Home, as God Intended
Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.
Husbands, love your wives and do not be harsh with them.
Children, obey your parents in everything, for this pleases the Lord.
Fathers, do not embitter your children, or they will become discouraged.
The text chosen for this message cannot be understood in isolation from the verse preceding. Verse seventeen instructs Christians, whatever you do, whether in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him. All relationships are transformed because we are in a new relationship to the Lord God. Whereas we might have certain rules guiding social behaviour, as Christians we are responsible to exhibit the new condition we have inherited by having been born into the Family of God. We are to be courteous, not because society demands such courtesies, but because our new relationship as Christians expects such courtesy.
Paul presents in this passage a scheme of household duties. Luther spoke of these instructions as Haustafel, which means “a list of rules for the household,” but is usually translated into English as “house-table.”[1] In essence, we have a series of marks of the Christian Faith. If you are a Christian, your behaviour will either verify your profession, or it will deny your assertion. You will notice that wives, husbands and children are addressed in their turn. In each instance the particular party is addressed, an imperative is issued, which is followed by a motivating statement for the behaviour sought.
I recognise that the issue of slaves and masters is also addressed as an issue of the Christian household (verses 22-25), but I have chosen to ignore this instruction in the present message. It is not that the issues presented have no relevance to responsibilities in the workplace, but it is that the changed social conditions permit me to focus on the family unit of husbands and wives and the children which God entrusts to their care. Perhaps we should acknowledge that family life is not divorced from the workplace, but rather how we relate to others at work reflects our acceptance of positions in the home. That, however, must be left to another message.
Christianity is not just personal; it is relational. The life of the new man is lived out among other new men. Since this is true, the new man, living among new men, must of necessity have an impact on the society in which he finds himself. The teaching that Christians are to have relationships which affect society is not something found only in Paul’s letters. Jesus says in Matthew 5:13, 14, You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled by men. You are the light of the world. A city on a hill cannot be hidden.
Paul told the Philippians to keep themselves blameless and pure, children of God without fault in a crooked and depraved generation, in which you shine like stars in the universe [Philippians 2:15]. Christians are not to withdraw from society; rather they are responsible to influence society for Christ—particularly through relationships.
Wives — You will have no doubt noticed that Paul begins by addressing wives first. If you have not observed this, I ask you to focus your attention on this fact. Take note that he consistently addresses first the subordinate party in each pairing—wives and then husbands, children and then fathers, and later, slaves and then masters. One reason for his address of the subordinate party first is that the New Testament teaches a “subordinationist ethic.”[2]
This fact can be verified through appeal to various passages of the Word. One such passage is John 13:12-17. When he had finished washing their feet, he put on his clothes and returned to his place. “Do you understand what I have done for you?” he asked them. “You call me ‘Teacher’ and ‘Lord,’ and rightly so, for that is what I am. Now that I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also should wash one another’s feet. I have set you an example that you should do as I have done for you. I tell you the truth, no servant is greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him. Now that you know these things, you will be blessed if you do them. Other passages stress this same truth [e.g. Romans 13:1-7; 1 Peter 2:13-3:7].
According to the biblical testimony, this is the only way in which human society can work without disintegration. To complain that modern people will not accept such teaching is misleading, since it should be evident that sinful human nature has never willingly embraced submission.
The other reason I believe that Paul first addresses women (and slaves) is that the Gospel of Christ brings a unique degree of liberation. It is vital that women, freed from the expectations of sinful men, should not abuse their liberty through rebellion against what God established in creation. Spiritual freedom should not become an occasion for scandal in society through misuse. Such activity would be detrimental to the message of life and freedom in Christ the Lord.
