicon Revised, edited by Harold K. Moulton; Word Pictures In the New Testament by A. T. Robertson; and “Ephesians” in The Anchor Bible Commentary by Markus Barth call it a middle voice. Koine Greek was in the process of merging these two voices into one.
Paul illustrates the Spirit-filled life by using the three members of the Greco-Roman domestic scene who had no rights-wives, children, and slaves. He showed how the Spirit changes cultural relationships into spiritual relationships, rights into responsibilities.
If the participle is middle it emphasizes the wife’s voluntary participation in marital submission for the benefit which comes from a peaceful, loving marriage with a believing spouse. If the participle is passive it denotes the wife’s need to allow the Spirit to do His work in her heart (cf. Eph 5:18) which affects both the husband and the children, as well as the domestic slaves.
“as to the Lord” One should compare Col 3:18, “in the Lord.” It is not that the husband is the ultimate authority, but that wives are to respect their husbands because of their own relationship to Christ. Jesus sets the pattern for both submission to authority (i.e., always the Father’s will) and the exercise of authority (i.e., over the church, cf. Eph 5:25).
Eph 5:23 “the husband is the head. . .as Christ is the Head” Christ is depicted as the husband and the church as the bride (cf. Rev 19:7; Rev 21:2; Rev 21:9). Husbands need to act in their God-given leadership position just as Christ did. He gave Himself for the church. It is not a control issue, but a giving-of-self issue.
Male headship is a very controversial issue in our modern western society. This is for several reasons:
1. we do not understand servant leadership
2. we do not like patriarchal societies because of our modern egalitarian emphasis on the worth of the individual
3. we are confused by the Bible’s paradoxical way of asserting male headship in some passages and equality in others
In my opinion the answer lies in the example set by Jesus of true headship in relationship to the church and true servanthood (submission) to God the Father. This submission in no way expresses inequality, but administrative functional design. Male headship addresses a kind of leadership which serves the needs of others in a self-giving way. Our modern society rejects authority, yet seeks power!
I can personally accept male headship as a result of the fall (cf. Gen 3:16; 1Ti 2:12-14). I can also affirm it as a biblical concept in light of Jesus’ leadership of the church (cf. Eph 5:22-33). But what I find difficult to accept is a patriarchal mandate (i.e., male dominated societies) as God’s revealed plan for every age and society (cf. Rom 3:27; 1Co 12:7; 1Co 12:13; Gal 3:28-29; Col 3:11). Does the mutuality so obvious in Gen 1:27; Gen 2:18 which was lost in Adam and Eve’s rebellion (cf. Gen 3:16), return in salvation? Is the curse of sin and subservience both dealt within Jesus’ redemption? As the new age breaks into the lives of believers now, does also the restoration of complete fellowship with God as in Eden also begin now?
I would also like to make a hermeneutical point. As an interpreter of what I believe to be the self-revelation of the one true God and His Christ, I am surprised by the cultural aspect of Scripture. We see it obviously in the OT (circumcision, food laws, leprosy laws, etc.) But it is much more difficult for us as modern Christians to see it in the NT. I am sure this is (1) because of our love and respect for the Bible and (2) our tendency toward propositional literalism.
The two issues which stand out to me to have obvious cultural aspects (1) male dominated societies (patriarchy) and (2) slavery. The NT never attempts to address the unfairness of these cultural pillars of the ancient world. Possibly because to do so would have meant the destruction of Christianity. Yet the gospel through time is abolishing both! God’s truth never changes but societies do change. It is a grave mistake for us to attempt to turn first century Greco-Roman culture into God’s will for all people in all places and of course the same is true for Israelite culture. Into each of them God revealed Himself in powerful and permanent ways. The real task is how to get the eternal absolutes out of its cultural husk. A good book which discusses this very issue is Fee and Stuart, How to Read the Bible For All Its Worth.
One way to try to determine what is eternal and, therefore, binding on all believers in all periods and what is cultural or personal preference it is to see if the Bible (OT & NT) gives a uniform message or does it record a variety of opinions (cf. Fee and Stuart’s How to read The Bible for All Its Worth).
My fear is that I might let my denominational training, personality, culture and personal preferences silence or diminish a revealed truth! My ultimate authority is God and His revelation (i.e., in His Son and in a written record, the Bible). But I realize He revealed Himself to a specific period of history, to a particular culture and everything in that culture was not His will. Yet, God had to speak to people of that culture in terms and categories they could understand. The Bible then is a historical document. I dare not ignore its supernatural aspect or its cultural aspect.
SPECIAL TOPIC: HEAD (KEPHAL)
Eph 5:24 “but as the church is subject” The form of this verb is either present passive or Present middle indicative (see note at paragraph four at Eph 5:22). As the wife submits to her husband for (1) her own best interest (middle voice) or (2) because she is enabled by God’s Spirit (passive voice), so too, the church must submit to Christ.
“church” See notes at Eph 3:10 and Special Topic at Col 1:18.
“in everything” Christ, not husbands, must be the ultimate authority (cf. Mat 10:34-39). This verse does not chain a believing wife to an abusive husband nor does it condone evil actions or deeds demanded by an authoritarian husband.
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
husbands. App-123.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
22-33.] Mutual duties of wives and husbands arising from the relation between Christ and the Church.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Eph 5:22. , wives) Inferiors are put in the first place, then superiors, Eph 5:25; ch. Eph 6:1; Eph 6:4-5; Eph 6:9; 1Pe 3:1; 1Pe 3:7, because the proposition regards subjection; and inferiors ought to do their duty, of whatsoever kind their superiors are. Many of those that are inferior become superiors; and he who acts well as an inferior, acts well as a superior.[88] Moreover, all these are addressed in the second person; therefore it is the duty of all to hear and read the Scripture; comp. 1Jn 2:13.-, to your own) Wives should obey their own husbands, even although elsewhere they should seem to have superior prudence: is to be supplied from Eph 5:21.[89] It is said of children and servants, obey [], ch. Eph 6:1; Eph 6:5. There is a greater equality in the case of husbands and wives;[90] comp., however, Rom 13:1.-, as) The subjection which is rendered by the wife to the husband, is at the same time rendered to the Lord Christ Himself. It is not compared with the obedience which the Church renders to Christ, but with that which the wife herself ought to render to Christ. Obedience is rendered to the husband, under the eye of Christ; therefore also to Christ Himself.
[88] Qui bene subest, bene prest.
[89] Wherefore in the Germ. Vers., Eph 5:22 is only put in a parenthesis.-E. B.
[90] Therefore , subordinate, not , is said in their case.-ED.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Eph 5:22
Eph 5:22
Wives, be in subjection unto your own husbands,-He begins here to specify the different classes that must submit to other classes. God first created man, then from him took woman. Man was first in the order of time, the stronger and more robust in person, God made him the head, and laid it on the wives to submit unto him in the fear of the Lord. This means submit to the husband so far as she can do it, without violating the prior and higher command to obey God. The first and highest duty is to God. [The submission is that of love, respect, and reverence, which is befitting the relation she holds to her husband. In her sphere, she is spiritually on an equality with man, but as a husband he is the natural and scripturally recognized head and leader in the family. Her submission must be in accordance with the principles of righteousness, and nothing is required of her inconsistent with her Christian character. This submission of the wife, when rightly understood and practiced, accords with her inner nature, is in harmony with her relations to God and others, and is productive of the fullest development of her character, her highest happiness and good.]
as unto the Lord.-When all other motives fail to lead the wife to obey the husband, when he is hard and harsh, fails to appreciate her kindness and love, and she is discouraged and disheartened, she is then to remember to submit and bear, because God commands it. She can find solace and comfort and strength to bear, because she is doing it as service to the Lord, knowing that he will reward it as service done to him.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
Love of Husband and Wife
Eph 5:22-33
The Apostle has been urging us to be filled with the Spirit, and now proceeds to show how Spirit-filled people should act in their homes. He has been exhorting to praise and joyfulness, and now urges that our lives, as well as our lips, should be attuned to music.
What a lofty ideal of wedded love is here! Chrysostom says: Wouldest thou that thy wife obey thee as the Church doth Christ? Have care for her, then, as Christ for the Church. Our earthly relationships are similitudes and emblems of sacred realities, and the more we can import into the time sphere the inspiration and virtue of the eternal, the more transcendental and beautiful will they become. The Lord has taught us the utter renunciation of love. Men of the world reckon how much love they can get; the children of eternity how much they can give; but such giving always means getting back with compound interest. Notice those phrases about nourishing and cherishing. O wounded member of Christs body, He suffers in thee, nourishes, cherishes, and will heal!
Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary
The Christian Family (Eph 5:22-33)
It is a remarkable thing that in the letter to the Ephesians Paul begins with the highest heights of divine revelation, then in the closing portion he seems to descend to what we might consider very commonplace. He opens his letter with that which thrills our souls-our predestination according to the riches of Gods grace to a place that angels have never known. He writes of our lofty position as accepted in the Beloved, blessed with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ. Then he applies this wonderful body of truth to the behavior of a Christian family. It is a poor testimony to talk high truth while living on a low level in the home. I am afraid there are those who can repeat very glibly the statements of the first half of the Epistle to the Ephesians and delight in the wonderful privileges of the people of God, but fail wretchedly when it comes to living the practical truth of the last half of this Epistle in their daily lives.
You will notice how closely verse Eph 5:22 is linked with verse Eph 5:21 : Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God. This is a principle of Christian living that applies to believers in every relationship of life, and now that the apostle turns to consider the Christian family he shows that it applies there. Did you ever stop to think what a wonderful institution the Christian family is? In reading a letter from a missionary in a heathen land I was struck by a paragraph that read something like this:
How we wish that some Christian people could come and live among us, even if not to engage in missionary work. There are different ways by which one might make his living among this semi-civilized people. For instance, we might have a Christian dentist and his wife, or a Christian worker in leather-a shoemaker or harnessmaker-with his wife and family. It would mean a great deal to us to have a harmonious family join us here, for we can conceive of nothing that could so commend Christianity to our people as just to see a Christian family living according to the New Testament: a Christian husband loving and honoring his wife, a Christian wife living in sweet and beautiful subjection and loyalty in her home, Christian children who really delight in obedience to their parents, parents who love their children and seek to bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. This would be so utterly different from anything our people have ever known.
