Christ Preeminent (Part Twenty-Three): A Word to the Wives

Transcript

JRNT 45
02/04/2024
Christ Preeminent (Part Twenty-Three): A Word to the Wives
Colossians 3:18
Jesse Randolph

On July 19, 1848, 200 women gathered for a convention at a Wesleyan church in Seneca Falls, in upstate New York. Leading the charge at this convention was a woman named Elizabeth Cady Stanton. And Stanton’s primary aim in calling for this convention was to secure for American women an equal right to vote. And at this convention, Stanton and the other delegates to the convention issued a document that was called the “Seneca Falls Declaration.” Modeled after the Declaration of Independence, it had these words, “We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men and women are created equal.” The original Declaration of Independence, or course, from back in the 18th Century mentioned only men; the “Seneca Falls Declaration” mentioned “men and women.” And though this document was purporting to be Godward in the sense that it mentioned men and women being created, there was at least the suggestion, this hint, of this openness to the existence of God by those who came to this convention, make no mistake there was already an anti-God, anti-Bible agenda that was afoot at this convention in 1848.

In fact, here’s Elizabeth Cady Stanton in her own words. She said, “the bible, with its fables, allegories, and endless contradictions, has been the great block in the way of civilization.”
Or on another occasion, Stanton described her own drift away from the Christianity of her youth in these terms. She said, “My religious superstitions gave place to rational ideas based on scientific facts . . . I view it as one of the greatest crimes to shadow the minds of the young with these gloomy superstitions; and with fears of the unknown and the unknowable to poison all their joy in life.”

Stanton, along with Lucretia Mott and the better-known Susan B. Anthony, are credited with ushering in what is now known as ‘first-wave feminism.’ Another feminist icon who emerged during this first-wave of feminism, you might of heard the name, was Margaret Sanger. Sanger was a nurse, a sex educator, and the person who is credited with coining the phrase “birth control.” In 1914, Sanger founded a monthly newsletter that was called “The Woman Rebel,” which, I’m sure, as you can imagine, did not hold to a biblical presupposition or worldview. In 1921 Sanger established the “American Birth Control League” which would later be known as “Planned Parenthood,” an organization whose blood-stained legacy in the role that it played, has been the slaughtering of tens of millions of innocent lives. Well, women’s suffrage, the right to vote, was finally obtained in 1920. And 1920 is widely regarded as being the bookend date of this “first-wave of feminism.”

After decades of war in the 30’s and the 40’s and then the 50’s, a second wave of feminism swelled up in the 1960’s, a wave which rode out all the way until the early 90’s. And while the first wave of feminism was focused more on civic rights and privileges of women, such as the right to vote, the second wave of feminism was more social in nature. Proponents of second wave feminism were interested more in analyzing society and its structures through a critical lens. They viewed society as unjustly patriarchal, with men exerting power over women, and women being unfairly subservient to men and treated as second-class citizens. And the goal of the second wave feminists then was to set women free from their socially-engineered chains of male dominance. And in this second wave of feminism, you had people like Betty Friedan who was instrumental, and in fact coined the phrase, ‘women’s liberation movement.’ Which came out of a book she wrote in 1964 called “The Feminine Mystique.” And in that book Friedan referred to a woman whose interests were focused on her home, her husband, and her children as suffering from “the disease with no name.”

Another second wave feminist you should know about is Germaine Greer, who in 1970 wrote “The Female Eunuch.” And her thesis, as its crass title indicates, was that in our male-dominated society, we have tamped down and repressed the inherent female sexual drive of women. And you can’t mention second wave feminism without mentioning Gloria Steinem. The former Playboy bunny, the founder of Ms. Magazine, the ardent abortion advocate, who once said infamously: “Women have two choices: Either she’s a feminist or a masochist.”

Now, in this second wave of feminism there were laws that were passed that truly were helpful to and protective of women. Laws, for instance, that prohibited sexual harassment in the workplace. Or provided equal pay for equal work in the workplace. But you also had in this very same window the issuance of the Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade in 1973, the judicial precedent for which has been, and the memory which has been, the slaughter of well over 60 million innocent lives, and sadly counting.

Now, while many of those second wave developments were largely happening out there, out in the culture, out in the world, the church was not exempt from feminism’s influence. In fact, in 1983, a feminist author named Virginia Ramey Mollenkott, wrote a book titled “The Divine Feminine.” And in that book, among other arguments, she tried to make the argument that the Trinitarian God revealed in scripture is -- you guessed it -- feminine. Here are some of her ‘robust’ exegetical arguments for God’s femininity in that book.