I stress another point of vital importance—Paul addresses wives. There is no address to single women, but specifically the instruction here is to wives. Women who were single, widowed, or divorced and of independent means could evidently function as heads of their own households.[3] Such women of independent means would include Lydia [Acts 16:14, 15], Phoebe, the first named “deacon” in Christian history and patron of the church in Cenchreae [Romans 16:1, 2], Chloe [1 Corinthians 1:11], and presumably Nympha in Colossae itself [Colossians 4:15]. The concern is primarily for the household unit. Good ordering is fundamental to well-ordered human and social relationships. In addressing wives first, Paul may be recognising that their relationship to their husbands was the linchpin of a stable and effective home.
The submission of the wife is not a human rule—it is a Christian rule.[4] A wife’s submission a to her husband is related to our union with Christ [cf. Ephesians 5:22-24]. The obligation of submission begins with her union to the Lord; it is not a duty newly devolved upon wives, but its propriety extended back to their conversion. In fact, a wife’s submission springs out of her divine union to Christ as Lord. This is the reason that the Apostle states that such submission is fitting in the Lord.
Some modern commentators have concluded that this particular verse simply reflects the cultural condition of the times. On this basis, these scholars have concluded that the passage is no longer binding since the concept of submission is odious in contemporary society. There are several responses which must be made to this assertion. First, it is true that women had scant standing in the ancient world. Certainly, Roman law would not permit a wife to resist her husband’s will. Under Roman law, a husband had absolute power over the other members of the family. This was a legal state of affairs. Under Christian teaching, however, a husband has responsibility for his family, but he has no power to compel his family to obey his will.
Again, Paul speaks of submission and we cannot soften the word. However, we need to realise that submission conveys the thought of subordination and not of subjugation. As has been stated in previous studies, it is the responsibility of a wife to submit to her husband, but no husband has the right to demand her submission. Submission is a wife’s to give and not a husband’s to demand.
Submission is voluntarily accepting a particular role because to do so is right. This is evident from the fact that the Apostle uses the middle voice (uJpotavssesqe), which emphasises the concept of submitting oneself. If this is distressing to men, let them take note that wives are addressed. Nowhere in the whole of the Word of God is a command for husbands to make their wives submit. What Paul presents here is consistent with the teaching of the Word of God which calls for wives to submit. This is again an emphasis upon the fact that such submission is to be voluntary and a mark of godliness.
One further response which is required by the text is that there yet exists the teaching found in other passages which must be brought to bear in understanding what the Apostle is saying here. We have witnessed that the Apostle appeals to the order of creation in urging the submission of wives to their husbands in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16. A similar appeal is made in 1 Timothy 2:11-15. Again, the order of the home is based on creation and not on chauvinism.
What transforms this verse from simply being a reflection of the ancient condition are the words as is fitting in the Lord. The wife’s relative attitude is to be that of every other Christian [Ephesians 5:21; 1 Peter 5:5], the attitude of unselfish service, only emphasised by the special fact of man’s ordained leadership in the home. The submission of a wife to her husband is an issue of propriety, and as we have seen in other studies, propriety looms large in Christian thinking.
My dear sisters in Christ, focus with me on what is taught here. As fellow heirs of Christ, you have been redeemed and brought into the Family of God. All that God promises to those who are twice born is our shared inheritance. This shared inheritance is not based on gender, but rather it is grounded in the character of God. Because you are fellow heirs of Christ, you are called to reveal His grace through acceptance of the role He assigned as wives.
The issue of submission is not an issue of ability, but it is an issue of attitude. The Apostle’s teaching is nothing less than that a wife’s relationship to her husband mirrors her commitment to Christ as Lord. Thus, in accepting His assignment as women and as wives you serve as salt and light in this dying world. Through joyful, voluntary acceptance of the role of women and wives, you demonstrate that you are transformed. Such an attitude of submission honours God through revealing His grace at work in your lives and confronts the world with a call to faith.
Husbands — We have previously seen that a husband is to love his wife. Because our world knows so little of Christian love, I am compelled to again note that Paul does not refer to sexual love or mere affection, though these are important, but rather he speaks of the sacrificial love such as Christian men have received from God. This is not something which is restricted to husbands, for all Christians have received the love of God in Christ. Be imitators of God, therefore, as dearly loved children and live a life of love, just as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us as a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God [Ephesians 5:1, 2]. All Christians are to love as Christ has loved us, but in this instance, husbands are again enjoined to in particular reveal this sacrificial love for their wives.