In many heathen lands one cannot find families that function according to Biblical principles. It is the knowledge of Christ that produces the Christian home, and how jealously we should guard this blessed and delightful institution.
After admonishing his readers to submit one to another in the fear of God, the apostle immediately applies that principle to the relationship of the husband to the wife: Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. The words, submit yourselves in verse Eph 5:22 are not found in the best manuscripts. Let us read verses Eph 5:21-22 as they are in the Greek: Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God, wives unto your own husbands. He is not calling on the wife to take the place of a slave- she often takes that place in pagan lands-but he is calling for mutual loyalty, mutual respect, mutual submission. Pass over the intervening words to verse Eph 5:25, Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it. That is how the husbands submit themselves to the wives, so it is a mutual thing. That which makes the Christian home what it ought to be is this mutual loyalty, the one to the other-the wife to the husband, the husband to the wife. This is a marvelous principle when you think of it.
For example, we see a young woman who has had her own way to a large extent; she has made her own way through the world. Or she may have come from a home where she has been carefully nurtured and cared for. One day she meets a man and her heart is moved to love him. She says, I could go to the ends of the world for him. I could keep house for him, care for our children, and submit to him. Or we see an independent bachelor who has made his own way in the world. He has supported himself and could do what he would with his money and time. But one day he meets a woman and is moved to love her. He says, I could work to support her even if it means I would have to change my life for her. I want to share my life with her. That is the Christian ideal. When the Spirit of God dwells in each heart, the relationship becomes a beautiful picture of the mutual relation of Christ and the church
The same experience takes place in the spiritual world. We see a person living his life utterly independent of God. Then one day he is brought face to face with Christ, and his heart says, For His sake I resign my own way; I give Him control of my life; I trust myself to Him. I am willing for His names sake to go and do whatever He would have me do. Christ on His part laid down His life to purchase the one He loves, and now delights to lavish blessings on this one whom He has made His own. We will never fully understand this relationship until we get to Heaven. He has designed that every Christian home should exemplify this very thing.
Do our homes harmonize with this beautiful picture that the apostle brings before us here? Let us examine each verse somewhat carefully. Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God, Wivesunto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. Remember, that the apostle was giving these directions to Christian families. This is marriage not only in the flesh but in the Lord. What a sad thing for the Christian ever to contemplate marriage apart from submission to the Lord. Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers, is an admonition that applies here as well as to many other relationships of life.
For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Our Lord as the head of the church provides and cares for all of its needs. So the Christian husband is not to lord his position over his wife in a harsh and arbitrary way, but to exemplify the gracious care of the Lord Jesus Christ as the savior of the body. And so the Christian husband takes on the responsibility to support his wife and his family. He is ready to work hard that they may be kept in a measure of comfort and ease. Because of this, as the church is submissive to Christ so should the wife be to her own husband.
On the part of the husband we read in verse Eph 5:25 : Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church and gave himself for it. A young fellow who had recently become married came to me in distress one day and said, Brother Ironside, I want your help. I am in an awful state. I am drifting into idolatry.
What is the trouble? I asked.
Well, I am afraid that I am putting my wife on too high a pedestal. I am afraid I love her too much, and I am displeasing the Lord.
Are you indeed? I asked. Do you love her more than Christ loved the church?
I dont think I do.
Well, that is the limit, for we read, Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it. You cannot love more than that. That is a self-denying love, a love that makes one willing even to lay down his life for another.
We are reminded of the striking story about the wife of one of Cyruss generals who was charged with treachery against the king. She was called before him and after trial condemned to die. Her husband, who did not realize what had taken place, was apprised of it and came hurrying in. When he heard the sentence condemning his wife to death, he threw himself prostrate before the king and said, O Sire, take my life instead of hers. Let me die in her place! Cyrus was so touched that he said, Love like this must not be spoiled by death, and he gave them back to each other and let the wife go free. As they walked happily away the husband said, Did you notice how kindly the king looked upon us when he gave you a free pardon? I had no eyes for the king, she said; I saw only the man who was willing to die for me. That sacrificial love is the picture that we have in Ephesians. That should characterize the Christian husband-willing to give even his life for the blessing of his dear ones.
The apostle can scarcely speak about marriage without being reminded of the One who has won his own heart, and he must tell us more about Him. This blessed Husband, this glorious Head of the church, this ideal for every Christian husband, gave up His own precious life for the bride of His heart, the church, that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word. Some imagine that this is a reference to baptism, a kind of sacramental washing. But I understand these words to mean that when He has found us in our sins and uncleanness, unfit for association with Him, He applied the water of the Word of His truth to us and we were sanctified by the truth. We were made fit to enter into communion with Him, the holy One. If my hand becomes dirty, I wash it in water and the dirt disappears. So when my conscience, my heart, my life were all defiled, the Lord by the Holy Spirit applied the truth of His Word to me. I was regenerated by the washing of water, and thus made clean in His sight, and so fitted for union and communion with Him.
The full regeneration will be seen in glory when He will present His bride to Himself, a glorious church not having spot caused by sin, or wrinkle caused by age. In Rev 21:2 we read, And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. This is the glorious picture of the church as it will be throughout all the ages to come-not having spot or wrinkle, or any such thing. There are some of my brethren who in their hyper-dispensational teaching read this chapter and deny that the church is the bride of the Lamb. They tell us that Israel is the bride. But in Ephesians Paul said the Bridegroom is our Lord; the church, His redeemed spouse, and the two are linked together for eternity. He then applied this principle to our lives again, So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. The two have become one, and therefore the man who would treat his wife unkindly is as one who would destroy or injure his own flesh. We may also reverse the analogy. We have heard of wives who are so vixenish in their tempers that they cause even good and devoted husbands terrible anguish. Both are one flesh, and need to learn that, No man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church. For so intimate is our union with Him that we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.
If some insist that the church is the body but not the bride, the argument that the apostle used contradicts them. The church is both the body and the bride even as a mans wife is both his body and his bride. And so the apostle quoted from the book of Genesis: For this cause [because of this union] shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. What a marvelous union it is when two are brought together through divine grace, the Lord having first united their hearts to Himself and then to each other, and so they set up a Christian home.
Is your home such as the apostle is here depicting, where husband and wife walk together in mutual love and submission, and where Christ is honored? If not, it would be well to ask why it is not. Perhaps you would find that the true root of the trouble is in the neglect of family devotions. In 1Pe 3:7 we read, Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with [your wives] according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered. Notice the words, that your prayers be not hindered. When a Christian home is the way it should be, prayer like fragrant incense will rise unhindered to God the Father from that family altar. But where the home is not as it should be, where husband and wife are not submissive to God and one another, where there is not that delightful relationship, then prayer immediately is hindered. The family altar is the thermometer that shows what conditions are in the home. What a blessing when husband and wife can happily kneel together and bring their varied problems to the Lord, or together lift their hearts to Him when things are going well. But when there is reserve on the part of either one or the other, you may know there is a storm in the offing, or something has already taken place hindering their fellowship and communion.
If in your home time is not given for the family altar, see to it that not another day goes by until husband and wife read the Word together and kneel together in the presence of God, commending one another and the children to the Lord. You will find it will make a great difference, and day by day anything that would hinder prayer can be judged at the family altar.
In closing this section of Ephesians chapter 5, the apostle said, This is a great mystery. He has spoken again and again of mysteries in this Epistle. In chapter Eph 1:9 he said, Having made known unto us the mystery of his will. In chapter Eph 3:3-5 he said, By revelation he made known unto me the mysteryWhich in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit. And in this chapter he wrote, This is a great mystery. Here he was speaking of the mutual relationship of husband and wife. This relationship exemplifies the very mystery that he has been speaking of in the previous chapters: This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church. There you have the mystery made clear: Christ as the husband, the church as the wife; Christ as the head, the church as the body. This is the marvelous mystery that was not made known in other ages, but has now been fully revealed in the pages of the New Testament.
Of course we understand that the word mystery as used here never means something hard to comprehend. It is not mystery in the sense of being something mysterious and difficult to understand. It is rather a sacred secret that the human mind never would have figured out without divine revelation. In the Old Testament times nobody thought of this wonderful truth, the mystery of Christ and the church, but it was revealed first to the apostle Paul and then to others of the New Testament company. It is the great truth that you and I are called on to confess and acknowledge in this dispensation of the grace of God.
We are not to be so carried away by the symbolic truth behind the marriage relation that we forget the obvious truth of the relationship between husband and wife. So the apostle drops again from the mystery itself to the commonplace things of life and says, Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband. There is to be mutual love, respect, and loyalty. The wife, while respecting her husband, is to serve in her particular capacity to make the Christian home what it ought to be. The husband, while loving his wife, is to take the responsibility of providing for the family as the acknowledged head of that home. Both are to act in the fear of God. It is Christian homes all over the city, all over the nation, that will strengthen the gospel that is preached from the pulpit. People must see the truths of Scripture lived out in life, and realize the power of Christ to bind two hearts together in such a way that they can exhibit the mutual relationship of Christ and the church.
Fuente: Commentaries on the New Testament and Prophets
4. Manifestation in the Family-relationship
CHAPTERS 5:22-6:4
1. Wives representative of the Church (Eph 5:22-24)
2. Husbands representative of Christ (Eph 5:25-29)
3. The mystery: concerning Christ and the Church (Eph 5:30-33)
4. Exhortations to children and parents (Eph 6:1-4)
The exhortations which follow concern the Christian family. The mystery concerning Christ and the Church (Eph 5:32) is to be manifested in the family relationship. While before we have seen the Church as the body of Christ, here in these verses we see the Church in her love-relation to Christ. He loved the Church and gave Himself for it. The union of husband and wife is used as a type of the union of Christ and the Church. Wives are mentioned first: Wives submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. And why? For the husband is head of the wife, even as Christ is head of the Church; and He is savior of the body. The wife is therefore to be in submission to her own husband in everything, as the Church is subject unto Christ. Thus the wife in her submission is to bear witness to the blessed relationship of Christ and the Church. She has the blessed portion of being in subjection. The question arises, What, if the husband is not a believer? Is she to submit in such a case? The Word of God gives definite instructions covering such a case, and adds a promise (See 1Pe 3:1-2).
