Eph 5:28 . [ ] : even so [ also ] ought husbands to love their own wives . The reading and the order vary somewhat. The precedes in most manuscripts, [656] 2 [657] [658] 17, etc.; in others ( [659] [660] [661] [662] , etc.) it follows it. Lachm. prefers the latter; TrWHRV the former. The TR, supported by [663] [664] [665] , etc., omits ; which is inserted, however, before by [666] [667] [668] [669] [670] 17, and most Versions, etc. It is accepted by TrRV, and is bracketed by WH. The is taken by some (De Wette, etc.) to refer to the following , = “husbands ought to love their wives just as they love their own bodies”. To this there is no serious grammatical objection; for does not look always to what precedes, but may refer to what follows ( e.g. , 1Co 3:15 , ; also 1Co 4:1 ). When this is the case, however, whether in classical Greek or in the NT, there appears to be a certain emphasis on the , and its more familiar reference is to what precedes. Here, too, the favours the relation to the preceding , etc. The idea, therefore, is that even as Christ loved the Church so too ought husbands to love their wives. : as their own bodies . This is not to be reduced to “like themselves” (Rosenm., etc.); nor does here mean simply “like,” as if all that is meant is that the husband’s love for his wife is to be similar to his love for his own body. The has its qualitative force, = “as it were,” “as being”. Christ and husband are each head , as Paul has already put it, and as the Church is the body in relation to the former, so is the wife in relation to the latter. The husband, the head, therefore, is to love the wife as being his body, even as Christ loved the Church as forming His body. The idea of husband and wife as being one flesh is probably also in view. , : he that loveth his own wife loveth himself . The relation of head and body means that the wife is part of the husband’s self . To love his wife, therefore, in this character as being his body, is to love himself . It is a love, consequently, not merely of duty , but of nature as well as (Ell.).

[656] Codex Sinaiticus (sc. iv.), now at St. Petersburg, published in facsimile type by its discoverer, Tischendorf, in 1862.

[657] Codex Mosquensis (sc. ix.), edited by Matthi in 1782.

[658] Codex Angelicus (sc. ix.), at Rome, collated by Tischendorf and others.

[659] Codex Alexandrinus (sc. v.), at the British Museum, published in photographic facsimile by Sir E. M. Thompson (1879).

[660] Codex Claromontanus (sc. vi.), a Grco-Latin MS. at Paris, edited by Tischendorf in 1852.

[661] 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.

[662] Codex Porphyrianus (sc. ix.), at St. Petersburg, collated by Tischendorf. Its text is deficient for chap. Eph 2:13-16 .

[663] Codex Sinaiticus (sc. iv.), now at St. Petersburg, published in facsimile type by its discoverer, Tischendorf, in 1862.

[664] Codex Mosquensis (sc. ix.), edited by Matthi in 1782.

[665] Codex Angelicus (sc. ix.), at Rome, collated by Tischendorf and others.

[666] Codex Vaticanus (sc. iv.), published in photographic facsimile in 1889 under the care of the Abbate Cozza-Luzi.

[667] Codex Alexandrinus (sc. v.), at the British Museum, published in photographic facsimile by Sir E. M. Thompson (1879).

[668] Codex Claromontanus (sc. vi.), a Grco-Latin MS. at Paris, edited by Tischendorf in 1852.

[669] Codex Augiensis (sc. ix.), a Grco-Latin MS., at Trinity College, Cambridge, edited by Scrivener in 1859. Its Greek text is almost identical with that of G, and it is therefore not cited save where it differs from that MS. Its Latin version, f, presents the Vulgate text with some modifications.

[670] 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.

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

men. Same as “husbands”, above.

wives = own wives. Compare “own husbands”, Eph 5:22.