The love of Christ for us is ajgavph. Throughout the New Testament, this word speaks of God’s love toward us. It is a love which would lead Jesus to sacrifice Himself in the place of sinful man. Accordingly, we are responsible as those who have received that love to so love one another. This is another form of love, (filevw), which speaks of affection and even of devotion. It is significant that the Bible never speaks of passionate love (e[rw"), The distinction is that the love which God reveals to us and which is expected of us leads us to spend ourselves on behalf of others. This giving of ourselves is unrelated to the worth of another, but it is rather that we seek their benefit even at our expense. This is the love which husbands are commanded to exhibit toward their wives. OiJ a[ndre", ajgapa`te ta;" gunai`ka".
Husbands are not to hold an attitude of superiority. The husband’s primacy in the home is not for domination, but his position is rather appointed to provide guidance, exhibiting sweetness, wisdom and peace. The role of the husband is to ensure order and peace as he provides security and cares for the material needs of the family. Though the image of working fathers and mothers who stay at home is a caricature in our world today, there is strong support for such an image in the Word of God.
It is certain that a husband is responsible to support his wife and to encourage her to achieve her highest potential as a woman. When I speak of support, I am not addressing only the physical need, but I am focusing on the need to support her to grow in grace and godliness. A man is responsible to build his wife through discovering what she needs for fulfilment and then enabling her to achieve that goal. In short, this means that in love a husband must learn to listen to his wife and consider her needs. It means that he must always struggle to bring his own desires under the mastery of Christ in order to ensure that his wife’s needs are met. Being a godly husband is an awesome responsibility, but it is not an impossible task.
A second command is addressed to husbands. Paul commanded that husbands must love their wives. No one questions that this is a positive command, and a command which all Christians should recognise as incumbent upon them because of their position in Christ. Now Paul issues a negative command, do not be harsh with them.
This is a somewhat strange command on the surface. The command does not occur in other ethical lists. The concept of husbands avoiding harshness (pikraivnw) is unique to this Colossian letter. In Ephesians 4:31 we are command to get rid of all bitterness, the same term which is translated as be harsh in our text. The noun form of this word occurs in Hebrews 12:15, speaking of a bitter root. Therefore, what we are witnessing in this verse is more than a mere injunction against harshness; we have before us a command against making our marriage bitter. There is some question whether it is the wife who is liable to be embittered or the husband who is susceptible to being embittered.
The verb Paul uses is in passive voice. Though most translations translate the command, do not be harsh with them [e.g. rsv, neb/reb, niv, gnb) it may well be that it is the husband who must guard against becoming embittered. What is in view may well be the feeling of a dominant partner who can legally enforce his will on his wife, but who will not thereby win her love and respect. Thus, he feels cheated and embittered at not receiving what he regards as his due. This is the likely outcome for anyone who stands on his rights alone, though knowing and exercising little of the love called for in the first half of the verse.[5]
Eadie[6] provides insight into this issue.
There is no doubt that the inconsistency here condemned was a common occurrence in heathen life, where a wife was but a legal concubine, and matrimony was not hallowed and ennobled by the Spirit of Him who wrought His first miracle to supply the means of enjoyment at a marriage feast. The apostle forbids that sour and surly objurgation which want of love will necessarily create; all that hard treatment in look and word, that unkind and churlish temper which defective attachment so often leads to. Wives are to submit, not indeed to guard against a frown or a chiding, but to insure a deeper love. So that if this love is absent, such obedience will not be secured by perpetual irritation and fault-finding, followed by the free use of opprobrious and degrading epithets.