The husband is not to demand of the wife this submission, which is her place. Husbands are to love their wives as Christ loved the Church. He stands in the Christian family as the representative of Christ and is called to love his wife. And how did Christ love the Church? He came from heavens glory to be a servant. He served and is serving the Church. The husbands love towards the wife is to be expressed in loving service in her behalf and giving unto her, as unto the weaker vessel (1Pe 3:7). Not the wife is to serve the husband, but the husband is to serve her in love, thus manifesting in a little measure the love of Christ for the Church. Beautiful is the description of the love of Christ for the Church. It is a love in the past: He loved the Church and gave Himself for it. Thus there is a present love: That He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the Word. Then there is His future love: That He might present it to Himself a glorious Church not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that it should be holy and without blemish. it is the love which passeth knowledge, the love which never changeth; the love which is eternal. Equally blessed is the truth contained in Eph 5:30-33. We are members of His body, and of His flesh and His bones.
That we have here a reference to Adam and Eve as the types of Christ and the Church is obvious. While Adam slept God built the woman out of his side and then presented her to him. This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh, were Adams words. She was taken out of his body, shared the same life and was also Adams wife. Adam is the figure of Him that was to come (Rom 5:14). Eve is the type of the Church. We possess His life and are of Himself, bone of His bone and flesh of His flesh. And the Churchs destiny is to have dominion with Him over the new creation.
Children are to obey their parents in the Lord. And the fathers are not to provoke the children to wrath, but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. And how much wisdom this takes! Parents must show constantly to the children the love and patience of Christ and bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. Then the promise will be made good. Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house (Act 16:31).
Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)
submit: Eph 5:24, Gen 3:16, Est 1:16-18, Est 1:20, 1Co 14:34, Col 3:18-25, 1Ti 2:11, 1Ti 2:12, Tit 2:5, 1Pe 3:1-6
as: Eph 6:5, Col 3:22, Col 3:23
Reciprocal: Gen 24:67 – and took Num 30:8 – General Rth 1:8 – the dead Est 1:12 – refused Est 1:22 – that every man Son 2:7 – ye stir 1Co 11:3 – and the head of the Eph 5:21 – submitting Eph 5:33 – reverence
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
(Eph 5:22.) With regard to the following admonition it is to be borne in mind, that in those days wives, when converted and elevated from comparative servitude, might be tempted, in the novel consciousness of freedom, to encroach a little-as if to put to the test the extent of their recent liberty and enlargement. The case was also no uncommon one for Christian wives to have unbelieving husbands, and the wife might imagine that there was for her an opportunity to manifest the superiority of a new and happy creed. 1Pe 3:1-6. And those Ephesian wives had little of the literary and none of the religious education enjoyed by the daughters of modern Christian households. Even under the Mosaic law, women and wives had few legal rights, and they too, when baptized. needed the injunction of the apostle-
, -wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands, as to the Lord. The sentence has no verb, and it afforded, therefore, a fair opportunity for the ingenuity of the early copyists. Some MSS., such as D, E, F, G, add after . Scholz and Hahn place the same word after , while A and some minusculi add -a reading followed by Lachmann. There are other variations in the form of attempted supplement. Jerome proves that there was nothing in the Greek Codices to correspond to the subditae sint of the Latin version. The continuity of the apostle’s style did not require any verbal supplement, and though the gender differs, every tyro will acquiesce in the reason given by Jerome- resonat. Jelf, 391. The idea conveyed in the participle of the previous verse guides the sense. Wives, in the spirit of this submission, are to be directed in their duty to their husbands. The noun often signifies a husband, as man does in vernacular Scotch. Mat 1:16; Joh 4:16-18; Homer, Od. 24.195; Herod. 1.140. So also Hebrew, Deu 22:23. The precise meaning of in this connection has been disputed. There are two extremes; that indicated by Valla, Bullinger, Bengel, Steiger, and Meyer, as if the apostle meant to say, Your own husbands-not other and stranger men; and that maintained by de Wette, Harless, and Olshausen, that merely stands for the common possessive pronoun. But in all such injunctions in which is used, as in 1Co 7:2, Col 3:18, 1Pe 3:1, the word seems to indicate peculiar closeness of possession and relation, though indeed in later Greek its meaning is somewhat relaxed. Joh 5:18; Romans 7; Rom 1:32; 1Co 14:35, etc. Winer, 22, 7; Phrynich. ed. Lobeck, 441. The duty of submission is plainly based on that tenderness, speciality, or exclusiveness of relationship which implies. But that submission is not servitude, for the wife is not a mere vassal. The sentiment of Paul is not that of the heathen poet-
,
.
The insubordination of wives has always been a fertile source of satire; and yet Christian ladies in early times drew forth this compliment from Libanius, the last glory of expiring paganism-proh, quales feminas habent Christiani! The essence of this submission is explained by the important words-
-as to the Lord. Pelagius, Thomas Aquinas, and Semler capriciously regard this noun as standing for the plural , and render it as to your masters, referring to their husbands. Rckert, Harless, Olshausen, Meyer, and Matthies take it to mean, that ye render this submission to your husbands as if it were rendered to Christ who enjoins it; or, as Chrysostom more lucidly explains it- . The adverb denotes the character of the obedience enjoined, and such seems to be the grammatical meaning of the clause. The context, however, might suggest another phase of meaning. Women, says Olshausen, are to be in submission, not to their husbands as such, but to the ordinance of God in the institution of marriage. And so de Wette, preceded by Erasmus, observes that the clause is explained by the following verse. The husband stands to the wife in the same relation as Christ stands to the church, and the meaning then is, not as if she were doing a religious duty, but in like manner as to the Lord-the duties of the church to Him being the same in Spirit as those of a wife to her husband. In either case, the submission of a wife is a religious obligation. She may be in many things man’s superior-in sympathy, in delicacy of sentiment, warmth of devotion, in moral heroism, and in power and patience of self-denial. Still the obedience inculcated by the apostle sits gracefully upon her, and is in harmony with all that is fair and feminine in her position and temperament:
For contemplation he and valour formed-
For softness she and sweet attractive grace:
He for God only, she for God and him.
Fuente: Commentary on the Greek Text of Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians and Phillipians
Eph 5:22. This verse should be understood on the principle set fourth in the preceding one. A wife must submit to the authority of her husband as long as he requires nothing that is contrary to the will of God. When she does that, she is doing so as unto the Lord, for He has willed the husband is the head of the wife.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Eph 5:22. Wives, submit yourselves, etc. The verb rendered submit yourselves must be supplied, from the general statement of Eph 5:21. In fact nearly all of our Greek manuscripts contain the word in different forms and positions. Most modern editors rightly reject it, since in addition to these variations and the testimony of the Vatican Codex, Jerome expressly states that it was not found in the Greek copies of his day. The exhortation to wives comes first, in accordance with Eph 5:21.
Your own husbands. Own emphasizes the peculiar and tender personal relation on which the duty rests.
As to the Lord; Christ. The meaning is not, as the Church yields to Christ, nor yet, as you yield to Christ, but rather, regard your duty to your husbands as duties to the Lord, The verses which follow plainly point to this sense. The duty is made to rest as a Christian basis, is to be rendered in a Christian spirit from a Christian motive. When it becomes a burden, or is neglected, the failure has usually been in not regarding it in this aspect
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Division 5. (Eph 5:22-33; Eph 6:1-9.)
Natural responsibilities.
We have now the earthly relationships of the heavenly people. It is striking that such responsibilities as these should come in just in this place. We find them also in Colossians, where the body of Christ is before us in some sense as we have it here, but it is suited, surely, that in the place which God has given us in Christ before Him, a place in which there is neither male nor female, in which, therefore, all these relationships might seem not to be found, that we should, nevertheless, have them pressed upon us. We belong to the new creation. We could not say that the relationships of which he is speaking here belong to this, and yet what is taught us clearly is that, while we are here, we are to own all that is of God, as we have seen with regard to other things. Creation was of Him. The world is fallen, but that which He meant for man in these relationships is none the less good in itself, and in this way to be respected. Christianity, as we know, in no wise sets aside whatever is of Him in any sphere, and it is suited that just here, therefore, where at least we might imagine such things could never come in, we have explicitly the responsibilities attaching to earthly relationships. In these, moreover, there is shining through, the light of those higher ones in which God Himself has taken up the ties of nature to make them the patterns of things which His own love has brought in for us. Thus it is here that we have the Church’s relationship to Christ as the Eve of the “Last Adam,” and it is striking that here we go to the very beginning of the world, before, in an evil sense, there was any world at all, before sin had spoiled things, to find at the very outset imaged for us that special relationship which Christ has made His own. How near it must be to His heart when it is the first thing that we find typically presented to us in the history of man! Thus, the Lord means to have us for Himself, and the tie of nature, we may be well assured, is, after all, only a feeble figure of the reality of which it is the figure.