For instance, Acts 17:28, Mollenkott notes, that Paul there, was interacting with those Athenian philosophers there at Mars Hill. And that he told them, that its in God the Father, “in Him we live and move and have our being.” And according to Mollenkott (you tell me later if you think this is brilliant) she said that that “in Him” reference, that obviously must be to a womb, “in Him”, in His womb. Well, who has a womb, (sorry, trans activists), but women, women have wombs. Ergo, according to Mollenkott, the femininity of God the Father. Or should we say, “God the Mother”?
Or in Luke 13:34, that scene where Jesus described His desire to protect Jerusalem’s children, and where He said, “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, just as a hen gathers her brood under her wings.” Well, there you go, says Mollenkott, Jesus is portraying Himself as a mother hen. How could we have missed this? He’s talking about His divine femininity! I say this all, of course, with a hint of sarcasm, because these are foolish arguments. These are facile arguments which can readily be disproved by a consistent, objective, and faithful reading of scripture.

That’s just two waves of feminism. Then we get to the third wave. After number one and number two came number three, and we’re still living in the shadows of third wave feminism today. And what was unique about this third wave was how it sought to fold itself in with other campaigns for so-called justice and so-called equality. The third wave was marked by the fact that it was no longer exclusively about women’s rights. But instead, merged with other rights, like the so-called rights of same-sex couples to marry, or rights for economic justice, or social justice, or environmental justice. But what was really notable about third wave feminism -- and with the advent of social media you could even say that there’s been a fourth wave of feminism -- is that unlike first-wave feminism which at least had a semblance of a connection to a Christian worldview, today’s brand of feminism is completely set apart from any notion of Christian values, or beliefs, or precepts. It is far mor radicalized and far more secularized. It ifar more critical and condemning of biblical beliefs and precepts. In our day, we have women like Rachel Held Evans, who though she would have called herself a Christian, is publishing books with titles like this: “A Year of Biblical Womanhood: How a Liberated Woman Found Herself Sitting on her Roof, Covering Her Head, and Calling Her Husband ‘Master’.”

So, we’ve gone from the earliest feminists, meeting at a church, that Wesleyan church, back in 1848 to more recent feminists infiltrating the church and actually ridiculing the charter of the church, the word of God. I’ll say this as plainly and as straightforwardly as I can. Feminism is a cancer, feminism is a poison, concocted by Satan himself in the very bowels of hell as he carries out his mission of blinding unbelievers and deceiving believers about God’s perfect plans and purposes and design for women.

And that brings us to our text for today. It’s a single verse; a verse which, I imagine, is going to ruffle some feathers; a verse, which I’m certain, would cause any committed feminist to recoil in horror; a verse that’s going to cause the unbeliever to scoff; and a verse which might cause some of you here this morning, who have been steeped in this culture that’s awash with feminism, to squirm in your seats. Turn with me in your bibles, please, to Colossians 3:18. We’re continuing on in our study of Colossians, camping out in this one verse today, Colossians 3:18. God’s word reads, “Wives, be subject to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.” That’s it, that’s as far as we’re getting today.

Now, some of you might be thinking to yourself, “Goodness, one verse, Jesse? And on wives? Did you lose a bet? Are we really going to talk about wives for one hour being subject to their husbands?” Yes, we are. Because there is enough meat on these bones, as we’re about to see, to chew on for the entirety of our time here this morning. The title of this morning’s sermon is “A Word to the Wives.” And what we’re going to see, as we approach this text today is… I’ll lay out the outline for you up front. First, we’re going to get sort of a running start up to our text. As we get more of a broader biblical backdrop to Paul’s words here in verse 18. We’re going to see that Paul wasn’t pulling these ideas here out of thin air. Paul wasn’t some sort of crude misogynist who was just making things up as he stormed ahead on his supposed crusade to suppress the weaker sex. No. Paul the Jew, Paul the well-trained former Pharisee, was steeped in the scriptures, namely the Old Testament scriptures. And what he has to say here in verse 18 is part of this larger arc of what the scripture teaches more broadly about husband-wife relationships, including God’s original design, women’s rebellion, the curse, and the need for greater clarity and guidance in a sin-cursed world.

So, for you note-takers we’ll call that first point that we’ll be in “The Context.” And then, after we work through some of that very important background information and establish that context, we’ll get into the heart of what Paul is saying here in verse 18. We’ll lay the text, verse 18, on the operating table and dissect it, and study it in detail to arrive at a clearer understanding of this command, and the various implications which flow out of it. The second heading will be “The Command.” So, we have “The Context,” and we’ll get to “The Command,” and then third and finally, we’re going to see how what Paul is saying to the wives here in verse 18 is truly the fruit of all that’s been said up to this point in Colossians 3. And what we’ll do is look at how the command given to wives here is actually part of this broader challenge to women, and specifically to wives, but when we really think about it generally speaking to all of us to consider whether we are doing what we’re doing in this life is for ourselves, for others, or for Christ Who is preeminent. So, it’s “The Context,” “The Command,” and then that third one is “The Challenge.”