To say, “I love you,” has always been easy for a man; to love is far more difficult. A wife can disappoint a man’s hopes and ambitions, failing to live up to his unrealistic ideals for her. The expectations men hold for their wives are frequently nothing less than unconscious compensation for their own inadequacies. A husband’s tiredness and his ill temper mean that his feelings of disappointment too quickly find expression in words which express our bitterness. Paul commands men to guard against such feelings.
What cannot be contested is that if either partner is embittered, the marriage relationship is jeopardised. Whether a husband is bitter because his expectations are not met, or whether a wife is provoked, the marriage suffers. The Apostle is clearly concerned for the marriage relationship as is shown by the construction of the sentence. Pikraivnw is followed by the preposition toward (mh; pikraivnesqe pro;" aujtav"). What Paul clearly has in view is the marriage relationship.
A husband is responsible to ensure that the marriage relationship does not become an irritant which would lead to making the marriage a bitter experience.[7] Husbands are not to exasperate their wives; they are not to provoke them or incite them or deliberately irritate them. There is enough irritation when men don’t mean to provoke without deliberately irritating our wives! Husbands are to provide loving leadership in the home.
Perhaps it would be helpful for men to recall the instructions which the Apostle issued in 1 Corinthians 7:33, 34. A married man is concerned about the affairs of this world—how he can please his wife—and his interests are divided. An unmarried woman or virgin is concerned about the Lord’s affairs: Her aim is to be devoted to the Lord in both body and spirit. But a married woman is concerned about the affairs of this world—how she can please her husband.
There should be mutual concern in the marriage relationship, but the husband bears the major responsibility to ensure that this concern is present! Though there is authority and submission by God’s design, there is also spiritual equality and mutual desire for each partner to please the other. A wife most pleases her husband with loving submission, while a husband most pleases his wife with loving authority.[8]
Children — Children, obey your parents in everything, for this pleases the Lord. Obedience to one’s parents is well pleasing in the Lord [literal meaning of eujavreston ejstin ejn kurivw/]. There are two issues of note to which I must draw your attention. First, the word which is translated pleasing, should perhaps be read as well pleasing, denoted by the prefix eu affixed to the word. This particular word almost always describes the relationship to the Lord.[9] This is evident from referring to a passage such as Romans 12:1, 2.
I urge you, brothers, in view of God’s mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God—this is your spiritual act of worship. Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will.
A second issue is that the phrase in the Lord (ejn kurivw) is used. This would mean, since you are in the Lord. Children hearing this letter read in the Colossian church would be called to remember the state of grace in which they lived and therefore recall the responsibilities which grow out of that state. Children have a responsibility in the Christian order—to be pleasing to the Lord as Christians, they must obey their parents.
It should be clear that Paul is here addressing children who are believers in the Lord Christ. Furthermore, it should be apparent that Paul is speaking of children who live in the home. There is an assumption that children raised in a Christian home will themselves embrace the Faith at an early age. Such is not an unrealistic expectation. This gives Christians parents an ideal to which they can aspire—that their children will each come to faith.
The fact that the Apostle included a direct address to children indicated that he expected children to be present when this was read to the church. I can scarcely imagine a stronger plea for the inclusion of children in the life of the body than this singular fact! Children attended the worship of the church (without children’s church) and they received instruction just as did adults. Such a view which welcomes the participation of children in the worship of our God condemns those among us who imagine that children are too young to understand the teaching of the Word or incapable of knowing God. Children are expected to know the Lord!
I must address this issue, because I believe there is reason for concern in this day. Our children should come to faith at an early age. They are being raised in homes where Christ is Lord, where prayer is offered up by godly parents, where the Word of God is read and obeyed. The most natural thing in the world is that such children should emulate their parents in their godly lifestyles. We provide Sunday School and opportunity for our children to hear the Word of God. Thus, we should reasonably expect that our children should confess Christ and follow him from earliest days.