1. The apostle begins with this here, with wives and husbands. The wives are to submit themselves to their own husbands as to the Lord. The authority of the Lord is concerned in it, and the way in which He has taken these things up is to be reverently observed also. The husband is the head of the wife, as also Christ is the Head of the assembly. The very shadows of such things must be dear to us. If it were but a picture only, how could we abuse such a picture of His love to us? We are reminded here at once, “He is the Saviour of the body,” His is not a place of authority merely. The authority itself is that which we yield to with delight, as realizing the title that He has to it. So, says the apostle, follow the pattern, “Even as the Church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything.” That, of course, could not possibly be meant to limit the higher authority of Christ Himself or of the Father. If there comes to be a question there, if these two are in manifest contradiction to one another, we must obey God and not man. Upon wives, submission to their husbands is enjoined. The husbands are never pressed to keep their wives in subjection. The duty pressed upon them is to love their wives, but here, again, the same measure is put before us; it is to be “as Christ loved the Church and gave Himself for it, that He might sanctify it and cleanse it with washing of water by the Word, that He might present it to Himself a glorious Church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing.” That, it is plain, carries us back to the beginning, only it was God that presented Eve to Adam and not Adam that presented her to himself. Christ transcends all types, and therefore it is fit and right that this should be manifest to us here. He is going to present the Church to Himself. He is diligently perfecting it according to His own mind, that He may be able to do
The water washing has nothing ritualistic in it. The apostle explains it here as “by the Word.” The power of the Word it is by which the Spirit works. Water could only act as water. God never uses a thing out of its place. He, the Creator, honors His own institution. He does not accomplish spiritual results by material means, nor can He possibly slight that Word, which is the work of the Spirit and by which the Spirit works. It is striking that in the Lord’s words to Nicodemus, the living water gives us the Word and the Spirit in relation to one another. The life in the water is the Spirit in the Word. Without the Spirit, the Word itself could accomplish nothing; but, on the other hand, the Spirit of God acts by the Word. If the angel comes to Cornelius, it is only to send him to one who already has in his possession the revelation of God for his soul. How blessed. to know that this work, which seems, as we think of it often, to be so little according to the full result which God is bringing us to, that it is, nevertheless, in bands that cannot leave unfinished that which He has begun. It would be as impossible for the Spirit to fail in the accomplishment of that which He has undertaken as it would have been for Christ to fail in that which He came to do. Thus Christ will present the Church to Himself “glorious,” not merely having “no spot,” but no “wrinkle” also; no sign of old age about it, no defect; nothing will suit Him then but the bloom and eternity of an eternal youth, the freshness of affections which will never tire, which can know no decay. The Church will be holy and blameless then. After all that we have known of her history, it would be strange to read that, if we did not know how gloriously God maintains His triumph over sin and evil.
Here, then, the Antitype shines fully through the type, but men ought also to “love their own wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his own wife, loveth himself,” and here, again, Christ is before us, for no one ever “hated his own flesh, but nourisheth and cherisheth it as the Lord the Church.” Think of the apostle being able to put it in such a way. “We are members of His body;” we are “of His flesh and of His bones.” These are different things which we must not confound. Eve was out of Adam. God formed the woman out of the man. She was thus akin to him in the closest way, but it is not this kinship in the spiritual sense that ever makes us members of His body. That is, as we know, by the Spirit. Both things are accomplished as to us. We have the nature which makes us to be of His kindred, nay, to be of Himself; but then we are brought into relationship, also, in which we are to be surely for all eternity; those who are the instruments of His purposes, the expression of His mind. The two things necessarily go together. The Lord must make us, first of all, such as He can work by before He can work by us.
The wife here is but another aspect of the Body. The apostle, in fact, seems to identify them. The man who loves his wife loves himself, his own flesh, his body, and so the apostle quotes from Genesis here, that “a man shall leave his father and his mother and be united to his wife, and the two shall be one flesh.” This he expressly states to refer to Christ and the Church, but the apostle applies it to the natural relationship: “But let every one of you so love his wife even as himself, and let the wife also reverence her husband.”
2. The admonition to children and parents follows. Children are to obey their parents “in the Lord.” This preserves, of necessity, His rights. “In the Lord” means in subjection to the authority of Christ, and therefore, of necessity, preserves that authority in everything. The apostle quotes the commandment with the sanction given to it in the Old Testament, -not at all as what is absolutely true for the present time, but to show the importance attached to it by God, -the first commandment having a promise connected with it: “That it may be well with thee and that thou mayest live long on the earth” or “in the land,” as the connection would rather make it. No doubt there is a government of God that goes on through all the present time, in which these things have a measure of fulfilment. The law was, or is still, the rule of God’s government, which, however, the peculiar position of Christians upon the earth necessarily modifies as to them. As Christians, they may be cut off from the earth, when, as obedient children simply, they would be preserved upon it; but the Christian loss is gain, as we know, so that the apostle Peter elsewhere refuses, as we may say, to consider it as loss. “Who is he that shall harm you if ye be followers of that which is good?” But, he immediately adds: “But if ye should suffer for righteousness, sake, happy are ye.” The suffering for righteousness, sake might seem to be a setting aside of what he had just urged, the question being the most positive form of statement, in fact. No one could harm them in following that which was good, but then, “suffering for righteousness’ sake” is not finding harm. A Christian cut off from the earth simply goes to heaven and to Christ. The Jew cut off from his land was, at least as to Jewish blessing which was in the land, in a different case.
Now comes the address to fathers: in the first place not to use authority so as to make it a burden to those under it, not to provoke the children to anger, but to bring them up in the discipline and admonition of the Lord. They are to be subject to the authority to which the parents also themselves are subject. This common subjection makes everything right. Divine authority is that which establishes every other authority and in which parents and children become alike brethren and servants.
3. We have lastly the address to servants and masters. To servants, who, in fact, were bondmen, slaves, the word is to obey their “masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling,” not on account of anything in their relationship to these, but as serving Christ in it, in singleness of heart as to Christ. How everything is raised in character here! The hardship of bond-service is relieved at once by the ability to make it service to Him, where all service is perfect freedom; yet this, of necessity, makes it pains-taking service too. It will be of the best kind, “not with eye service as men-pleasers.” If the desire were only to please these, it might be effected by what, after all, is superficial enough; but if we are, as all are, the bond-servants of Christ in spirit, “doing the will of God from the heart,” we shall serve with good will “as to the Lord and not to men,” and the compensation in due time may be looked for also. “Whatever good shall be done, ye shall receive of the Lord, whether a man be bond or free.” Masters, on the other hand, have to remember that they have a Master in heaven. Scripture lowers the hills and raises the valleys. These also serve in their very position as masters of others. They must not, therefore, use their authority with harshness, remembering that their Master is in heaven, and that with Him there is “no acceptance of persons.”
Fuente: Grant’s Numerical Bible Notes and Commentary
APPLICATION TO THE HOUSEHOLD
In the last lesson Paul spoke of the Christians walk in general terms, but now applies the thought particularly to: wives and husbands (5:22-33); children and parents (Eph 6:1-4); and servants and masters (Eph 6:5-9), summing up the whole in Eph 6:10-18. The epistle concludes with a brief reference to his personal affairs (Eph 6:19-22), and a benediction (Eph 6:23-24).
Speaking of the application to the three classes of the social order, it is noticeable that the apostle begins with the duties of the inferior or subjected party in each case, an arrangement not accidental, as may be judged by comparing Col 3:18 to Col 4:1, as well as 1Pe 2:18, and the subsequent verses. As another suggests, one reason for this may be that the duties of submission and obedience are so incomparably important to all the interests of human life. Furthermore all these duties are here seen in special connection with the believers standing in Christ.
In the instance of wives and husbands, we are not to suppose that there is anything derogatory to the former in their submission, since subordination and order are the great characteristics of Gods workmanship. Christ is equal to God and yet as the Son He is submissive to the Father. Is that derogatory to him? Of course, the reference here is to the saved woman, and one who so appreciates her standing in Christ as to feel the fitness of things resulting there from. Moreover, as the same spiritual teacher says, husbands are not directed to command but to love their wives. The right to command is implied but not enforced. The husbands love, on the other hand, includes every attention to his wife, the reposing of his confidence in her, and the enjoyment with her of their oneness in Christ. Under these reciprocal conditions submission is likely to be a delight. Eph 5:30-31 of this section are quoted from Gen 2:23-24, which suggests a beautiful type of the church as the bride as well as the body of Christ (1Co 11:2-3).
In the instance of children and parents, observe that the former are addressed as though they were present in the church assemblies where this letter was read, and expected to give their personal attention to it, to understand it, and obey its teachings the same as their adult associates. Observe too, that they were saved children, and able to appreciate their obligation to obey their parents because with them they were in the Lord. One such inspired declaration as this is an all-sufficient answer to much of that newer pedagogy in our Sunday schools which leaves the supernatural almost out of account.
Children need the Word of God as much as their parents do, and if it be given to them clear and simple, the Holy Ghost is able to illuminate it to their understandings and apply it to their hearts. They who are substituting something else in its place in our Sunday schools are assuming a responsibility from which the wise may well shrink. Observe finally, in this connection, that fathers are not to be unduly severe with their children, but to temper and qualify their government as becometh them that are in the Lord.
In the instance of servants and masters, the former are to be understood as slaves, but not necessarily of an inferior race. They may have been captives taken in war, and in many respects the equal of their masters, and yet they were to be obedient, as unto Christ. They were in him just as their masters were, but this would not alter the relation they bore to them, for Gal 3:28 has reference to salvation in Christ, and does not contravene the established relations of life. But there are obligations for the Christian masters also (Eph 6:9).
In the previous lesson we dwelt on the Christians walk, but now we come, in the summing up of the article, to the Christians warfare (5:10-18). The Scofield Bible divides these verses thus: the warriors power (Eph 6:10); the warriors armor (Eph 6:11); the warriors foes (Eph 6:12-17); and the warriors resource (Eph 6:18).