wife = own wife.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

28.] Thus (two ways of understanding this are open to us: 1) as referring back to Christs love for the church,-Thus, in like manner, &c., as (being) their own bodies: and 2) as referring forward to the below, as very frequently (though Eadie calls it contrary to grammatical law) in St. Paul (cf. 1Co 3:15; 1Co 4:1; 1Co 9:26, al., and Eph 5:33 below, where Eadie himself renders, so as himself),-Thus, so, &c., as (they love) their own bodies. After weighing maturely what has been said on one side and the other, I cannot but decide for the latter, as most in accordance with the usage of St. Paul and with Eph 5:33 : also as more simple. The sense (against Ellic.) remains substantially the same, and answers much better to the comment furnished by the succeeding clauses:-husbands ought to love their own wives as they love their own bodies (= themselves: for their wives are in fact part of their own bodies, Eph 5:31): this being illustrated by and referred to the great mystery of Christ and His church, in which the same love, and the same incorporation, has place) ought the husbands also (as well as Christ in the archetypal example just given) to love their own (emphatic: see above on Eph 5:22) wives, as (with the same affection as) their own bodies. He that loveth his own (see above) wife, loveth himself (is but complying with that universal law of nature by which we all love ourselves. The best words to supply before the following will be, And this we all do): for (see above) no man ever hated his own flesh (= , but put in this form to prepare for in the Scripture proof below. Wetst. quotes from Seneca, Ep. 14, fateor, insitam nobis esse corporis nostri caritatem), but nourishes it up (through all its stages, to maturity: so Aristoph. Ran. 1189, of dipus, : and ib. 1427, (at all): (have been brought up), ) and cherishes (ref. 1 Thess. It is certainly not necessary to confine the meaning to warming, as Beng. (id spectat amictum), Mey., al.: for it is very forced to apply the feeding and clothing to the other member of the comparison (as Grot.: nutrit eam verbo et spiritu, vestit eam virtutibus), as must then be done (against Mey.)) it, as also (does) Christ (nourish and cherish) the church.

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Eph 5:28. , himself) Eph 5:29; Eph 5:31, at the end.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

Eph 5:28

Eph 5:28

Even so ought husbands also to love their own wives as their own bodies.-As Christ redeemed the church and loves it, so ought husbands to love their own wives. Christ loved the church better than he did his own fleshly body. He sacrificed it that he might establish the church. The church became the spiritual body which was dearer to him than the fleshly body.

He that loveth his own wife loveth himself:-So the wife becomes part of the body of the husband. The twain are one. [This is so because she is one with him, and their interests are identified; because by this, he really promotes his own welfare as much as he does when he takes care of his own body. A husbands kindness to his wife will be more than repaid by the happiness which she imparts, and all the real solicitude which he shows to make her happy will come to far more than it costs. If a man wishes to promote his own happiness in the most effective way, he should follow the Lords instruction to show love and kindness to his wife.]

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

as: Eph 5:31, Eph 5:33, Gen 2:21-24, Mat 19:5

Reciprocal: Gen 2:24 – and they shall be one flesh Deu 22:13 – General Deu 24:5 – a man Ecc 3:8 – time to love Isa 28:7 – erred Mat 19:6 – God Mar 10:8 – one flesh 1Co 7:2 – let Eph 5:25 – love Col 3:19 – love

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

(Eph 5:28.) , -So also ought husbands to love their own wives, as being their own bodies. The reading adopted has A, D, E, F, G, and the Vulgate, Gothic, and Coptic versions in its favour. The adverb carries us back to , and indicates the bringing home of the argument. It is contrary to the plain current of thought on the part of Estius, Meier, de Wette, Baumgarten-Crusius, and Alford, to make it refer to in the following clause, as if the apostle said, Ye are to love your wives in the way in which ye love your own bodies. The takes up the comparison between the husband and Christ, the wife and the church. Thus, that is, in imitation of Christ’s love, husbands ought to love their own wives. The instances adduced by Alford and Ellicott against the statement in our first edition are not all of them quite parallel, in the position and use of , in reference to praecedentia. There is no parenthesis in the two preceding verses, as Zanchius and Harless suppose. It is putting a special pressure upon the words to insist, after the example of Macknight and Barnes, that the husband’s love to his wife shall be an imitation of Christ’s love, in all those enumerated features of it. When Christ’s love is mentioned, the full heart of the apostle dilates upon it, and in its fervour, tenderness, devotedness, and nobility of aim, a husband’s love should resemble it. In the phrase as their own bodies, Harless and Stier, in imitation of Theophylact, Zanchius, and Calovius, suppose that is used argumentatively, and that the verse contains two comparisons-As Christ loved the church, so husbands are to love their wives-As they love their own bodies, so are they to love their wives. But the introduction of a double comparison only cumbers the argument. The idea is well expressed by Meyer-So ought husbands to love their wives, as being indeed their own bodies. The language is based on the previous imagery. The apostle calls Christ the Head, and the church the body, that body of which He is Saviour. Christ loved the church as being His body. Now the husband is the head of the wife, and as her head he ought to love her as being his body. And therefore-

-he that loveth his own wife loveth himself. But the phrase, loveth himself, is not identical with the formula of the preceding clause-as their own bodies; it is rather an inference from it. If the husband, as the head of the wife, loves his wife as being his own body, it is a plain inference that he is only loving himself. His love is not misspent: it is not wasted on some foreign object; it is a hallowed phasis of self-love.