If teenage children have not confessed Christ, have not been baptised, have not assumed their place in the Body, perhaps their parents have not understood the importance of winning their children to the Faith. Parents must realise that time is swiftly fleeing and the opportunity to influence their children for good will soon be past. I urge parents whose children have yet to openly confess Christ, have yet to submit to Him in baptism, have yet to unite with the Body, to speak to their children while they yet have a degree of influence over their children.
I do want to be cautious about picking green fruit, but the most natural response of a child to godly parents and godly instruction is to embrace the Faith. If our Sunday School teachers are not presenting Christ and calling for faith in Him, they should resign before they are dismissed. Parents must assume responsibility to instruct their children in the Faith from earliest age, and then encourage them to obey Christ when they do come to faith. To fail to do so is to dishonour God!
When I observe teens wandering the halls of a church, or in evidence of their boredom sitting in the back room instead of entering into worship, the church has failed. They are not demonstrating love for Christ at that point, and that is a reflection on their training. Perhaps it is too much to expect that children raised in an environment which places them at the centre of the universe would be excited about the things of God, but those who are born from above will exhibit just such zeal for Christ and His Word. Children entertained to death will find worship boring, but those who have been raised to seek the Lord will rejoice at the prospect of entering the House of the Lord to worship.
Tragically, our children are more influenced by their peers than by their parents. They receive more instruction in the philosophies of this dying world through the music of the world, through television, through instruction in the schools, through the Internet than they do instruction in godliness. Let me ask pointedly of you who are parents. Do you have a time when you read the Word of God with your children? Do you have a time when you pray with your children? The window of opportunity will shortly close.
Children are to be trained to obey (obey and not submit) their parents in everything (kata; pavnta). There is no explanation on the breadth of this command since obedience is expected in all matters. When parents are Christians and govern their children in a spirit of godliness, obedience should be without exception in everything.[10] Consequently, obedience is expected toward both parents, and not toward the father only. In homes with blended families, such obedience of children must be expected toward stepparents as well as biological parents.
Of course, this command excepts those matters in which a parent orders a child to disobey God. The assumption is that parents, acting as parents, will deal wisely and kindly with their children. This is the expected norm of good family and social relationships. As Paul stated in another letter (citing the Mosaic Law), Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. “Honour your father and mother”—which is the first commandment with a promise— “that it may go well with you and that you may enjoy long life on the earth” [Ephesians 6:1-3]. The counsel does not envisage situations where the norm is breached by the parents or where a higher loyalty might conceivably need to be invoked [as in Luke 14:26].[11]
Fathers — Perhaps you notice that there is no instruction to mothers, but there are explicit instructions to fathers. Why do you suppose this is so? Of course, it may be that Paul intended by using the term fathers to include all parents. Certainly, there are scholars who adopt this view, and there is certainly justification for the view. In single-parent homes where only a mother represents the parental view, the need to avoid embittering children is just as needy as it would be in a family with both parents. However, it is likely that Paul addressed fathers because they are held accountable to the greatest degree for the faith of their children and for the relationships in the home.
Fathers, you are the primary impetus toward either godliness or worldliness in the home. You are the one who sets the standard for your children. Just as you are responsible for the spiritual tenor of your wife, so you are responsible for the spiritual tenor of your children. Whether they are a benediction to your name, or whether they serve to curse your memory settles in great measure on your shoulders. Mom will get the glory when children turn our well. If children turn our poorly, dads will bear the blame.
Take note that the stress is not on a father’s discipline or authority, but it is on his duties. The only responsibility mentioned is a negative one, rather than that of bringing up and training as is the case in Ephesians 6:4. Younger members of the Christian family were in a vulnerable position. They no doubt had a great degree of attraction to the alternatives of the Christian Faith. If they conscientiously adopted their parent’s ethic, they would have been compelled to resist the flow of culture. Such a position stresses an adult, must less a child. Children who do not share in the activities of the world will likely feel embarrassed. Paul is urging fathers not simply to “lay down the law,” but to employ tact in holding the family together.
