The Mystery of God
So I am doing a research paper for one of my seminary classes, and the theme of this paper is an investigation into what "submission" really means with the goal of developing a theology of submission. I can across an article in Christianity Today written by Sarah Sumner, an associate professor of theology and ministry at Haggard School of Theology, entitled Bridging the Ephesians 5 Divide. Within this article Sumner seeks to shed light on what message Ephesians 5:21-22 is portraying. I want to share a little bit of what her article has to say, but I would like to offer something that I have connected after reading this article as well.
Sumner begins her writting with the basic assumption that Ephesians 5:21 calls all believers/Christian to "be subject to" one another. There is a distinction between two views that can be held in reagards to Ephesians 5:21-22. Becuase verse 22, in the original Greek language, does not contain a verb, it relies upon the previous clause to supply the verb. This leads to the interpretation that because verse 21 says that all Christian ought to be subject to one another, the implication in verse 22 is the wives should be subject to their own husbands. Two highlights real quick: 1.) Verse 22 makes it clear that this is a direct command to wives; and 2.) the verse says the woman should subject to only their husband.
The egalitarian view is that because this command to wives, towards their own husbands, falls within the context of all believers being subject to one another, then husbands and wives are subject to each other equally. In contrast to this understanding, there is a mindset that only wives, exclusively, should submit to their husbands. This comes more from an interpretation of verse 22 on it's own.
However, what Sumner argues is that either way the wife is commanded to be subject to her husband. The question becomes is it only the wife who is responsible for submitting? Or does the husband do the same as well?
If the belief is held that husbands do not have to be subject to their wives, then when read in light of verse 21, husbands are subject to all believers except their wives. How terrible of a thought is that?
Sumner goes on to explain how the husband becomes the head of the wife. Think of it as the man's head on the woman's body. It sounds strange, but doesn't Paul say that "Christ is the head of the church, his body"(Eph. 5:23, emphasis added)? So, despite how strange it sounds, there is a logical connection and reflection here.
This leads me to input my own thoughts I wanted to share...
Throughout this article I was continuously making connections between what Sumner was explaining and different Scripture passages that echoed what she said but in regards to the Gospel and Christ's relationship with the church. All credit for this is to do the process of sanctification that God is working in me, the Holy Spirit giving me wisdom and knowledge to recollect, and the great emphasis of Scripture memorization from my seminary professors.
In regards to the husband being head of the wife's body, Sumner later makes a claim in her article:
This reminded me of something that I have been thinking on in my own personal devotion time going through the book of Colossians.
So what we have here a connection, rather a picture of how marriage reflects the Gospel. I mean you hear it all the time at church and in Christian counseling sessions/pre-marital classes: "Marriage is perhaps the best thing God has created within human relationships to display the Gospel."
But I feel like when this connection was made the weight of what it means for marriage to reflect the Gospel become more real and weighty (in a good way). That when God brings a man and woman, two flelshly bodies, and creates one flesh in marriage, we have a greater understanding of what happens in salvation. God takes our life and the life of Christ and creates one body, so that like Paul says "your life is hidden with Christ in God" (Col. 3:3) and "Christ is all, and in all" (Col. 3:11).
We look forward to the future wedding feast where our bridegroom Christ embraces us and we see ever so clearly what now it a dim picture. But thank God for what he has made marriage to be and what he does within it to bring a little more definition to our future hope and promise in Christ.
Sumner begins her writting with the basic assumption that Ephesians 5:21 calls all believers/Christian to "be subject to" one another. There is a distinction between two views that can be held in reagards to Ephesians 5:21-22. Becuase verse 22, in the original Greek language, does not contain a verb, it relies upon the previous clause to supply the verb. This leads to the interpretation that because verse 21 says that all Christian ought to be subject to one another, the implication in verse 22 is the wives should be subject to their own husbands. Two highlights real quick: 1.) Verse 22 makes it clear that this is a direct command to wives; and 2.) the verse says the woman should subject to only their husband.
The egalitarian view is that because this command to wives, towards their own husbands, falls within the context of all believers being subject to one another, then husbands and wives are subject to each other equally. In contrast to this understanding, there is a mindset that only wives, exclusively, should submit to their husbands. This comes more from an interpretation of verse 22 on it's own.
However, what Sumner argues is that either way the wife is commanded to be subject to her husband. The question becomes is it only the wife who is responsible for submitting? Or does the husband do the same as well?
If the belief is held that husbands do not have to be subject to their wives, then when read in light of verse 21, husbands are subject to all believers except their wives. How terrible of a thought is that?
Sumner goes on to explain how the husband becomes the head of the wife. Think of it as the man's head on the woman's body. It sounds strange, but doesn't Paul say that "Christ is the head of the church, his body"(Eph. 5:23, emphasis added)? So, despite how strange it sounds, there is a logical connection and reflection here.
This leads me to input my own thoughts I wanted to share...
Throughout this article I was continuously making connections between what Sumner was explaining and different Scripture passages that echoed what she said but in regards to the Gospel and Christ's relationship with the church. All credit for this is to do the process of sanctification that God is working in me, the Holy Spirit giving me wisdom and knowledge to recollect, and the great emphasis of Scripture memorization from my seminary professors.
In regards to the husband being head of the wife's body, Sumner later makes a claim in her article:
"I can't help but wonder if the divorce rate in the church might decrease if we would recognize the mystery of God fusing a husband and wife into 'one flesh.'"
This reminded me of something that I have been thinking on in my own personal devotion time going through the book of Colossians.
Pauls says in Colossians 1:27 "To them God chose to make known how great among the Gentiles arerthe riches of the glory of pthis mystery, which is Christ in you, sthe hope of glory."
So what we have here a connection, rather a picture of how marriage reflects the Gospel. I mean you hear it all the time at church and in Christian counseling sessions/pre-marital classes: "Marriage is perhaps the best thing God has created within human relationships to display the Gospel."
But I feel like when this connection was made the weight of what it means for marriage to reflect the Gospel become more real and weighty (in a good way). That when God brings a man and woman, two flelshly bodies, and creates one flesh in marriage, we have a greater understanding of what happens in salvation. God takes our life and the life of Christ and creates one body, so that like Paul says "your life is hidden with Christ in God" (Col. 3:3) and "Christ is all, and in all" (Col. 3:11).
We look forward to the future wedding feast where our bridegroom Christ embraces us and we see ever so clearly what now it a dim picture. But thank God for what he has made marriage to be and what he does within it to bring a little more definition to our future hope and promise in Christ.
Comments
Post a Comment