We’ll start with “The Context.” In this section of Colossians that we’ll be in this morning we really find ourselves moving somewhat abruptly from the heavenlies, you could say, to the home. And though this might seem like it’s somewhat of an abrupt shift here, as we go from verse 17 to 18, as we’re going to see in just a little bit, it’s actually not. See, heavenly realities, or eternal truths, ought always to inform the home front. The home is where our professions are practiced and the convictions that we hold to are tested, and challenged, and proven. What better place for a husband to demonstrate his devotion to Christ but through his sacrificial, selfless love of his wife? What better way for a child who has made a profession of faith in Christ than through their obedience to their parents? And as we’re going to see here in verse 18, what better place for a wife to showcase her submission to her Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, her heavenly husband, than through her submission to her earthly husband? That’s what Paul is getting after here in verse 18, when he says: “Wives, be subject to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.”

Now, as we establish this context of what Paul is saying here in verse 18 it’s important to note, and important to mention, that it goes all the way back to the beginning. As in the very beginning in the book of Genesis. In fact, turn with me, if you would, all the way back to the first chapter of the Bible, Genesis 1. And you know the account. And you know that we here at Indian Hills hold to this being a literal account of God’s creation of the world and all things.
Genesis 1, starting with the very first verse of the very first chapter of Genesis, 1:1 where it says, “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.” And then the rest of Genesis1 goes on to describe God’s creation of the natural realm. We see this all throughout this first chapter. God created the light and the darkness, He created day and night, He created the seas and the dry land, and all plants and animals, flora and fauna, He created celestial beings, the stars and the planets.

And then when you get to Genesis 2 on the next page we’re given this account of how God created man who was the pinnacle of God’s creative works. Look at Genesis 2:7, which says, “Then the Lord God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.” We see that God gave man a place. That’s in Genesis 2:15, “Then the Lord God took the man and put him into the garden of Eden to cultivate it and keep it.” We see that God gave the man a prohibition. That’s in verses 16-17. “The Lord God commanded the man, saying, ‘From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die’.” We see that God identified a problem, verse 18, “Then the Lord God said, ‘It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him’.” And we see that God solved that problem by giving the man a partner, in verses 21-22. “So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; then He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that place. The Lord God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man and brought her to the man.” And God’s provision brought about praise. Look at verse 23,
“The man 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.” And in verse 24, we’re given this eternal statement of purpose, “For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.”

See, what we have here, working our way through Genesis 2, is the first pairing, the first marriage, the first home, you could say. And note, right away what we see in this home is structure, order, function. Now, this is going to come as a surprise and maybe a disappointment to egalitarians and feminists alike. But woman wasn’t created first. Woman didn’t have a man formed from her side. Man wasn’t created to be the woman’s helper. No. What we see here in Genesis 2, is that there was this divine design, this timeless template, involving the man being created first, the woman being formed from his side, and the woman’s design and function being that of the man’s helper.

Now, an objector might say, “Well, that’s the Old Testament, that’s Moses, the Israelites were a bunch of backwards tribal farmers, what do they know?” Well, the New Testament says the same thing. Here’s what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 11:8-9, “man does not originate from woman, but woman from man; for indeed man was not created for the woman’s sake, but woman for the man’s sake.” “Ok,” you might say. “But Paul there is just letting his Jewish prejudices shine through. He was, after all, once a Pharisee. Not only that, Paul was not the Son of God. And Jesus didn’t say anything about this.” Ok, He did. In Matthew 19:4-6, our Lord says, “Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.”

Continuing on in Genesis. As we read on into Genesis 3, we see that it did not take long for God’s divine design, His timeless template, to be cast aside in the Garden of Eden. Look at Genesis 3. And we’ll pick it up in verse 1 and read these first several verses here. It says,
“Now the serpent was more crafty than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said to the woman, ‘Indeed, has God said, “You shall not eat from any tree of the garden?” ’ The woman said to the serpent, ‘From the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat; but from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, “You shall not eat from it or touch it, or you will die.” ’ The serpent said to the woman, ‘You surely will not die! For God knows that in the day you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.’ When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate. Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loin coverings. They heard the sound of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God among the trees of the garden. Then the Lord God called to the man, and said to him, ‘Where are you?’ He said, ‘I heard the sound of You in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; so I hid myself.’ And He said, ‘Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree of which I commanded you not to eat?’ The man said, ‘The woman,’ ” and here the blame game starts, “ ‘whom You gave to be with me, she gave me from the tree, and I ate.’ Then the Lord God said to the woman, ‘What is this you have done?’ And the woman said, ‘The serpent deceived me, and I ate.’ ”

So, what we see in these verses is that both Adam and Eve sinned against God. They rejected the goodness and the kindness and the favor which God had shown them. They turned away from their all-wise and all-benevolent Creator. They heeded the deception of the serpent. To borrow from Proverbs 3 [verse 5], they trusted in their own understanding. And they rejected the words and the very commands of God Himself. They ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil which was this act of disobedience and sin against God. Which brought about these curses, not only on all of human life, but on the entirety of God’s creation.
God began, we see in Genesis 3:14, by pronouncing this curse on the serpent, and that goes on into verse 15. And then look at what comes next in verse 16 of Genesis 3, “To the woman He said, ‘I will greatly multiply your pain in childbirth, in pain you will bring forth children; yet your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.’ ”