The word Paul uses here (ejreqivzw) occurs only one other time in Scripture where it is used in a positive sense [see 2 Corinthians 2:9]. The concept is to stir up, to provoke, even to nag. Children who are not encouraged through instruction and training, and through knowing that their father is standing with them and sharing in their resistance to the world’s pressure, may become discouraged, may lose heart [njb, nrsv], become listless or sullen. Paul is being sensitive to the weakest and most vulnerable members of the family, and consequently to the most vulnerable members of the church.
A father may cause a child to lose heart through being overprotective, never allowing the child to have freedom. A father may show favouritism, and thus discourage a child. Children become discouraged when their worth is depreciated. Those hasty words which indicated that your child had no worth were means of depreciating his or her worth. Unrealistic goals can discourage a child. Fathers who attempt to live out their faded dreams through their sons can discourage the child. An unaffectionate father can cause his child to lose heart.
It is possible that a father will drive a child to despair by failure to provide for the child’s needs. Criticism will exasperate a child. A father is responsible to provide a positive, constructive environment in the home. Perhaps one of the major ways in which fathers discourage their children is through neglect. Because men permit themselves to be so busy with work and with their own pursuits, it is possible to neglect their children, leading to discouragement. Fathers may also dishearten a child through excessive discipline.[12]
Dorothy Law Nolte wrote a poem which details the influence parents have in the lives of their children. The title of the poem is, “Children Learn What They Live.”
If a child lives with criticism,
he learns to condemn.
If a child lives with hostility,
he learns to fight.
If a child lives with ridicule,
he learns to be shy.
If a child lives with shame,
he learns to feel guilty.
If a child lives with tolerance,
he learns to be patient.
If a child lives with encouragement,
he learns confidence.
If a child lives with praise,
he learns to appreciate.
If a child lives with fairness,
he learns justice.
If a child lives with security,
he learns to have faith.
If a child lives with approval,
he learns to like himself.
If a child lives with acceptance and friendship,
he learns to find love in the world.
Children are to receive firm guidance, and while that guidance is to come from both parents, fathers in particular are to assume responsibility in raising their children. Men, set an example for your children. Your daughters need to see an example of godliness so that they will know what to expect in the man they marry. You sons need the example of godliness so that they will be suited for godliness in the homes God will one day give them.
Our world is dying for a lack of godly homes. I would that the men and women of this church would say in their hearts, “God willing, I will be that godly man,” or “God helping me, I will be that godly woman.” Those who share the Faith with their mates should openly give thanks that God has permitted them to share in this most intimate of activities—worship of the true and living God. Those who are spiritually single should declare their desire to honour God through a spirit which reflects His presence. May God encourage each of us and equip us to honour Him in our homes. Amen.
----
[1] Cited in Peter T. O’Brien, Word Biblical Commentary: Colossians, Philemon, Vol. 44 (Word, Waco TX 1982) pg. 214
[2] R. C. Lucas, The Message of Colossians and Philemon: The Bible Speaks Today (InterVarsity, Downers Grove IL 1980) pg. 158
[3] James D. G. Dunn, The New International Greek Testament Commentary: The Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon (Eerdmans, Grand Rapids MI 1996) pg. 246
[4] John Eadie, Commentary on the Epistle of Paul to the Colossians (James & Klock, Minneapolis MN 1977) pg. 258
[5] Dunn, op cit., pg. 249
[6] Eadie, op cit. Pp. 258-9
[7] Richard R. Melick, Jr., The New American Commentary: Philippians, Colossians, Philemon, Vol. 32 (Broadman, Nashville TN 1991) pg. 314
[8] John MacArthur, Jr., The MacArthur New Testament Commentary: Colossians & Philemon (Moody, Chicago IL 1992) pg. 170
[9] Melick, op cit., pp. 314-5
[10] Eadie, op cit., pg. 260
[11] Dunn, op cit., pg. 250
[12] An excellent discussion of parental exasperation is found in MacArthur, op cit. Pp. 171-3