The Responsibilities of the Wife

Eph. 5:22-24

Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.

For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.

Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.

Having spent a great deal of time studying the foundational principles of the home, we are now prepared to examine the specific responsibilities of each family member. Ephesians 5:22-33 comprises the most detailed, and therefore the most important, description of the roles of the husband and wife in all of Scripture. Jay Adams writes this excellent summary statement of this passage:

The heart of these words to the husbands and the wives can be reached quickly by asking two questions: Husbands, do you love your wives enough to die for them? Wives, do you love your husbands enough to live for them?[1]

As Adams also brings out, “In most cases of marital disruption, counselors find that it is a matter of sorting out each partner’s responsibility before God.”[2] That should be obvious, but tragically many miss it. In a world that ignores God’s Truth, couples are engulfed in the world’s philosophies, goals, values, and all else. The answer to any problem is going to come only by following God’s order and design. As pastor James Boice illustrates, just as our car will break down if we ignore the manufacture’s instructions, marriages will break down if we ignore God’s instructions.[3] Likewise that great 4^th Century expositor Chrysostom wrote:

Paul would never without a reason and without an object have spent so much pains on this subject . . . And why so? Because when [husbands and wives] are in harmony, the children are well brought up, and the domestics are in good order, and neighbors, and friends, and relations enjoy the fragrance. But if it be otherwise, all is turned upside down, and thrown into confusion.

How appropriate and up to date that is! It is as true today as it was seventeen centuries ago. Families are in a mess now for the same reason as then—the Word of God is not the absolute authority for the home.

The foundational Truth, therefore, for understanding the duties of each family member is to see the picture of each one that is given here. The HUSBAND is a picture of Christ. As Christ is the Head of the Church and gave Himself sacrificially for it, the husband is the head of the wife and gives himself sacrificially. The WIFE is a picture of the Church. As the Church is under the leadership of Christ and His Word, the wife is to be under the spiritual leadership of her husband. The CHILDREN are pictures of the Christian. As the Christian is obedient to God, children are to be obedient to their parents whom God has placed over them. As we have seen, there is a perfect balance here of authority and submission.

We deal first, because the Scriptures do, with the wife. Why is she mentioned first? Well, we shall see the reason a little later, but may we see at the outset that there truly are few things today that have been as misunderstood and totally distorted as the place and duties of women. This has been a battleground for millennia! One of the countless perfections of the Bible, however, is Its view of women. One of the accusations against the Bible is that it has a low view of women, that It enslaves them, and denies them freedom. But such views could not be more wrong and show a total ignorance of Scripture and ancient history.

It is true that history has not been kind to women. Women have been blamed for much of the world’s calamity. Long ago someone declared that “if the world were only free from women, men would not be without the converse of the gods.” Someone else pronounced woman to be “a necessary evil, a national temptation, a desirable calamity, a domestic peril, a deadly fascination, and a painted ill.” A German proverb that says, “There are only two good women in the world—one of them is dead, and the other is not found.” Similarly, Englishmen sometimes say, “If there is any mischief you may rest sure that a woman has to do with it.” Still another writer declares, “It cannot be denied that the devil employed woman [Eve] to accomplish the ruin of the race; that by [a woman] he disturbed Abraham’s home and heart, cast innocent Joseph into prison, robbed Samson of his strength, brought life-long trouble upon David, seduced Solomon into idolatry, caused John the Baptist to be beheaded, and drove Paul and Barnabas from Antioch.”

Such statements are unfair to say the least. How many men could we list who have brought unimaginable calamity upon the world? It was a man, Adam, who chose unhindered to sin, while Eve was deceived. It was a man, Cain, motivated by jealousy and fueled by testosterone, who became the first murderer. It was a man, Ham, who became the father of the wicked Canaanites, who had to be purged from the Land before God’s people could occupy it. Men, not women, are specifically mentioned as the homosexuals in Sodom who called for Lot to send out the visitors in his house. It was a man, Achan, who caused the defeat of the Israelites at Ai. How long a list could we compile of such wicked men as Haman, Nebuchadnezzar, Herod, Nero, Diocletion, Genghis Khan, Adolph Hitler, Heinrich Himmler, Adolph Eichmann, Joseph Stalin, Ho Chi Minh, Saddam Hussein and his sons, Osama Bin Laden, Charles Manson, Timothy McVey, Ted Bundy, and the list goes on virtually ad infinitum.