And there we have it. We’re getting closer and closer to getting back to the book of Colossians here. There we have our twofold curse not only on Eve herself. But on all who would fall in her line. Literally, on every woman who would live on this planet. And you see here how this twofold curse breaks down.
First, there’s this first part of the judgment on the woman. He declared that bearing children would now be painful and traumatic. The woman’s primary life-giving, procreative function would be full of toil. The New Testament counterpart to this first part of the curse, is found in 1 Timothy 2:13-15, which says, “For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. But women will be preserved through the bearing of children if they continue in faith and love and sanctity with self-restraint.” We don’t have time to get into that passage today and what it means to be preserved -- the verb there is “soizo,” literally saved through the bearing of children -- because we’re focused more on the second part of the curse in verse 16, that was pronounced on the woman, where it was said here, “yet your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.” Here, in the second part of the curse, God declared that the woman’s primary relationship, her relationship to her husband, and the undergirding feelings and emotions that are tied to that relationship naturally, would be disrupted.

The marriage relationship, that relationship, which was to be central to the family, central to the culture, and later, central in the church, the very building-block of all human relationships would be marked by the effects of the Fall. And it starts with those words there in Genesis 3:16, “your desire will be for your husband.” Now, we’ve got to unpack that. We need to understand, what does that desire mean, what’s that desire referring to? And relevant to us, what does that have to do with Colossians? Don’t worry, we’ll get there.

Now, some have theorized that that word “desire” in Genesis 3:16 is referring to some sort of sexual desire. They would say that the consequence for the sin of the woman would be that she would now have sexual desire for her husband. To which I would reply biblically, well, how would that be a consequence for sin? Because we have passages like 1 Corinthians 7:3-5. We have passages like Hebrews 13:4 which indicate that sexual desire, when kept safely within the hearth of a committed marriage relationship, is a good thing. So that explanation doesn’t work. This would be the curse is a desire for a sexual relationship with her husband.

So, what does it mean, then? Thankfully, there’s a clue in the very next chapter of Genesis. Turn with me over to Genesis 4. And the scene here in Genesis 4, is that, we recall, is the Cain and Abel account. And Cain has had his offering rejected by God and his brother Abel has had his offering accepted by God. And Cain is furious, and it is showing up on his face. Jealousy, murder are rising in his heart. And look what it says in Genesis 4:6-7, it says, “Then the Lord said to Cain, ‘Why are you angry? And why has your countenance fallen? If you do well, will not your countenance be lifted up? And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door; and its desire is for you, but you must master it’.” There’s that word again now, in Hebrew, “desire.” In Genesis 4 here sin is personified like it has these animal-like properties. It’s crouching, it’s pictured like a lion or a tiger that’s ready to pounce. It’s pictured, sin is, like a snake that’s coiled up in a basket, ready to strike. The aim of the predator is to kill and the aim of sin is to destroy.

With all that in view we go back to Genesis 3, where God said to the woman, “your desire will be for your husband.” Far from referring to a good and a God-honoring sexual desire for her husband, this is referring to a wrong and a sinful desire on the part of the woman. Specifically, it’s referring to the woman’s desire to dominate her husband, the same way that sin, when coiled up, seeks to dominate each one of us. God has originally created the family structure to be comprised of a husband lovingly leading his wife. And a wife following the husband’s leadership. But now, as a result of this curse, the result of the Fall, there would be this power struggle with now the woman having this desire, sometimes overtly, sometimes covertly, to push the husband out of his place of leadership. The woman’s desire now, would naturally in her flesh be pitted against her husband. And now, she would stand in opposition to her husband’s God-given position of leadership and headship and authority.

And sadly, that’s how countless marriages go on today, not only in the world, but right here in the church. That is why, even a bible-teaching church like ours, there will inevitably in this room be some stopped-up ears and some stubborn hearts here this morning who refuse to hear and heed the eternal principles that God has set forth here in His word. That is why there will be women who are choosing rebellion against what God has declared to be good over submitting to God’s perfect and beautifully-designed plans for how women are to function.

This is the reality of life after the Fall. And bringing it back to our topic of study for today, in their natural post-fall condition this is the state of all women on this planet after the Fall. In that a life that was originally designed to be perfect in every way will now be marred by pain, pain in childbirth and pain in the home. As women were designed to be helpers to their husbands, will now instead be tempted to become his nemesis.

Going back to the introduction of this message. It’s the curse on the woman, the curse of Genesis 3:16, which explains so much. The curse explains why there have been three, maybe four waves of feminism. The curse explains why preaching on biblical womanhood is so hated in our day. The curse explains why, if I took this message over to the State Capitol, I’d be vilified. The curse explains why many of you here this morning can nod your head in agreement about the text we’ll be looking at today, but why it’s so much more difficult to live out this text back at home. That’s the background, that’s the context of our text for today. Going back to Colossians, Colossians 3:18, back to Colossians 3:18, the idea here is that Paul wasn’t writing in a vacuum. Rather, he was writing against this broad backdrop of biblical realities that we’ve just worked through. So that’s “The Context.”