QUESTIONS
1. What three classes of the social order are named?
2. Why presumably, does the apostle begin with the duty of the subjected party first?
3. Show that there is nothing derogatory in the subjection of a wife to her husband.
4. Under what conditions is such submission likely to be a delight?
5. What inferences are to be drawn from the address to children in Gal 6:1?
6. What caution does this suggest to Sunday School teachers?
7. Have you looked up the reference to Gal 3:28?
8. To what does that reference refer?
9. What new idea about the Christian is suggested in the summing up of the epistle?
10. Analyze Eph 6:10-18.
Fuente: James Gray’s Concise Bible Commentary
Eph 5:22-24. In the following directions concerning relative duties, the inferiors are all along placed before the superiors, because the general proposition is concerning submission: and inferiors ought to do their duty, whatever their superiors do. Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands Unless where God forbids. Otherwise, in all indifferent things, the will of the husband is a law to the wife: as unto the Lord As owning Christs authority in your husbands, whose image they bear, 1Co 11:7. The obedience a wife pays to her husband, is at the same time paid to Christ himself. For the husband is the head of the wife Under Christ; is her governor, guide, and guardian; as Christ is the head of the church As if he had said, God will have some resemblance of Christs authority over the church exhibited in the husbands authority over his wife. See on Eph 1:22. And he is the Saviour of the body Of the church, his mystical body, from all sin and misery. As if he had said, As Christs authority is exercised over his church to defend it from evil, and supply it with all good, so should the husbands power over his wife be employed to protect her from injuries, and provide comfortably for her according to his ability. Therefore as the church That is, that part of the church which is truly regenerate; is subject unto Christ And with cheerful willingness submits to his authority; so let the wives be to their own husbands To whom they have promised obedience; in every thing Which is lawful, which is not contrary to any command of God.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Eph 5:22 to Eph 6:9. Subordination in the Fear of Christ.The principle is illustrated by the relation (a) of wives to husbands, (b) of children to parents, (c) of slaves to masters. The writer does not attack existing social institutionsslavery, the patria potestas, the dependent position of women. He accepts the relationships as they exist in the world he knows, and seeks to interpret them in the light of the gospel (p. 649). If he enforces upon wives, children, and slaves, the duty of subordination, he insists also upon the corresponding obligations of conjugal love and protection, parental nurture and admonition, kind treatment and forbearance towards slaves. All these relationships are now relationships in the Lord. That of husband and wife in particular is grounded in Christs relation to His Church.
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
SECTION 12. DIRECTIONS TO WIVES AND HUSBANDS. CH. 5:22-33.
Wives, be subject to your own husbands as to the Lord. Because man is head of the woman, as also Christ is Head of the Church. He is Saviour of the Body. Nevertheless, as the Church submits to Christ, so also the wives to the husbands in everything.
Husbands, love your wives, as also Christ loved the Church and gave up Himself on its behalf that He might sanctify it, having cleansed it by the bath of water, with the word, that He may Himself present to Himself the Church glorious not having spot or wrinkle or any of the suchlike things, but that it may be holy and blameless. So ought the men to love their own wives as their own bodies. He that loves his own wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it as also Christ does the Church. Because we are members of His Body. For this cause, a man will leave father and mother and will be joined to his wife; and the two will become one flesh. (Gen 2:24.) This mystery is great. But I speak in regard to Christ and in regard to the Church. Nevertheless, also ye severally, let each one thus love his own wife, as himself; and the wife that she fear the husband.
The implied general exhortation at the end of 11, submitting yourselves one to another, is now specialised in reference to the three most conspicuous relations of social life; in 12 to wives and husbands, in 13 to children and parents, in 14 to slaves and masters. The same three relations are discussed in the same order in Col 3:18 to Col 4:1. But the discussion here is much more full and valuable; especially that of the first pair, which is developed under the influence of the dominant thought of this Epistle.
Eph 5:22-24. The wives to their own husbands: similar injunction to Col 3:18. Their own husbands: noting a peculiar and intimate relation. The words in italics, be subject are supplied from the close of the foregoing sentence.
As to the Lord: slightly different from as is fitting in the Lord in Col 3:18. The wife must recognise that her position of subordination is ordained by Christ and that in bowing to her husband she does but submit to her Master in heaven. Thus the Gospel lays upon her a new obligation. But, as we shall see, by laying upon the husband a like obligation it gives to the wife new rights.
Because man is etc.: a fact containing a reason for the foregoing injunction.
Head of the woman: as in 1Co 11:3, a close parallel. The head and body are vitally united, and share the same nature. But the one is placed above the other to direct its action. Paul asserts that this is the relation of man to the woman. To this metaphor is added another similar metaphor which still further expounds the subjection of the woman to the man: as also Christ is Head of the Church. Same favourite metaphor in Eph 1:22; Eph 4:12; Eph 4:16. Its frequency is explained by the ideal aspect of the Church which is the dominant thought of this Epistle.
He is Saviour of the Body: an important assertion thrown in, which practically limits the foregoing comparison. From the head of the woman the Head of the Church differs in that HE (very emphatic) is Saviour of the Body. This completes the foregoing metaphor by calling the Church the Body of Christ; and makes conspicuous a difference between the metaphors by an assertion about Christ and the Church quite inapplicable to the relation of man and woman. The Body of which Christ is Head, He has Himself rescued from bondage and death.
Nevertheless etc.; reasserts, in spite of the difference just mentioned, the primary injunction of Eph 5:22.
In everything: a subjection universal within the limit fixed by its aim, viz. as to the Lord. She must do nothing even in obedience to the husband which she cannot do for Christ.
Eph 5:25. Husbands, love the wives: word for word as in Col 3:19.
According as also etc.: ground of this exhortation. If the womans relation to the man resembles that of the Church to Christ, the love with which Christ loved the Church must be a model of mans love to his wife. This comparison is the more natural in Greek because the word Church is feminine.
And gave-up Himself on its (or her) behalf: historic manifestation and proof of this pattern love.
Gave-up on-behalf of: same words in Eph 5:2; Gal 2:20. It is Christs self-surrender to death.
In this verse and in Joh 3:16 we have two aspects, each supplementing the other, of the love which prompted the death of Christ. Since the purpose of salvation embraced the world, and since God brings to bear on every man an influence which unless resisted will lead him to salvation, Christ said to Nicodemus, in a general statement about the Gospel, that God so loved the world that He gave etc. But the eternal love of God foresaw all who would accept the Gospel and be finally saved. Consequently, this foreseen result of the gift of Christ may be spoken of as the aim of His self-surrender, and therefore as the object of the love which prompted it. Each of the saved can say He loved me and gave up Himself for me. And the lost will know that their destruction was due, not to a limitation of Gods love, but to their own rejection of His offered mercy.
Eph 5:26-27. A digression expounding the moral aim of Christs self-surrender. Cp. Tit 2:14. It is very appropriate in this exposition of Christian morality.
May-sanctify it: subjective holiness, i.e. the actual and unreserved devotion and loyalty of the Church to Christ. For this is clearly implied in the words following. So the word holy in Eph 5:27. This is here represented as an aim of the death of Christ. And rightly so: for without it there can be no full blessedness. And an intelligent purpose includes all means necessary to the end in view. In 1Co 1:2, the same word denotes the objective holiness of all the people of God, i.e. His claim that they live only for Him. In this sense even the carnal Corinthian Christians were already sanctified. Wherever sanctification means more than this, viz. the actual devotion which God claims, it is represented, not as attained, but as a divine purpose. So 1Th 5:23; Joh 17:17; cp. 1Co 7:34; 2Co 7:1. Since loyalty to God is ever the work of the Holy Spirit, since the gift of the Spirit implies pardon of sin, and since Christ died in order to harmonize the justification of believers with the justice of God and thus make it possible, Paul here asserts that Christ gave up Himself in order that He may sanctify the Church. See a close and important parallel in 2Co 5:15, where we are taught that Christ died in order that we may live a life of devotion to Him.
Having-cleansed it by the bath of water: a necessary preliminary to the actual devotion to God which Christ purposes to work in His people. For all impurity is opposed to unreserved devotion to God, and must therefore be removed before subjective holiness can be realised. So Rom 6:11, dead to sin, but living for God. Similarly, in symbolic ritual, the priests in the Temple washed themselves at the brazen laver before they approached the altar: Exo 30:18-21.
Cleanse: same word in 2Co 7:1; Tit 2:14; Heb 9:14; 1Jn 1:7; 1Jn 1:9; Act 15:9; important parallels. It denotes removal of the stain which mars the moral beauty of sinners.
Bath: same word in Tit 3:5, bath of the new birth; and Sirach xxxi. 30, one who is baptized from a dead body and again touches it, what has he been profited by his bath? in reference to ceremonial purification. It denotes, as does the English word bath, both the act of washing and the vessel in which we wash. In view of these two other passages and of Act 22:16, we can hardly doubt that Paul refers here to Baptism. And such reference presents no difficulty. As commanded by Christ, Baptism was binding on all who had not received it and who sought deliverance from the stain of sin; and was therefore in this sense a condition and instrument of spiritual purification. This does not imply any magical efficacy in the outward rite, but only its divine obligation in all ordinary cases. In Pauls day, the peril frequently involved in outwardly confessing Christ made this obligation a most serious element in the way of salvation. Hence the language of these three passages.
This reference to Baptism was probably suggested by the metaphor in Eph 5:27. Paul silently reminds his readers that Baptism, which to many of them had been so perilous, was but the brides bath on the eve of marriage, in their case a necessary precursor of the joy of eternal union with the great King.
With the word: joined most naturally to that He may sanctify it. For the intervening words give a complete sense, and describe a necessary preliminary to the sanctification which Christ designs. Having noted this preliminary, Paul adds the instrument of sanctification, viz. the word of the Gospel, Gods chosen instrument of salvation. Cp. Joh 17:17, sanctify them in the truth. Thy word is truth. Same word, in the singular number as here, and referring to the Gospel, in Eph 6:17; Rom 10:8; Rom 10:17; Heb 6:5; 1Pe 1:25. In eternity the Son of God purposed to draw men, by a spoken word, viz. the Gospel, to bow to God with unreserved and joyous devotion. Similarly, by a word of God the world was made: Heb 11:3.
Eph 5:27. Further and ultimate aim of the purpose described in Eph 5:26. It is clothed in a not unfrequent metaphor: 2Co 11:2; Rev 19:7; Rev 19:9; Rev 21:9; Joh 3:29; Mat 25:1.
Present: same word in Col 1:22; Col 1:28; Rom 6:13; Rom 6:16; Rom 6:19; Rom 12:1; and, in the same connection as here, 2Co 11:2.
Himself to Himself: emphatic assertion that the Giver and Receiver are the same. For the Bride has been rescued and purified by the self-surrender of the Bridegroom.
Glorious: clothed in splendour exciting universal admiration; cp. Rev 21:11, having the glory of God. Christ designs the Church to be glorious, and as such to be His own for ever.
Spot: any blemish.
Wrinkle: a mark of decay. Maintaining his metaphor, Paul describes moral imperfections as bodily blemishes.
But that it may be etc.; completes the description of the glorious Church.