Isn’t it also interesting that while many men reviled, mocked, and mistreated the Lord Jesus, we read of not one woman doing so? And while even all his disciples forsook Him, women clung to Him and were present at the cross.

Greek society, to which many today look as being built on monumental philosophy, did not have a very high view of women. William Barclay writes, for example:

The respectable Greek woman led a very confined life. She lived in her own quarters into which no one but her husband came. She did not even appear at meals. She never at any time appeared on the street alone; she never went to any public assembly.[4]

Neither did 1^st Century Judaism hold women in high esteem. While they were allowed to attend synagogue, they were not encouraged to learn. In fact, most rabbis refused to teach women, considering it to be throwing pearls to swine.

“How appalling,” we think, “why does the Bible teach such things?” The answer is that the Bible does not teach such an attitude. Jewish tradition had drifted far from what the Old Testament Scriptures taught. The Old Testament specifically teaches that women are spiritually equal to men. The Mosaic law was given to all Israel, women as well as men (Deut. 1:1). Both were to teach it to their children (Deut. 6:4-7; Prov. 6:20). The protection of the law applied equally to women (cf. Ex. 21:28–32). Women had inheritance rights (Num. 36:1-12). Men and women alike participated in the Jewish religious feasts (cf. Ex. 12:3; Deut. 16:9-15). The single greatest spiritual vow, the Nazarite vow, was open to both men and women (Num. 6:2). Women were involved in spiritual service (Ex. 38:8; Neh. 7:67). Nor did God hesitate to deal directly with women (Gen. 3:13: 16:7-13; Judg. 13:3). We see, then, that the Old Testament actually had a very high view of women.

The Apostle Paul is especially singled out as being “a male chauvinist” and really “hung up” on the woman’s place. As positive proof, critics cite such verses as I Timothy 2:11-12: “Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.” A key “proof” of Paul’s “problems” with women is supposedly Galatians 3:28: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.” It is absurdly argued that conversion, therefore, obliterates the distinctions between male and female. But such teachers ought to be embarrassed by such a ridiculous conclusion. The context is clearly about salvation, that it is to all who believe. It has nothing to do with the roles of men and women, rather a spiritual reality that is open to all.

Such critics simply don’t know what they’re talking about. We’ll come back to this later in this study, but when Paul said “let a woman learn,” he was actually teaching something totally revolutionary. He was demanding that while women were not to teach by position they were most certainly to be taught by application, something that shocked his listeners to the core of their belief system. Such an attitude was unheard of.

Because the Bible “liberates” women far more than the ERA (Equal Rights Amendment) could have or what the NOW (National Organization of Women) crowd could ever conceive of accomplishing, we could call the Bible in this context the WMC, the Woman’s Magna Charta. The momentous historical Magna Charta (Latin for “Great Charter”) is the most famous document of British constitutional history. Issued in June of 1215 by King John under pressure by an alliance of the barons in Runnymede, its original purpose was to ensure feudal rights and guarantee that the king could not encroach on those rights. It also guaranteed the freedom of the Church and the customs of the towns, and recognized that even the king was bound by laws enacted by the people. It later became the basis for civil rights such as habeas corpus and trial by jury. The point is that the Magna Charter is generally recognized today as the historical turning point of opposition to the excessive use of royal power. That is exactly what the Biblical revelation was to women. They were no longer slaves to the “royal power” of men. They now had the same divinely bestowed privileges and blessings.

This brings us to the place of the wife according to God’s order. To put the matter simply and Biblically: As the Church is under the spiritual leadership of Christ, the wife is to put herself under the spiritual leadership of her husband. To amplify, let us look at two major thoughts: the women’s place in creation and then her place in the home.

I. The Woman’s Place In Creation

To understand fully the role of the women we must go back to where it all began—the book of Genesis. Let us consider first the creation and then the fall.

The Creation

Notice Genesis 1:27-28:

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

The key truth to notice here is the word “them.” How profound and pivotal! Adam and Eve actually ruled together; they were “co-regents.” There was perfect unity and harmony. That is exactly what “one flesh” (2:24) and “help-meet” (2:18) refer to, as we saw in our last chapter. Without the other half we truly are only half a person. Together we are whole; each half compliments the other. This is how it was in the Garden. As I shared from the pulpit, what this series on the home should show us is that we can return to the Garden of Eden when it comes to our homes. When each family member is Spirit-filled and Word-filled we can go back to the Garden. So while Adam was the leader because he was created first and given the responsibility as head of the race, Eve was given to be his compliment and to rule with him. Eve was not Adam’s “better half” as is commonly said to today, but rather she was his “other half.” What a beautiful picture this paints in the mind! How wonderful it was in the Garden! And how wonderful it can be again!