Next, we come to “The Command” which takes us back to our text, Colossians 3:18. I’ll read it again, “Wives, be subject to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.” We’ll take this piece by piece according to the very straightforward train of thought that Paul is employing here. Where first, he mentions a “who” -- wives. Then he mentions a “what” -- “be subject to your husbands.” And then, he mentions a “why,” -- “as is fitting in the Lord.”

Let’s start with the “who” -- wives.” It’s, “Wives, be subject to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.” Now, that word “wives,” “gunaikes,” is broad enough in meaning that it can refer to a female, a woman, in contrast to a male, a man. For instance, we see it used that way in the broader sense of being a woman, not a wife necessarily, in Matthew 9:20 where Jesus has that interaction with the woman with the hemorrhage of blood. The word is used that way to refer to a woman, not a wife, in Matthew 5:27-28, where our Lord says, “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery’; but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman,” a gunaika, “with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” It’s used that way also, in 1 Timothy 2:11-12 which says, “A woman,” same word here, “must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet.” But this word “gunaikes,” as we see here in Colossians 3:18, can also refer to a wife as in a woman with a husband, going back to Genesis 2:24, a woman who has been joined to her husband.

And I can’t just resist this, but isn’t it amazing? That there is no question in Paul’s mind, his brilliant mind, his Spirit-directed mind, that only a woman could be a wife, and that only a man could be a husband, and that only a man and a woman could make a marriage. It wasn’t all that confusing to him. How far we’ve drifted, how far we’ve fallen, when today’s academic elite, and today’s so-called influencers, and sadly, some in today’s churches are bowing down to the cultural idol. Arguing against the beauty and the simplicity of God’s perfect design in which a woman is a wife, a man is a husband, and one and one makes two, makes a marriage.
I digress. The point here, verse 18, is that Paul is addressing wives.

Next, we turn to the “what.” We’ve got the “who” -- wives. Next is the “what” with the command here, “Wives, be subject to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.” Oh boy! I’m not going to be getting any invites to the Women’s Club of Lincoln with what I’m about to say. I’m not going to be getting any invitations to certain denominational churches and even certain churches with the name “Christ” or “Bible” in them when I’m done with this one. That’s alright, because the text says what it says. And what we do here is we preach it, and we proclaim it, that’s what we do.
So, what does that mean, “be subject to your husbands”? Well, the word there for “be subject to” is “hupotasso.” It’s a compound word and has two components kind of pressed in together. First, is this preposition “hupo” which means under. And then there’s “tasso” which means order or ordering. And you put these two ideas together, you smash them together, and “hupotasso” literally means, to order oneself under, to line oneself under. It’s a military term which means to arrange under or to rank under. Meaning a wife is to order herself under her husband. Smoothed out a bit, she is to subject herself to her husband. Smoothed out even further, she is to submit to her husband.

Now, you might be thinking, “Great, I came here to hear you talk for an hour about how being subject to your husband means to be subject to your husband.” Yea, but there’s actually a lot more to these words. There’s so much richness baked into these terms. Which requires far more exploration and explanation. In fact, I’ve put together thirteen observations about biblical submission from just these five words, “be subject to your husbands.” Good luck fitting these into the margins of your Bibles. Hopefully you brought a note sheet. Thirteen observations about biblical submission. Ready? Here we go.

Observation #1 – A wife’s posture of submission is not about her value, her integrity, her worth, or her quality, in a lesser sense. No. Every woman, every wife, is an image bearer of God, Genesis 1:27, “God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.” Here’s another one. Christian husbands and Christian wives are one in Christ. Galatians 3:28 says, “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” And that means that a Christian wife is to be shown, 1 Peter 3:7: “honor as a fellow heir of the grace of life.” Though we want to be cautious about not taking this too far, there is a loose trinitarian parallel here when we think of the fact that Jesus, though one in essence with the Father, John 10:30, “I and the Father are one,” submitted to the Father in various respects. For instance, in His incarnation, in His death, “becoming obedient.” Philippians 2:8, “to the point of death, even death on a cross.” And in doing so our Lord -- and this is important -- never became less God than He eternally already was. In a similar way, wives are not in any way ontologically, essentially inferior to their husbands. They’re not inferior in terms of spiritual blessings. But nevertheless, functionally they’re called to submit to their husbands and operate in a different manner than their husbands. Wives are not the heads of their homes, their husbands are. And the head of the husband ultimately is Christ, 1 Corinthians 11:3, “But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ.” There you go, important roles, distinctive roles, different roles.

Here is a second observation: biblical submission ties back to God being a God of order. The context here, for 1 Corinthians 14:40, it’s a quote I’m going to give you as the distribution of spiritual gifts in the church. But there it says, “all things must be done decently and in order.” Why? Because God is a God of order. Well, as is true in the church. God has also decreed how things are to be ordered in the home. He has not left it to each home to decide which person will be responsible to Him for what happens in that home. No. God has made the husband directly responsible, and ultimately accountable to Him, for the spiritual and physical well-being of that home. And the wife ranks under the husband in that regard. And this is an order as we’ve already seen that’s rooted in the order of creation. 1 Timothy 2:13-14 says, “For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.”