Holy: subjectively: for, objectively, as claimed by God, Pauls readers were (Eph 1:1) already holy. This word keeps before us the subjective sanctification of Eph 5:26. Instead of having spot or wrinkle, Christ designs the Church to be holy and blameless: same words together in the same connection in Eph 1:4. They are added in the form of a purpose in order to throw emphasis on the holiness and blamelessness of the Church as specially designed by Christ.
Notice that present to Himself corresponds to sanctify and holy: for that is holy which is devoted to God. Not having spot or wrinkle corresponds, as a negative element implied in holiness, to cleanse and blameless.
Eph 5:28 a. Application of the foregoing metaphor to the matter in hand, viz. the duty of husbands to love their wives.
In this way: according as Christ loved the Church.
As their own bodies: i.e. looking upon their wives as being their own flesh and blood. These words link together two closely related metaphors, viz. the Church as the Body (Eph 5:23) and as the Bride (Eph 5:27) of Christ; and brings them to bear, thus linked together, upon the relation of husband and wife.
Verse. 28-30. These verses develop an argument lying in as their own bodies. Husband and wife have one interest. Therefore, affection towards the wife brings proportionate gain to the husband. In this sense, he that loves his own wife, loves himself. This argument, Eph 5:29 further supports. Paul asserted in Eph 5:25 that a mans relation to his wife is like that of Christ to the Church. And he has frequently taught that the Church is the Body of Christ. If so, Christs love to the Church is like a mans love to his own body. This latter love Paul declares to be universal, and further describes.
His own flesh: his body, in view of its material constitution, which has special needs and demands special care.
Nourishes: finds the food needful for its health and development.
Cherishes: 1Th 2:8 : keeps warm, as a hen her chickens. Every one feeds his own body and protects it from cold. And as every one acts towards his own body so Christ acts towards the Church. This treatment of us by Christ is illustrated by a restatement of the fact that we are members of His Body.
Eph 5:31-32. The words of Gen 2:24 (almost word for word from the LXX.) taken up by Paul and woven into his argument about the relation of Christ to the Church as a pattern to husbands and wives. Same quotation in Mat 19:5; Mar 10:7-8. Adam asserts that because woman is derived from man the relation of husband and wife is the closest of human relationships. By appropriating these words, Paul brings them to bear on the argument before him. And they prove clearly that (Eph 5:28) to love ones wife is to love oneself. For they assert that husband and wife are one flesh. This plain reference of the quotation makes it needless to seek in it an assertion about Christ. And certainly the Son of Mary did not leave His mother in order to be united to the Church.
Because of this: because woman was taken out of man, as stated in Gen 2:23. It is a part of the quotation. We therefore need not assume a special reference to Eph 5:30.
A man will leave: whenever in all generations a man marries.
The two shall become one flesh: the chief point in the quotation. So close is the marriage relation that it seems in some sense to suspend the distinction of personality. Now, whatever is done to one part of a living body affects the whole. Consequently, kindness to ones wife is kindness to oneself.
This quotation casts light upon the assertion in Eph 5:23 that man is head of the woman. The head and body are one flesh, so closely and vitally united that injury or benefit done to one is done to the other. Yet the head directs and the body obeys. All this is true both of man and woman and of Christ and the Church. Of each of these relationships the human body is a metaphor. Even Christ and the Church are one flesh: for both are human. But Christ directs; and the Church obeys. The human body is thus a pattern of two important relations, viz. of husband and wife and of Christ and the Church. It is therefore a link uniting these relations, and making each a pattern of the other. This double metaphor is not found elsewhere. And it greatly strengthens the obligations here enforced. The wife is bound to obey her husband, as the Church, of which she is a member, obeys Christ. The husband is bound to love his wife, as Christ loved the Church. To fail in this is, as this quotation proves, to act as a man would who did not care for his own body. We have thus a double motive for marital love, the example of Christ and the instinct of self-preservation.
Eph 5:32. This mystery: (same word in Rom 11:25 🙂 the marriage relation described in the foregoing quotation. See note under 1Co 3:4. Under the marriage relation lies secret teaching known only to those taught by God.
But I speak: Pauls own use here of this quotation as distinguished from the hidden truth underlying marriage.
With reference to Christ and with reference to the Church: these represented as distinct objects of thought. While quoting Genesis, Paul is thinking not so much of man and woman as of Christ and the Church. In other words, under the specific matter in hand lie broader truths. Even marriage, so important in itself, receives greater importance from being a visible setting forth of the relation of Christ to the Church.
It is needless to discuss here whether marriage is a sacrament: for this would involve a definition of the term. Certainly, marriage cannot be put on a level with the two rites ordained by Christ for all His servants. But Pauls teaching here implies clearly its unchangeable sacredness. And this felt sacredness has ever found expression in acts of worship accompanying the marriage ceremony. Callous must they be who can enter the solemn obligations of wedlock without recognising its divine sanction and sacred duties.
Eph 5:33. Nevertheless: or, more fully, I say nothing except this one thing. It breaks off the discourse to insist on the one thing needful.
Ye severally: transition from a mystery touching Christ and the Church to readers of this Epistle, taken one by one.
Thus love: i.e. in the manner, and for the reasons, just expounded.
As himself: as their own bodies in Eph 5:28. And the wife must remember that the husband has been set over her by Christ, and that therefore insubordination to him is disobedience to Christ. An obligation so solemn may well evoke her fear. So careful is Paul to balance the duty of the husband by that of the wife.
REVIEW. At the close of 11 Paul bids his readers to submit one to another. He then discusses in order three very special kinds of submission. Of these, the first and noblest and most significant is that of the wife to her husband. The Apostle bids her render to him a reverence similar to that which she pays to her Master in heaven; and supports this by asserting a similarity between the marriage relation and that of the Church to Christ. This similarity he describes by comparing each of these relations to that of the head and members of a human body; but points out the limits of his comparison by reminding us that the Head of the Church is also its Saviour. He concludes his injunction to the wife by urging her to take as her pattern the submission of the Church to Christ.
If Paul speaks first of the duties of the wife, he finds it needful to linger longer over those of the husband. Just as the wife must look on the Churchs submission to Christ as a pattern of her own submission to her husband, so the husband is bound to take Christs love to the Church, manifested in His death, as a pattern for his own love to his wife. Paul then leaves for a moment the duty of husbands to describe, in language borrowed from the metaphor he is here using, the purpose of Christ is self-sacrifice for the Church, viz. to present to Himself the Church as His loyal and spotless bride. The purity needed in the bride of Christ recalls the baptismal water through which these Asiatic Christians had passed, and which was designed to be the entrance into a spotless life. Going back to the subject specially in hand, Paul bids husbands to love their wives like Christ loved the Church, to love them even as they love their own bodies. These last words introduce another motive for love to the wife, a motive which is at once more fully developed. To love ones wife, is to love himself: and all are careful to feed and protect their own bodies. Since we are members of the Body of Christ, this care for our own body has a divine counterpart in Christs kindness to the Church. The double analogy involved in this argument, viz. that the human body consisting of head and members has one counterpart in the relation of husband and wife and another spiritual counterpart in the relation of Christ to the Church, Paul supports by a quotation from Genesis which asserts that husband and wife are one flesh as though parts of one living body. He adds that in this quotation he is referring to Christ and the Church. He thus finds in the Bible strong support for his second motive for love to the wife, viz. that in loving her the husband is loving himself. The Apostle concludes by repeating, and placing side by side, the mutual duties of husband and wife.
This section is throughout characteristic of Paul. As in his earlier Epistles the duties of to-day are enforced by reference to broad and abiding principles. Thus, as ever with him, little details of common life are raised into dignity. And these details are made an occasion of expounding broad principles, which thus receive important practical illustration. The O.T. quotation finds for the relation of the Church to Christ an important and most instructive counterpart in the original constitution of our race. We notice also, as before, Pauls fairness. While defending the rights of the weaker, he does not forget the obligations involved in those rights.
Fuente: Beet’s Commentary on Selected Books of the New Testament
Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
Wives submit – submit comes from a combination of two words “sub” meaning below, and “mit” meaning clenched hand —- JOKE!
This is the outworking of part of the curse mentioned in Genesis. Gen 3:16″Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.”
I might mention that the word desire is also used in Gen 4:7 “If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee [shall be] his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.” You will see that the desire has the context of ruling over – sound like the natural side of womanhood? I suspect that this is part of that curse that was thrust upon the woman – submittal in light of a strong desire to dominate.
Do it to your husband as unto the Lord. If you submit to your husband you submit to Christ, if you don’t you don’t. Simple. If you aren’t submitting to your husband you are not a godly woman – simple as that.
This is the same term used in the previous verse for “submit.” It has the thought of being under or under the control of another; to submit or obey, to order in ranks as in military usage.
This is not a call of the husband to dictatorship, it is a call to lead, and it is a call to be the head of the house.
Oh, how many times I’ve heard women say; well he won’t be the head so somebody has to be, so God told me to take over – NOT! God tells you to submit, not take over.
Note, it is submit to your OWN husband. Not to someone else’s husband but to your own. There are women that take the word of a pastor to be superior to their own husband in terms of life, of living etc. The husband is the head of the house and the leader. He is the one to be followed. If the woman thinks the preacher is so great have the husband consider his words and talk it over with the wife. The husband is the spiritual leader of the house as well as mental, emotional and physical leader.
Now, guys if that doesn’t get your worry juices flowing I don’t know what will – you have a tremendous responsibility in a marriage and you’d better be doing it – AND getting it right.
If every Christian woman would hold to this doctrine there would be no more cases of adultery in the church. Think on that one folks. Adultery is the breaking of some of the most basic of teachings, yet Christian men and women continue to do it anyway. There is no way that a woman can commit adultery while submitting to their own husband.
“Unto the Lord” relates to that daily commitment to walk with Him. To walk with Him you must walk with your husband properly. A heavy responsibility in this liberated society we call America. This teaching flies in the face of just about everything that girls/young women are taught today, especially if they are in public schools. They are taught that they are individuals and that they make their own way doing what they want to do.