Alas, however, something terrible happened in the Garden.

The Fall

This brings us to Genesis 3:16:

Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

To understand that, we ask three questions.

First, what did Eve do? Of course, we know that Eve ate the forbidden fruit. But the deeper principle issue here is that when she took the fruit and then gave it to Adam she actually usurped his leadership. She was now leading instead of following.

Second, what was the result of Eve’s action? What calamity that one single sin caused! How often do we think that “one little sin” doesn’t matter? We should remind ourselves often of Abraham. God promised him that He would bless him with a son (Gen. 15:1-21). Getting impatient, however, Abraham “hearkened to the voice of [his wife] Sarai” (who like Eve was leading instead of following) and conceived a son with Hagar, Sara’s handmaiden (16:1-4). And what was the result of that “one little sin? A boy named Ishmael, who became the father of the Arab nations (16:11-12; 17:20; 25:12-16), who have been fighting the Jews for millennia and have caused untold damage in the world of our own day. 18:10; cf. 17:1-6

As for the “little” sin in the Garden of Eden, the results were infinitely greater. Part of the curse was that the husband would now “rule.” The Hebrew word used here (masal) means “to install in an office, to elevate to official position.” Man and woman were once “co-rulers,” but the husband was now installed as the ruler. But may we also notice something else. The phrase “thy desire shall be to thy husband” doesn’t mean what we might first think; it doesn’t mean “a desire to please.” In fact, it means quite the opposite! “Desire” comes from an Arabic word that means “to compel, to urge, or to seek control.” It is used in only one other place in Scripture, and it is in the same construction as here. In Genesis 4:7 we read of Cain’s anger and God’s encouragement that he could still bring the correct offering. The latter part of the verse reads “and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his [i.e., sin’s] desire . . .” In other words, sin was like “a wild animal, lurking at the door of Cain's life, desiring to enslave him.”[5]

The same meaning, then, is in 3:16. The literal idea is, “Your desire will be to control your husband, but he will rule over you.” We see, therefore, that that is the curse! It is from that moment the “battle of the sexes” has come. “Women’s Liberation” is nothing but women trying to rule and “Male Chauvinism” is nothing but men trying to squelch the rebellion, and both attitudes are sinful. The home life of many Christians today is in shambles because the wife “rules the roost.” Neither does this mean that the husband acts like Napoleon. It means that he is to lead his home in accordance with God’s laws. And may we add, every man will stand before God and give an account for how he lead his family.

Third, is there a solution to this “battle of the sexes?” Indeed there is. The solution is Spirit-filled, Word-controlled family living. When each family member knows his (or her) place and duties and then practices them, this will bring back the “one person” union that was destroyed at the fall. When we follow God’s design, we will return from what the home was after the fall to what it was at creation.

II. The Woman’s Position In The Home

We turn now to several related texts that tell us the duties of the woman within the home.

Ephesians 5:22-24

Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.

For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.

Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.

Before we consider what this passage does say, may we consider what it does not say. As we’ve seen already, this does not imply “inferiority.” We should make it very clear that women are NOT inferior to men in any way; they are not “second class citizens.” I have even seen submission used as a justification for abuse.

Neither does this mean you “obey” your husband in the usual meaning of that word. I have read books and heard preachers who insist that the wife must “obey,” but that is not what the text says. Some cite Titus 2:5 because the AV says wives are to be “obedient to their own husbands.” But the Greek there is actually hupotassō, the same word translated “submit” here in Ephesians. There is a great difference between the word “submit” (hupotassō) and the word “obey” (hupakouō). Children must obey their parents and slaves must obey their masters, but wives do not obey their husbands in that sense. Why?—because the marital relationship goes far deeper than such a surface relationship. The husband isn’t to treat his wife, his loving help-meet, like a child or a slave. He is to treat her as a part of himself, which she truly is. The beloved J. Vernon Mcgee rightly comments on this principle of submission:

It is not, ‘Wives, obey your husbands.’ Submit is a very mild word. It is a loving word. It means to respond to your own husband as unto the Lord. The way we respond to the Lord is that we love Him because He first loved us.

That is, indeed, the true picture. It is willful submission, not forced obedience. (We’ll examine another occurrence of “obey” later in the chapter.)