Here is a third observation: the whole of the Christian life, no matter who you are, no matter what gender you are, is about submission. It’s not only wives who are called to submit. All Christians are called to submit. Children, Ephesians 6:1, are to obey their parents, “Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right.” Bondslaves are subject to their masters. Titus 2:9, “Urge bondslaves to be subject to their own masters in everything.” Church members are to submit to their elders, Hebrews 13:17, “Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they keep watch over your souls.” Members of the body of Christ are to submit to one another, Ephesians 5:21, “be subject to one another in the fear of Christ.” Citizens are to submit to the governing authorities, Romans 13:1, “Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities;” Titus 3:1, “Remind them to be subject to rulers, to authorities, to be obedient;”1 Peter 2:13, “Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether to a king as the one in authority, or to governors as sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right.” And we all submit to the Lord, James 4:7, “Submit therefore to God.”

As you look at the history of the church, as you look at the martyrs, as you look at the life of our Lord, who “like a lamb that is led to slaughter, and like a sheep that is silent,” what have Christ-followers primarily been marked by over the course of history -- rebellion or submission? The answer is submission. Christians are to be a submissive people. Meaning that by submitting to her husband, the Christian wife isn’t doing anything out of step with, or foreign to, what is to be the pattern and practice of the life of any believer.

Observation #4: a wife’s submission is ultimately grounded in delegated authority. The husband submits to God, and the wife submits to her husband as unto the Lord. In fact, go ahead and turn with me over to Ephesians 5, the companion text to our passage, Ephesians 5 and take a look how Ephesians 5:22 reads, it says, “Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord.” There it is, “as to the Lord,” delegated authority. And then note this fuller explanation. It’s given in the next verse, verse 23, “For 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. But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything.” God has given the husband authority over his home. And it’s delegated authority. I mean, whatever authority the husband has, ultimately comes from God, and the husband submits to the Lord, and the wife now submits to the husband. And what this means, and this is a question that gets asked with some frequency, is that there may be instances in which a wife not only does not submit, but can’t submit. And that’s because her husband’s direction, her husband’s leadership, would lead her to sin. In such a situation, you seek counsel from your pastors and elders on this one. A God-fearing wife, in some instances, may legitimately choose not to follow her husband’s lead. While in a sense still continuing to submit, because she’s still recognizing that her husband is her head. Just not her ultimate Head; that title belongs to Christ.

Observation #5: biblical submission does not allow for a husband’s dictatorial rule, not at all. A Christian wife is not a doormat. She’s a trophy rather of divine grace. And a husband who thinks that biblical submission gives him license to be some tyrannical, heavy-handed despot . . . is proving himself to be biblically illiterate at best, and a rebel against God most likely. We’ll get into this text next week when we get to verse 19. But the Christian husband is to love his wife. That’s his command, in sickness and in health, in good days and in bad. He is to treasure her. Even when she’s not acting in a particularly treasure-worthy manner. He’s not to rule over her autocratically, he’s not to have a heavy-handed rod of iron in his home, he’s not to confuse submission with subjugation. No. She is his joy, his treasure. As Martin Luther called his wife, Katharina von Bora, she is his rib.
Back to verse 18, this command to wives to “be subject to your husbands” is not to be coupled with sinful chauvinism, rather it’s to be coupled with a husband’s Christ-like love.

Observation #6: biblical submission is to be a way of living for the faithful woman of God. She strives to make it her pattern and practice. That’s not just me saying that. We get that from the verb tense here. This is a present tense verb, when it says, “be subject to your husbands,” meaning this is referring to constant, daily submission. This is a constant, daily practice. The faithful Christian wife, in other words, does not only submit to her husband when she feels like it, or when she thinks he deserves it. No. She submits to her husband as a regular practice, as a way of life. Her submission, in the most immediate context, is to her husband, but she recognizes that her submission, in the ultimate sense, is to God. And she submits the way she submits as a grateful act of worship to the one who saved her.

Observation #7, and this ties in with what I just mentioned: biblical submission is voluntary. Note that language again here, “Wives, be subject to your husbands.” Now, those words, “be subject to”, could also be rendered “subject yourselves to,” which I think might actually be a better translation. I don’t want to over belabor or bore you with Greek grammar here. But that little clause there, “be subject to” or “subject yourselves to,” is in the middle voice. And in the middle voice, typically in Greek, it’s talking about a person bringing something upon themselves, where the action happens to the person as they bring it upon themselves. “I shot myself in the foot,” that would be a middle voice statement. Here, with wives, the idea here is that the wife is voluntarily subjecting herself to her husband, submitting to her husband. The biblically submissive wife, as an act of worship, submits herself to her husband’s authority, as unto the Lord. Did you catch that? She submits herself. In other words, this is a command which can only be heeded voluntarily by the wife’s willing choice, by the exercise of her free will.