Fuente: Commentary on the Greek Text of Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians and Phillipians

Eph 5:28. The apostle continues his comparison that was started at verse 22, because there are so many points of likeness between the family and the church, the two and only divine organizations on earth today. Wives as their own bodies. When a man joins himself to his wife they become one flesh (Gen 2:24; Mat 19:5-6). That is why it is said that he that loveth his wife loveth himself.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

Eph 5:28. Thus; in this manner, as Christ loved the Church; not to be referred to the following as.

Ought husbands also to love their own wives. Also is well supported, and shows that the example of Christ is referred to. Own is emphatic

As their own bodies. Not, as if they were, but since they are, the husband being the head of the wife, etc. (Eph 5:23). Thus indeed Christ loved the Church, but the Apostle has not yet brought out that thought.

He who loveth, etc. This general proposition is self-evident.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

Our apostle here propounds a farther argument to enforce this duty of love from husband to wife, taken from that near conjunction between them, showing that they are one flesh and one body, not in a natural, but in a relative sense; and accordingly a man should so love his wife even as himself. Doth a man love himself superlatively, cordially, tenderly, industriously, perseveringly? So ought he to love his wife. Will a man be out of love with himself, much less hate himself, though he be deformed, or by some accident maimed? In like manner ought not any natural defect, or accidental mischance, to cause a remission, much less a cessation, of the man’s love unto his own wife; as it is an unnatural thing for a man to hate his own flesh personal, so his own flesh relational.

Again, a man is so far from hating his own flesh, that he nourisheth and cherisheth it with the utmost care and tenderness: in like manner ought to be kind to, and tender over, his civil-self, the wife of his bosom; in imitation likewise of Christ’s example, who nourishes and cherishes his church, as being flesh of his own flesh, and bone of his own bone; that is, as near to one another by a mystical and spiritual union, as Adam and Eve were by a matrimonial union.

O stupendous privilege, for believers and Christ to be as one flesh! Husband and wife are not so near, as Christ and believers are to each other.

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

Reasons a Man Should Love His Wife

Christ actually put the love of the church above the love of his own body when he died on Calvary. In marriage, man and woman become one, thus when the husband loves his wife, he loves himself ( Ephesians 2:28 ; Gen 2:24 ). Men generally try to take the best possible care of their own bodies and keep them from injury. They pamper themselves and should do likewise to their wives, just as the Lord bestowed tender love on the church (5:29).

As Adam could say Eve was bone of his bones and flesh of his flesh, Christ can say individual Christians are part of his body, flesh and bone (5:30). Husband and wife are to be faithful to one another until death separates them. The church must remain faithful unto Christ so that it can have the ultimate union with him in heaven (5:31).

The importance of the marriage relationship is highlighted by its being a foreshadow of Christ’s relationship with the church. God’s great concern for the salvation of man is likewise seen in the fact that it was planned so long ago and was being foreshadowed in the beginning of time (5:32). Based upon all that has now been said about the marriage union, Paul again calls for husbands to love their own wives and wives to respect their own husbands (5:33).

