Teaching Tuesday: What Are We Doing Here? - Christ-centered Relationships

Series: What Are We Doing Here?
Sermon: Christ-centered Relationships (Ephesians 5:21-6:9)
Watch the messages HERE. 

I spent most of our sermon time this past Sunday thinking through what Paul meant by his instruction that Christians are to “submit” or “be subject to” each other, in the church and in the home.

Ephesians 5:22 (“Wives, submit to your husbands…”) is a controversial verse, and since I wanted to avoid preaching a 90 minute sermon (you’re welcome!), I didn’t think I could also do justice to the other controversial verse that follows right after it, Ephesians 5:23:

For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 

Many Christians (and non-Christian Bible-readers) take this statement to be more than Paul’s acknowledgement that the norm is for husbands to be considered the leader of their wives and families, but his affirmation that this norm is appropriate and perhaps even God-intended and expected or required.

There’s no debate that the former is the case; male leadership over wives and families (and governments, armies, churches, businesses…) was certainly the normal state of things in Paul’s day and for most people groups (but not all) across most of history (but not all). At least in the West, it is only in recent decades that these traditional gender norms and expectations have begun to be broadly challenged and in some significant ways largely adjusted or abandoned.

For a number of reasons, men still hold a higher percentage of leadership positions in the vast majority of industry fields, and in many (most?) American families the husband/father is either explicitly or implicitly identified as the primary decision-maker, stronger personality, and thus, the leader. But that role is less starkly defined than it once was, and there has been and continues to be a cultural shift toward a more collaborative model in the home as well as a more skill-set-based approach in many marriages, whereas if the wife/mother is more adept at administering traditionally understood leadership tasks and duties, she often does.

If you agree with the main argument of my sermon - that Christ-centered relationships within the Christian community are marked by selfless love and consideration for others - then we’ve already settled much of the question, at least, of what Paul means by his command for Christians to submit to each other in 5:21 and the subsequent commands for wives to submit to their husbands and husbands to love their wives: it looks like mutual cooperation, support, sacrifice, and selflessness in the name of Jesus because of the example of Jesus.

So Paul’s context was one where men were expected to lead in society and in the home. In large part, ours is too, though considerably less than before. But is the traditional arrangement of husband as the leader of his wife something that God intends, expects, and/or even commands?

That, actually, is a very complex question. Probably too complex for a Teaching Tuesday. But we can look more specifically at what’s going on in Ephesians 5:23.

For much of the past century or so, Bible scholars have argued over Paul’s meaning of the term “the head,” which he uses here in Ephesians, as well as in 1st Corinthians.

Here’s Ephesians 5:23, in the NIV: For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior.

And 1st Corinthians 11:3, in the NIV: But I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.

To us, this sure reads as if “the head” - the Greek word is kephalē - indicates a position of authority and leadership. It very well may, but that’s not the only way Paul could have meant this.

There are basically three possibilities (the following is from the first in a series of blog posts at Theology in the Raw, which I recommend for more study on this matter):

Authority over, ruler

This is what many people assume kephalē means, since the English term “head” often conveys the idea of “authority over” or “ruler.” The “head of the planning committee” is in some sense in charge of the planning committee. The question, however, is: does the Greek word kephalē carry the same meaning as the English word “head?” [A number of scholars] say “yes.”

Source, origin, beginning

Several scholars have countered the above interpretation by saying that the Greek word kephalē does not carry the same notion of “authority over, ruler” as the English word “head.” These scholars argue that kephalē is better interpreted as “source” in ancient Greek literature and in the two Pauline passages (1 Cor 11:3 and Eph 5:23). Man/husband is the “source” of woman/wife in light of Eve being created out of Adam in the creation account (Gen 2:18-23; cf. 1 Cor. 11:8-9).

Preeminence, prominence, foremost, first, representative

Proponents of this third view argue that the best interpretation of kephalē is neither “source” nor “authority over,” but something along the lines of preeminence, prominence, foremost, etc. This might sound very close to the first view, but it’s actually different. Something can be prominent, for instance, and not necessarily be in a position of authority. A particular mountain peak can stand out among all other mountains in the range, but this doesn’t mean it’s exercising authority over the other mountains. Certain baseball players like Mookie Betts, Freddie Freeman, or Clayton Kershaw are prominent among the rest, but this doesn’t mean they are exercising authority over, say, Corbin Carroll, Christian Walker, or Zac Gallen.

It’s important to keep in mind that the above meanings are not necessarily mutually exclusive. A word like kephalē could mean “source” and not “authority” or “prominence,” or it could mean “source” and also “authority,” or it could mean “source, prominence,” and “authority.” Words can be polysemous—capable of more than one meaning at the same time.

Ok, my (Brady’s) words again:

There is not really a scholarly consensus on the meaning of kephalē in Paul’s letters. In other words, in my opinion, we don’t really have a conclusive understanding of exactly what Paul intended here. There are other clues in Scripture that seem to indicate an intended norm of male leadership in the church and home generally (which is not necessarily the same thing as saying male leadership is expected or mandated by God), but we need to be careful not to derive more from potentially ambiguous Bible passages than they really say or elude to.

As always, the whole narrative of Scripture must be considered when trying to determine what individual texts mean.

Also as always, God’s Word is infallible, but our interpretation of it is not.

Also also as always, God is good, and loves us more than we love ourselves, and these questions will all be answered or rendered obsolete in the new heaven and the new earth.

TO KNOW HIM AND TO MAKE HIM KNOWN!

- Pastor Brady