There’s a degree of human responsibility involved here where the wife will one day give an account for whether she submitted or did not, at Christ’s bema seat. It’s important to stress here, it’s important to iron this out here. Because we do live in a day where there is this growing tribe of hard-core, right-wing, what they’ll call biblical patriarchists. Who think that the command here to wives to submit to them, or to be subject to them, is a license for their own exercise of their chest-puffing male dominance. And according to this tribe, it’s their job to train their wives, to break the will of their wives. And, I kid you not, there’s even a sliver of this group that believes that it’s within the sphere of their influence and authority to discipline their wives and spank their wives when their wives get out of line. That sort of teaching is severely misguided. That sort of teaching is exegetically untenable. Headship does not mean dictatorship.

The command here is not to the husband to get his wife to submit. It’s to the wife to submit. The command here isn’t even, you notice, to get his wife to obey. The words are different. Children are told to obey. Look down at Colossians 3:20, “Children, be obedient to your parents in all things.” Down in verse 22, “Slaves, in all things obey those who are your masters on earth.” But wives aren’t children and aren’t to be treated as such. And wives aren’t slaves and aren’t to be treated as such. No. Wives are to submit. And as they learn and as they strive to do so, they are treated by their husbands, back to 1 Peter 3:7, as “fellow heir[s] of the grace of life.”

Here’s an eighth observation: biblical submission, for a married Christian woman, does not extend to all men. Christian wives are not called to submit to every man. Christian wives aren’t called to submit to every man who might be a husband. No. It says, “be subject to…”, what does it say there? Verse 18, “be subject to your husbands.” Paul here is not saying that all women everywhere must subject themselves to men everywhere. What he’s saying here, is that wives are to subject themselves to their husbands. That’s completely consistent with what we see all throughout the New Testament. Ephesians 5:22, “Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord.” 1 Peter 3:1, “you wives, be submissive to your own husbands.” Titus 2:5, “being subject to their own husbands.” You get the idea.

Here’s #9, and this one will be quick: biblical submission modeled by a godly wife may be a tool the Lord uses in unequally-yoked marriage where the wife wins over her unsaved husband. A moment ago, I just read a little excerpt out of 1 Peter 3:1, here’s the rest of it, 1 Peter 3:1, reading on into verse 2, “In the same way, you wives, be submissive to your own husbands so that even if any of them are disobedient to the word, they may be won without a word by the behavior of their wives, as they observe your chaste and respectful behavior.” In other words, biblical submission can be evangelistic. So, for you wives with unsaved husbands, don’t lose heart. Stay faithful, not only to the man whose last name you share, but in honoring the God who saved you.

#10, and this one should be rather obvious but: biblical submission is a marital concept. Meaning it doesn’t apply to women who don’t have husbands, whether single or widowed or divorced, for the Christian women without a husband. As we’ve already seen she has various spheres of her life and activities in which she will be called to submit, to the governing authorities, to church leaders, to God Himself. And each is a sphere in which she can grow in her submission generally. So that when the Lord sees fit to bring a godly husband into her life, submission won’t be a foreign concept to her. But to be clear, submission is a concept limited to the marital realm. Girlfriends don’t submit to boyfriends. And fiancées don’t submit to fiancées. Wives submit to husbands.

#11: biblical submission is not only to not be shied away from, but it’s to be embraced, and taught on, specifically in the context of the local church. That’s Titus 2:3-5, “Older women likewise are to be reverent in their behavior, not malicious gossips nor enslaved to much wine, teaching what is good, so that they may encourage the young women to love their husbands, to love their children, to be sensible, pure, workers at home, kind, being subject to their own husbands, so that the word of God will not be dishonored.” If there ever was a curriculum that older woman in the church ought to be taking younger women through… At the very core of that curriculum, and you see it there at the end of verse 15, it’s about the word of God and the honor of God. At the core of that curriculum would be teaching those younger women how they are to submit themselves, subject themselves to their husbands.

#12: a wife’s decision to submit to her husband or not to submit to her husband is not a second-tier issue. Instead, it’s a gospel issue. And by that I don’t mean, necessarily that an unsubmissive wife is always an unsaved woman. That can be the case. What I do mean though, is what we see over in Ephesians 5:22. We were already there earlier. But it says, “Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord.” And in Ephesians 5:24 it says, “But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything.” Those passages are pointing to underlying gospel realities, of the love that Jesus Christ has for His bride, the church. Ephesians 5:32 says it this way, “This mystery is great; but I am speaking with reference to Christ and the church.” In other words, our marriages are to be living illustrations, flesh-and-bone pictures, of the spiritual relationship between Christ and His church. So that the submissive wife is through her life and her submission picturing the church’s love for its Savior. On the other hand, the wife that refuses to submit, the wife who fails to submit is through her life and through her disobedience distorting to the watching world the very message of the gospel.