Fuente: Gary Hampton Commentary on Selected Books

Eph 5:28-32. But to return to the subject from which this pleasing digression has led us: So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies That is, as themselves, or a part of themselves; the bond of marriage making the husband and his wife one, and establishing an inseparable community of interests between them; so that the husband is to love his wife with the same sincerity and ardency of affection wherewith he loves himself. The husband, says Macknight, whose love leads him, after Christs example, not only to protect and cherish his wife, by giving her the necessaries and conveniences of life, but also to cleanse her; that is, to form her mind, and assist her in making progress in virtue, really loves himself, and promotes his own happiness in the best manner. For his wife, being thus loved and cared for, will be strengthened for performing her duty; and her mind being improved, her conversation will give him the greater pleasure. Withal, having a high esteem for her husband, she will submit to the hardships of her inferior station with cheerfulness. No man In his senses; ever yet hated his own flesh Whatever its infirmities or imperfections were; but nourisheth and cherisheth it Feeds and clothes it; nay, and not only provides for its sustenance, but for its comfortable accommodation; even as the Lord nourishes and cherishes the church Supplying it with all things that may conduce to its welfare and happiness, sympathizing with it in its infirmities, looking upon it as one with himself. For He can say of his church what Adam said of Eve, when just taken out of his side, (Gen 2:23,) This is bone of my bone, and flesh of my flesh. In other words, the reason why Christ nourishes and cherishes the church, is that close connection which subsists between him and her, his people being as intimately united to him, as if they were literally flesh of his flesh, and bone of his bone. For this cause Because the woman is of the mans flesh, and of his bones; shall a man leave his father and mother To whom he was before united by the closest ties; and shall be joined unto his wife Inseparably, till death shall part them; and they Though originally and naturally two persons; shall For the future; be one flesh Shall be considered as one person, or as one soul in two bodies. This is a great mystery A truth long unknown; and now, when in some measure discovered, is a matter worthy of much admiration. In the Vulgate version, this clause is translated, Sacramentum hoc magnum est, This is a great sacrament. And it is the sole foundation on which the Papists have set up marriage as a sacrament. But I speak concerning Christ and the church That is, In saying this, you will easily perceive I speak not of the union between a man and his wife, but of that between Christ and the church: for that the eternal Son of God should unite himself to a society of degenerate and mortal men, should love them with an affection exceeding that which is to be found among the most intimate human relations, and should even regard them as making a part of himself, because of the intimacy with which they are joined to him in a community of spirit and of interest, can certainly never be sufficiently admired.

This seems to be the sense of the passage. Dr. Macknight, however, following Dr. Alix, Dr. Whitby, and several others, thinks that the apostle calls the formation of Eve from Adams body, his marriage with her, and the intimate union established between them by that marriage, a great mystery, because it contained an important emblematical meaning concerning the regeneration of believers, and their union with Christ, which [meaning] hitherto had been kept secret, but which he had discovered by applying Adams words concerning Eve, to Christ and his church; insinuating, by this application, 1st, That the formation of Eve, of a rib taken out of Adams body, was a figure of the regeneration of believers, by the breaking of Christs body, mentioned Eph 5:25. 2d, That Adams love to Eve, on account of her being formed of his body, was a figure of Christs love to believers, because they are become his body, Eph 5:30. 3d, That Adams marriage with Eve was a figure of the eternal union of Christ with believers in heaven, mentioned Eph 5:27. In giving this emblematical representation of these ancient facts, the apostle has not exceeded the bounds of probability. In the first age, neither the art of writing, nor any permanent method of conveying instruction being invented, it was necessary to make such striking actions and events as could not easily be forgotten, emblems of the instruction intended to be perpetuated. On this supposition, Adam, in whom the human race began, was a natural image of Christ, in whom the human race was to be restored; and his deep sleep, the opening of his side, and the formation of Eve of a rib taken out of his side, were fit emblems of Christs death, of the opening of his side on the cross, and of the regeneration of believers by his death. The love which Adam expressed toward Eve, and his union with her by marriage, were lively images of Christs love to believers, and of his eternal union with them in one society after their resurrection. And Eve herself, who was formed of a rib taken from Adams side, was a natural image of believers, who are regenerated, both in their bodies and in their minds, by the breaking of Christs side on the cross. Thus the circumstances which accompanied the formation of Eve, being fit emblems of the formation of the church, we may suppose they were brought to pass to prefigure that great event; and by prefiguring it, to show that it was decreed of God from the very beginning! For a further elucidation of the subject, the reader must be referred to the above- mentioned commentator. We may add here, however, that Origen seems to have had some notion of the relation this passage had to Adam and Eve, when he says, If any man deride us for using the example of Adam and Eve, when we treat of the knowledge of Christ, let him consider these words, This is a great mystery. Tertullian also frequently alludes to the same thing, saying, This is a great sacrament: Carnaliter in Adam, spiritualiter in Christo, propter spirituales nuptias Christi et ecclesi: carnally in Adam, spiritually in Christ, by reason of the spiritual marriage between him and his church.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

28. Here we have the love of Christ for his Church, which constrained him to shed his blood to sanctify her, held up as the example for every husband to emulate in his love for his wife, thus confirming the sanctity of Christian wedlock beyond the possibility of cavil.

Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament

So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself.

This is two separate statements. We, husbands, ought to love our wives as our own bodies – that is one statement and if we love our wife we will love ourselves. I have always been taught the verse as a unit, as relating to one idea – love wife as you love your body.

It almost seems to me that the second statement may be external to the first statement as well as the next verse.

We “OUGHT” to love our wife as our own body. Doesn’t say we have to —- well, that is most likely implied in the statement 🙂 The next question is how does a husband love his own body, so that we can know how he is to love his wife?

I am not sure that I can say I have ever loved my body in the sense that the world uses this phrase. I have always been a little less than exercised, and there has never been anything for me to be pleased with much less in love with – so what is meant here? Are we to exercise till we can like what we see in the mirror? Are we all to be running around looking like male models?

The term used here is the normal term for body or the flesh of a man so there is little help there. In that not all men naturally love their bodies, and since one that does love their body as the world uses this terminology, would be vain and proud, then we must find some other concept in this verse to relate to.

I would suggest that this love relates to the general taking care of ones body, that care that keeps one’s self from injury. The wearing of gloves to avoid blisters the wearing of safety glasses to protect the eyes, etc. The love of continuing on with a body that is whole and generally useful as opposed to one that is limited and maimed.

In this aspect we should love our wife by taking as good care of her as we can. Protecting her from danger to the best of our ability, keeping her fed, clothed and protected from the elements. No, I am not suggesting that we are required to house her in a $250, 000 home with three cars to protect her feet from blisters, but the basics of life would be the minimum that we should attempt to provide.

Does that mean that the man in Africa that has no money nor food that can’t feed his wife is unspiritual, no – he is doing all that he can.

In general we should love or care for our wife as well as we care for ourselves. This requires that we provide the best that we can and not spend that which we have upon our own enjoyment and pleasure.

Secondly, there seems a bit of a promise here. If we love our wife we will love ourselves. If we care for her properly we will be at peace with what we have done. Many are the men that have regretted deeply the poor care that they have shown their families. It is a deep guilt about setting themselves over their family.

If we care for the wife properly, we will find satisfaction in ourselves and in how we have lived our lives.

This might run along the line that Barnes takes it, in that the husband is to make his wife as comfortable as he is – that same care for her as for him – they are one rather than two since they are joined in marriage thus he should take care of her as himself.

One minor point that we might take note of while we are speaking of marriage. On one of the internet boards where I read the question arose as to the churches “BIBLICAL” place in marriage, or should the church perform marriage ceremonies. I replied that there is no Bible text to show that we are unless it is where Christ was at the wedding and turned water into wine. I suggested that if this were a Biblical basis for churches doing weddings then it was also a passage for drinking in the church.

One defender of the faith suggested a few passages relating to marriage, but that had nothing to do with the church being involved in that marriage. He and his comments were correctly dismissed as not relevant. The line of thought was that God instituted marriage and spoke much about it in His Word, but that the church is not commanded to be involved. Indeed, much of the marriage of the Old Testament was simply a person to person commitment and a joining of the two intimately.

Should the church perform ceremonies? Not by the command of God, but if they want to I don’t see anything in Scripture to forbid it, however because of the church involvement does not mean there is any special blessing, nor certainly no grace extended to the union.

Fuente: Mr. D’s Notes on Selected New Testament Books by Stanley Derickson

5:28 {14} So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself.

(14) Another argument: every man loves himself, even by nature: therefore he strives against nature that does not love his wife. He proves the conclusion, first by the mystical knitting of Christ and the Church together, and then by the ordinance of God, who says that man and wife are as one, that is, not to be divided.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

This verse and the following two verses apply the truth just stated in Eph 5:25-27. Since in marriage two people become one flesh (Gen 2:24), in a figurative sense a man’s wife becomes part of his own body. Consequently the husband should love and treat her as he does his own body (cf. Lev 19:18).

"As he does not think about loving himself because it is natural, so also, should the husband’s love of his wife be something that is as natural as loving himself." [Note: Hoehner, Ephesians, p. 765.]

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)