The media is teaching our families that the man is the dunderhead that can do nothing correctly, and that the woman knows it all. If men were the dunces they are portrayed to be, why are they more prevalent in the work place, why are they filling the Home Depots across the country. Men are intelligent capable beings that can do most anything they set their minds to – even though they are depicted in so many commercials as unable to do anything correctly, and certainly nothing which takes any intelligence. It seems if it can’t be done with a gun or bomb the man of today can’t do it according to the media.
Christian’s get your lifestyle information from God, not the humanism taught in the school system, or the media.
So, why is the wife to be subject to the husband? Glad you asked – Paul has the answer to that in the next verse.
Fuente: Mr. D’s Notes on Selected New Testament Books by Stanley Derickson
5:22 {7} Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, {8} as unto the Lord.
(7) Now he descends to a family, dividing orderly all the parts of a family. And he says that the duty of wives consists in this, to be obedient to their husbands.
(8) The first argument, for they cannot be disobedient to their husbands except by also resisting God, who is the author of this subjection.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
The duty of wives 5:22-24
"After centuries of Christian teaching, we scarcely appreciate the revolutionary nature of Paul’s views on family life set forth in this passage. Among the Jews of his day, as also among the Romans and the Greeks, women were seen as secondary citizens with few or no rights. The pious male Jew daily said a prayer in which he thanked God for not making him a woman. And he could divorce his wife by simply writing ’a bill of divorcement’ (which must include the provision that she was then free to marry whomever she wanted). The wife had no such right." [Note: Morris, pp. 180-81.]
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
Paul addressed wives first. Christian wives are to be subject (Eph 5:21) to their own husbands as an expression of their submission to the Lord Jesus. Paul did not say they were to be subject to their own husbands in proportion as they are submissive to the Lord. In submitting to her husband, the wife is obeying the Lord who has commanded her to do so. In this section Paul was speaking of relationships in marriage, as the context clarifies (Eph 5:22-33). He was not saying all women are to be subject to all men, nor was he saying that women are inferior to men (cf. 1Pe 3:7).
People often misunderstand submission. It does not indicate inferiority or involve losing one’s identity and becoming a non-person. Some women fear that submission will lead to abuse and or a feeling of being used. Submission does not mean blind obedience or passivity. It means giving oneself up to someone else.
"Equality of worth is not identity of role." [Note: J. H. Yoder, The Politics of Jesus, p. 177, footnote 23.]
We live in an ordered universe in which there is authority and submission to authority everywhere (cf. Rom 13:1). Authority and submission relationships are therefore natural and necessary to maintain order. God has authority over man (Jas 4:5). Man has authority over nature (Gen 1:28). Husbands have authority over their wives (Eph 5:22). Parents have authority over their children (Eph 6:1). Governors have authority over those they govern (1Pe 2:13-14). Employers have authority over their employees (1Pe 2:18). Spiritual leaders have authority over those they lead spiritually (1Pe 5:2).
Submission means organizing voluntarily to fill out a pattern that constitutes a complete whole. The word "support" is a good synonym for the biblical concept of "submit." A wife submits to her husband when she voluntarily "organizes" herself so she can complete her husband. A good example of this is her cooperating with him when they run a three-legged race. They have to work together to succeed. Submission is essential to achieve oneness in marriage. [Note: See Family Life Conference, pp. 104-6.]
Submission involves four responsibilities. It begins with an attitude of entrusting oneself to God. The focus of life must be on Jesus Christ. The ability to submit comes from Him (cf. 1Pe 2:24). He is similar to the cables that enable a suspension bridge to carry out its purpose. Second, submission requires respectful behavior (cf. 1Pe 3:1-2). This rules out nagging. Nagging is similar to having a duck nibble you to death. Third, submission means developing a godly character (cf. 1Pe 3:3-5). Fourth, submission involves doing what is right (cf. 1Pe 3:6). Submission should not extend to participating in conduct that is contrary to Scripture. Every Christian’s primary responsibility is to do God’s will. [Note: See Stott, pp. 218-19.]
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
Chapter 25
ON FAMILY LIFE
Eph 5:22-33; Eph 6:1-9.
CHRISTIAN MARRIAGE
Eph 5:22-33
In mutual subjection the Christian spirit has its sharpest trials and attains its finest temper. “Be subject one to another,” was the last word of the apostles instructions respecting the “walk” of the Asian Churches. By its order and subjection the gifts of all the members of Christs body are made available for the up-building of Gods temple. The inward fellowship of the Spirit becomes a constructive and organising force, reconstituting human life and framing the world into the kingdom of Christ and God. “In fear of Christ” the loyal Christian man submits himself to the community; not from the dread of human displeasure, but knowing that he must give account to the Head of the Church and the Judge of the last day, if his self-will should weaken the Churchs strength and interrupt her holy work. “For the Lords sake” His freemen submit to every ordinance of men. This is such a fear as the servant has of a good master, {Eph 6:5} or the true wife for a loving husband (Eph 5:33), -not that which “perfect love casts out,” but which it deepens and sanctifies.
Of this subjection to Christ the relationship of marriage furnishes an example and a mirror. St. Paul passes on to the new topic without any grammatical pause, Eph 5:22 being simply an extension of the participial clause that forms Eph 5:21 : “Being in subjection to one another in fear of Christ-ye wives to your own husbands, as to the Lord.” The relation of the two verses is not that of the particular to the general, so much as that of image and object, of type and antitype. Submission to Christ in the Church suggests by analogy that of the wife to her husband in the house. Both have their origin in Christ, in whom all things were created, the Lord of life in its natural as well as in its spiritual and regenerate sphere. {Col 1:15-17} The bond that links husband and wife, lying at the basis of collective human existence, has in turn its ground in the relation of Christ to humanity.
The race springs not from a unit, but from a united pair. The history of mankind began in wedlock. The family is the first institution of society, and the mother of all the rest. It is the life basis, the primitive cell of the aggregate of cities and bodies politic. In the health and purity of household life lies the moral wealth, the vigour and durability of all civil institutions. The mighty upgrowth of nations and the great achievements of history germinated in the nursery of home and at the mothers breast. Christian marriage is not an expedient-the last of many that have been tried-for the satisfaction of desire and the continuance of the human species. The Institutor of human life laid down its principle in the first frame of things. Its establishment was a great prophetic mystery (Eph 5:32). Its law stands registered in the eternal statutes. And the Almighty Father watches over its observance with an awful jealousy. Is it not written: “Fornicators and adulterers God will judge”; and again, “The Lord is an avenger concerning all these things”? St. Paul rightly gives to this subject a conspicuous place in this epistle of Christ and the Church. The corner-stone of the new social order which the gospel was to establish in the world lies here. The entire influence of the Church upon society depends upon right views on the relationship of man and woman and on the ethics of marriage.
In wedlock there are blended most completely the two principles of association amongst moral beings, -viz., authority and love, submission and self-surrender.
I On the one side, submission to authority.
“Wives, be in subjection, as to the Lord,”-as is fitting in the Lord. {Col 3:18} Again, in 1Ti 2:11-12, the apostle writes: “I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to have dominion,” or (as the word may rather signify) “to act independently of the man.” Were these directions temporary and occasional? Were they due, as one hears it suggested, to the uneducated and undeveloped condition of women in the apostles time? Or do they not affirm a law that is deeply seated in nature and in the feminine constitution? The words of 1Co 11:2-15 show that, in the apostles view of life, this subordination is fundamental. “The head of woman is the man,” as “the head of every man is the Christ” and “the head of Christ is God.” “The woman,” he says, “is of the man,” and “was created because of the man.” Whether these sentences square with our modern conceptions or not, there they stand, and their import is unmistakable. They teach that in the Divine order of things it is the mans part to lead and rule, and the womans part to be ruled. But the Christian woman will not feel that there is any loss or hardship in this. For in the Christian order, ambition is sin. To obey is better than to rule. She remembers who has said: “I am amongst you as he that serveth.” The children of the world strive for place and power; but “it shall not be so amongst you.”
Such subordination implies no inferiority, rather the opposite. A free and sympathetic obedience -which is the true submission-can only subsist between equals. The apostle writes: “Children, obey; Servants, obey”; {Eph 6:1, Eph 6:5} but “Wives submit yourselves to your own husbands, as to the Lord.” The same word denotes submission within the Church, and within the house. It is here that Christianity, in contrast with Paganism, and notably with Mohammedanism, raises the weaker sex to honour. In soul and destiny it declares the woman to be man, endowed with all rights and powers inherent in humanity. “In Christ Jesus there is no male and female,” any more than there is “Jew and Greek” or “bond and free.” The same sentence which broke down the barriers of Jewish caste, and in course of time abolished slavery, condemned the odious assumptions of masculine pride. It is one of the glories of our faith that it has enfranchised our sisters, and raises them in spiritual calling to the full level of their brothers and husbands. Both sexes are children of God by the same birthright; both receive the same Holy Spirit, according to the prediction quoted by St. Peter on the day of Pentecost: “Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy Yea, on my servants and on my handmaidens in those days will I pour out my Spirit, saith the Lord”. {Act 2:17-18} This one point of headship, of public authority and guidance, is reserved. It is the point on which Christ forbids emulation amongst His people.
Christian courtesy treats the woman as “the glory of the man”; it surrounds her from girlhood to old age with protection and deference. This homage, duly rendered, is a full equivalent for the honour of visible command. When, as it happens not seldom in the partnership of life, the superior wisdom dwells with the weaker vessel, the golden gift of persuasion is not wanting, by which the official ruler is guided, to his own advantage, and his adviser accomplishes more than she could do by any overt leadership. The chivalry of the Middle Ages, from which the refinement of European society takes its rise, was a product of Christianity grafted on the Teutonic nature. Notwithstanding the folly and excess that were mixed with it, there was a beautiful reverence in the old knightly service and championship of women. It humanised the ferocity of barbarous times. It tamed the brute strength of warlike races and taught them honour and gentleness. Its prevalence marked a permanent advance in civilisation.