#13 and final: biblical submission is fitting. Look at the last few words there of verse 18. It says, “Wives, be subject to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.” The Christian wife is to submit to her husband. Not because it makes her fit in better with society. Certainly not because it fits the cultural moment. Not because it fits her especially well as a woman or fits her temperament or her preferences. You know, some women will say, “I’m just naturally louder and more dominant in my personality. I’m more aggressive. And he’s more quiet and passive.” In fact, there’s a whole row of books at certain Christian bookstores. Like there’s this book called “Fierce Women and the Men Who Love Them.” And what it’s trying to do is say there’s an exception to how you’re go live out these principles, if you’re a fierce woman. I don’t care how fierce you are, you submit to him, you submit to his leadership, and his God-appointed headship over your home. The godly woman submits to her husband, not because it fits her, but because it’s “fitting in the Lord.” The Lord determines what is fitting or is not. And His determination transcends centuries, borders, preferences, personalities, and, yes, three, maybe four waves of feminism.

Alright, so far today we’ve looked through this single verse. We’ve seen “The Context.” We’ve seen “The Command,” and probably beaten it to death with thirteen principles here. Now, we get to “The Challenge.” There’s no doubt that for wives, wives here this morning, wives in general, Christian wives, that submitting to another human being, maybe especially to your husband, can be hard, can be difficult, maybe more difficult on some days than other days. Here’s the challenge I want to throw down this morning. This challenge ultimately is not mine. The challenge comes straight off the pages of the book of Colossians that we’ve now been studying for many many months now. Think about what you’ve learned just in Colossians 3 in the past couple months, not to mention chapters 1 and 2 all those months ago. How might the truths that you’ve been taught in the first seventeen verses of Colossians 3 help you to see biblical submission, not as some sort of dry duty, but rather as a Christ-honoring delight?
Let’s work our way backwards, real quickly, through Colossians 3.

How might you view submission if the entire focus of your life is that “whatever you do in word or deed” you seek to “do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks through Him to God the Father?” [verse 17]
How might you view submission with the word of Christ richly dwelling within you, or with the peace of Christ ruling in your heart? [verses 16, 15]
How might you view submission with a true commitment to putting on love and a real commitment to “forgiving each other” and an underling commitment to “bearing with each other?” [verses 14, 13]
How might you view submission if you were committed to putting on a heart of compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness, and patience? [verse 12]
How might you view submission if you were committed to laying “aside the old self with its evil practices.” And putting aside “anger, wrath, malice, slander, and abusive speech from your mouth?” [verses 9, 8]
What might submission look like to you and your life and your home if you thought of Christ, not you husband, as being your “life,” and if you considered your life as being hidden with Christ in God, and if you were regularly setting “your mind on the things above” and seeking the things that are above? [verse 4, 3, 2, 1]

You see, the call on wives here, on Christian wives, in verse 18, to “be subject to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord,” is really not about wives, and it’s really not about husbands. It’s not even ultimately about marriage. No. The command that we’ve been working through here this morning, this command to wives to “be subject to” their husbands is bound up in who every Christian wife here is ultimately in Christ. Not Mrs. Smith, not wife of Tim, not bride of Jason, but ultimately a child of God, a follower of the Lord Jesus Christ.

So there we go, one verse, preached by one man this morning, on the subject of wives submitting to their husbands. I suspect I might be getting a couple of letters this week. And that’s okay, that’s part of the job. But my greater concern is about you. And everyone here this morning, the women and the men alike. Are you willing to stand for these truths? Not only in your words and actions, not only behind a keyboard or with your thumbs, not only here at church or in your home bible studies throughout the week. But back home, Monday through Friday, 24/7, in your lives. Are you willing to stand, as it relates to biblical roles, submission of wives to their husbands as is fitting in the Lord. See, no one here needs to be afraid of, or back down from, or apologize for, what the Bible teaches about God’s design for women. His design provides safety and security for women. His design provides blessing and favor to women. And His design is perfect and unchanging for women. And His design, you can count on it, will always be upheld here as what is best.

So there we have it, “A Word to the Wives” -- “Wives, be subject to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.” Husbands, you’re up next week.

Let’s pray. Lord, thank You so much for this time together in Your precious word. Your word is the light to our feet. The lamp unto our path. Whether we’re men or women, husbands or wives. It contains such rich eternal truths, that a man like me can get up here and rattle on for an hour, and we could still go longer and not get to the end of it. God, I thank You for the women here who are committed to faithfully honoring what Your word says about the role of women, more generally and broadly, but also for those who are married, as wives. I thank You for the men who come along side their wives, and support them as they pursue biblical submission and biblical fidelity. And no matter what the world and culture is saying, are committed to living out what Your word decrees. I do pray for those here who maybe this is new to them, maybe this sounds offensive to them, maybe the feminist lies of the past many years have gotten to them. And this is rattling them. I pray that they would submit their every thought, they take every thought captive to the word of Christ. And I do pray for that group here who may not know You, God, through Your Son, Jesus Christ, that they wouldn’t see biblical submission as we’ve been talking about today, as a hurtle to clear to get right with You, the living God. But rather, what they first must do, is put their faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord. God, thank You for the privilege of proclaiming Your word. Do with it as You please. We pray in Jesus name. Amen.