Shall we say that this law of St. Paul is that laid down specifically for Christian women? is it not rather a law of nature-the intrinsic propriety of sex, whose dictates are reinforced by the Christian revelation? The apostle takes us back to the creation of mankind for the basis of his principles in dealing with this subject (Eph 5:31). The new commandments are the old which were in the world from the beginning, though concealed and overgrown with corruption. Notwithstanding the debasement of marriage under the non-Christian systems, the instincts of natural religion taught the wife her place in the house and gave rise to many a graceful and appropriate custom expressive of the honour due from one sex to the other. So the apostle regarded the mans bared and cropped head and the womans flowing tresses as symbols of their relative place in the Divine. {1Co 11:13-15} These and such distinctions-between the dignities of strength and of beauty-no artificial sentiment and no capricious revolt can set aside. while the world stands. St. Paul appeals to the common sense of mankind, to that which “nature itself teaches,” in censuring the forwardness of some Corinthian women who appeared to think that the liberty of the gospel released them from the limitations of their nature.
Some earnest promoters of womens rights, have fallen into the error that Christianity, to which they owe all that is best in their present status, is the obstacle in the way of their further progress. It is an obstacle to claims that are against nature and against the law of God, -claims only tolerable so long as they are exceptional. But the barriers imposed by Christianity, against which these people fret, are their main protection. “The moment Christianity disappears, the law of strength revives; and under that law women can have no hope except that their slavery may be mild and pleasant.” To escape from the “bondage of Christian law” means to go back to the bondage of paganism. “As unto the Lord” gives the pattern and the principle of the Christian wifes submission. Not that, as Meyer seems to put it, the husband in virtue of marriage “represents Christ to the wife.” Her relation to the Lord is as full, direct, and personal as his. Indeed, the clause inserted at the end of Eph 5:23 seems expressly designed to guard against this exaggeration. The qualification that Christ is “Himself Saviour of the body,” thrown in between the two sentences comparing the marital headship to that which Christ holds towards the Church, has the effect of limiting the former. The subjection of the Christian wife to her husband reserves for Christ the first place in the heart and the undiminished rights of Saviourship. St. Paul indicates a real, and not unfrequent danger. The husband may eclipse Christ in the wifes soul, and be counted as her all in all. Her absorption in him may be too complete. Hence the brief guarding clause: “He Himself [and no other] Saviour of the body [to which all believers alike belong].” As the Saviour of the Church, Christ holds an unrivalled and unqualified lordship over every member of the same. Nevertheless, as the Church is subject to the Christ, so also wives [should be] to their husbands in everything” (Eph 5:24). Again in Eph 5:33 : “Let the wife see that she fear her husband-with the reverent and confiding fear which love makes sweet. As the Christian wife obeys the Lord Christ in the spiritual sphere, in the sphere of marriage she is subject to her husband. The ties that bind her to Christ, bind her more closely to the duties of home. These duties illustrate for her the submissive love that Christs people, and herself as one of them, owe to their Divine Head. Her service in the Church, in turn, will send her home with a quickened sense of the sacredness of her domestic calling. It will lighten the yoke of obedience; it will check the discontent that masculine exactions provoke; and will teach her to win by patience and gentleness the power within the house that is her queenly crown.
II. The apostle alludes to submission as the wifes duty; for she might, possibly, be tempted to think this superseded by the liberty, of the children of God. Love he need not enjoin upon her, but he writes: “Husbands, love your wives, even as the Christ also loved the Church and gave up Himself for her”. {comp. Col 3:18-19} The danger of selfishness lies on the masculine side. The mans nature is more exacting; and the self-forgetfulness and solicitous affection of the woman may blind him to his own want of the truest love. Full of business and with a hundred cares and attractions lying outside the domestic circle, he too readily forms habits of self-absorption and learns to make his wife and home a convenience, from which he takes as his right the comfort they have to give, imparting little of devotion and confidence in return. This lack of love denies the higher rights of marriage; it makes the wifes submission a joyless constraint. Along with this selfishness and the uneasy conscience attending it, there supervenes sometimes an irritability of temper that chafes over domestic troubles and makes a grievance of the most trifling mishap or inadvertence, ignoring the wifes patient affection and anxiety to please Too often in this way husbands grow insensibly into family tyrants, forgetting the days of youth and the kindness of their espousals. “There are many,” says Bengel (on this point unusually caustic), “who out of doors are civil and kind to all; when at home, toward their wives and children, whom they have no need to fear, they freely practise secret bitterness.”
“Love your wives, even as the Christ loved the Church.” What a glory this confers upon the husbands part in marriage! His devotion pictures as no other love can, the devotion of Christ to His Redeemed people. His love must therefore be a spiritual passion, the love of soul to soul, that partakes of God and of eternity. Of the three Greek words for love, eros, familiar in Greek poetry and mythology, denoting the flame of sexual passion, is not named in the New Testament; philia, the love of friendship, is tolerably frequent, in its verb at least; but agape absorbs the former and transcends both. This exquisite word denotes love in its spiritual purity and depth, the love of God and of Christ, and of souls to each other in God. This is the specific Christian affection. It is the attribute of God who “loved the world and gave His Son the Only-begotten” of “the Christ” who “loved the Church and gave up Himself for her.” Self-devotion, not self-satisfaction, is its note. Its strength and authority it uses as material for sacrifice and instruments of service, not as prerogatives of pride or titles to enjoyment. Let this mind be in you, O husband, toward your wife, which was also in Christ Jesus, who was meek and lowly in heart, counting it His honour to serve and His reward to save and bless.
From Eph 5:26 we gather that Christ is the husbands model, not only in the rule of self-devotion, but in the end toward which that devotion is directed: “that He might sanctify the Church, -that He might present her to Himself a glorious Church without spot or wrinkle, -that she might be holy and without blemish.” The perfection of the wifes character will be to the religious husband one of the dearest objects in life. He will desire for her that which is highest and best, as for himself. He is put in charge of a soul more precious to him than any other, over which he has an influence incomparably, great. This care he cannot delegate to any priest or father-confessor. The peril of such delegation and the grievous mischiefs that arise when there is no spiritual confidence between husband and wife, when through unbelief or superstition the head of the house hands over his priesthood to another man, are painfully shown by the experience of Roman Catholic countries. The irreligion of laymen, the carelessness and unworthiness of fathers and husbands, are responsible for the baneful influences of the confessional. The apostle bade the Corinthian wives, who were eager for religious knowledge, to “ask their husbands at home”. {1Co 14:35} Christian husbands should take more account of their office than they do; they should not be strangers to the spiritual trials and experiences of the heart so near to them. It might lead them to walk more worthily and to seek higher religious attainments, if they considered that the shepherding of at least one soul devolves upon themselves, that they are unworthy of the name of husband without such care for the welfare of the soul linked to their own as Christ bears toward “His bride the Church.” Those who have no father or husband to look to, or who look in vain to this quarter for spiritual help, St. Paul refers, beside the light and comfort of Scripture and the public ministry and fellowship of the Church, to the “aged women” who are the natural guides and exemplars of the younger in their own sex. {Tit 2:3-5}
The selfishness of the stronger sex, supported by the force of habit and social usage, was hard to subdue in the Greek Christian Churches. Through some eight verses St. Paul labours this one point. In verse 28 he adduces another reason, added to the example of Christ, for the love enjoined. “So ought men indeed to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself.” The “So” gathers its force from the previous example. In loving us Christ does not love something foreign and, as it were, outside of Himself. “We are members of His body” (Eph 5:30). It is the love of the Head to the members, of the Son of man to the sons of men, whose race-life is founded in Him. Jesus Christ laid it down as the highest law, under that of love to God: “Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.” His love to us followed this rule. His life was wrapped up in ours. By such community of life self-love is transfigured, and exalted into the purest self-forgetting.
Thus it is with true marriage. The wedding of a human pair makes each the others property. They are “one flesh” (Eph 5:31); and, so long as the flesh endures there remains this consciousness of union, whose violation is deadly sin. As the Church is not her own, nor Christ His own since He became man with men, so the husband and wife are no longer independent and self-complete personalities, but incorporated into a new existence common to both. Their love must correspond to this fact. “If the man loves himself, if he values his own limbs and tends and guards from injury his bodily frame” (Eph 5:29), he must do the same equally by his wife; for her life and limbs are as a part of his own. This the apostle lays down as an obvious duty. Nature teaches the obligation, by every manly instinct.
The saying the apostle quotes in Eph 5:31 dates from the origin of the human family; it is taken from the lips of the first husband and father of the race, while as yet unstained by sin. {Gen 2:23-24} Christ infers from it the singleness and indelibility of the marriage covenant. But this doctrine, natural as it is, was not inferred by natural religion. The cultivated Greek took a wife for the production of children. Her rights put no restriction upon his appetite. Love was not in the marriage contract. If she received the maintenance due to her rank and the mistress-ship of the house, and was the mother of his lawful children, she had all that a freeborn woman could demand. The slave-woman had no rights. Her body was at her owners disposal. Nothing in Christianity appeared more novel and more severe, in comparison with the dissolute morals of the time, than the Christian view of marriage. Even Christs Jewish disciples seemed to think the state of wedlock intolerable under the condition He imposed. This want of reverence and constancy between the sexes was the main cause of the degeneracy of the age. All virtues disappear with this one. Roman manliness and uprightness, Greek courtesy and courage, filial piety, civic worth, loyalty in friendship-the qualities that once in a high degree adorned the classic nations, were now rare amongst men. In the most exalted ranks infamous vices flourished; and purity of life was a cause for odium and suspicion.
Amidst this seething mass of corruption the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus created new hearts and new homes. It kindled a pure fire on the desecrated hearth. It taught man and woman a chaste love; and their alliances were formed “in sanctification and honour, not in the passion of lust as it is with the Gentiles who know not God”. {1Th 4:3-6} Every Christian house, thus based on an honourable and religious union, became the centre of a leaven that wrought upon the corrupt society around. It held forth an example of wedded loyalty and domestic joy beautiful and strange in that loveless Pagan world. Children grew up trained in pure and gentle manners. From that hour the hope of a better day began. The influence of the new ideal, filtrating everywhere into the surrounding heathenism and assimilating even before it converted the hostile world, raised society, though gradually and with many relapses, from the extreme debasement of the age of the Caesars. Never subsequently have the morals of civilised mankind sunk to a level quite so low. The Christian conception of love and marriage opened a new era for mankind.