Specifically, then, what does submit mean? As we studied back in 5:21, the Greek word used here is hupotassō. The root is tassō originally carried the military connotation of drawing up troops (or ships) into battle array. From this came the ideas of directing or appointing someone to a task and to arrange and put things in order. [6] The prefix hupo, then, adds the idea of “under,” so the full idea is to voluntarily get in order under someone. May we say again, this does not imply that one person is inferior to another. To illustrate with the military, just because one officer outranks another does not mean the higher-ranking officer is a better or superior person. I’ve not met many enlisted men, for example, who haven’t met an officer that was of low character or just plain incompetent. Submission has nothing to do with superiority, rather order. There must be order or there will be chaos.

As commentator on the Greek text John Eadie points out, because of their low position in society in that day, newly converted women might tend to use their new found liberty to encroach on their husband’s position. Many such women also had unbelieving husbands, so they might be tempted to take on a superior attitude, which would not tend to win their husbands to Christ.[7]

What Paul is teaching, then, is that the husband is the head of the wife. Head is the Greek kephalē, which means exactly what it implies, “the head, top, that which is uppermost in relation to something,” such as the head of a person (Matt. 8:20) or animal (Rev. 9:17). Used metaphorically of persons, then, it speaks of one who is “chief, one to whom others are subordinate.” [8] Some interpreters try to get around the implication of authority by saying that kephalē can also mean “source or origin,” but the only time this is even hinted is in secular Greek to refer to the “source of a river.”[9]

Paul’s meaning is crystal clear—God has ordained the husband to be the head, the leader in the home. The wife is to voluntarily “rank herself” underneath that leadership. The analogy of the body is crucial here. The head controls the body. She, therefore, doesn’t act before or independently of the head. If the body acts independently, the result is chaos, or even convulsions. Tragically we see many families today in convulsions because of no leadership or the wrong leadership.

This principle is further underscored by the Greek construction of verse 24: as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands. Subject is not in the Passive Voice because that would mean that the husband is putting her in subjection. Rather it is in the Middle Voice, which pictures the subject acting in its own interest, that is, receiving the benefit of the action. She does this on her own and for her benefit, her own advantage. One aspect of that benefit is that she doesn’t have the responsibility and accountability that the husband does. Another, as we’ll study in the next chapter, is that the husband is the saviour [i.e., protector, preserver] of the body. What a serious denial of God’s law and what a foolish mistake it is for a woman to take leadership in the home! Wives often worry about certain things and end up taking matters into their own hands, but it is the husband who will answer to God, not the wife.

Now then, does this mean that whatever the husband says, even if he is an unbeliever, the wife must follow? One author gives this answer:

People ask foolish, theoretical questions here. “What if a husband should command his wife to get drunk?” etc., etc. That is a supposition for which the Lord made no provision here. We may be sure the reason is that that will not occur to a truly Christian woman who loves and obeys her husband. Husbands respect such wives and their religion! That is the reason God says such a course should win the husband when the preaching of the Word fails. Wives should be in subjection to their husbands, even unsaved husbands.[10]

Please pardon my frankness, but rarely have I read a more ridiculous statement. It has several problems. First, such questions are most certainly not foolish. They are quite practical and demand a Biblical answer. Second, God most certainly does make provision for such situations here in Ephesians, as we’ll see in a moment. Third, while a lost man might very well have more sense than to ask his “church-going” wife to go get drink with him, he also might not.

For example, as one counselor offers, let’s assume an unbelieving couple enjoyed the practice of “wife swapping,” as some couples do. Now consider if the wife gets saved but the husband still wants to continue wife swapping. Does she “submit?” Of course not! She is being told to violate a clear Biblical command, “Thou shalt not commit adultery” (Ex. 20:14). She would, in a humble attitude, have to refuse to do so. She would have to “obey God rather than [man]” (Acts 5:29).[11] I read of another husband, “in order to make a business deal, told his [Christian] wife to go to bed with a client.”[12] Should she “submit?” These are not foolish questions!

While such incidents are extremes, a husband might make other “lesser” demands. I have seen more than one Christian woman allow a lost husband to dictate when she could go to church. I had one lady come to me and say that a previous pastor told her to stay home if her lost husband told her to because this would be a “witness” to him. She then told me that after she did so her husband said that he was just testing her to see how committed she was and that obviously her “religion” didn’t mean that much to her after all. How broken hearted she was! Oh, how foolish and naïve it is to say that an unsaved man (or woman) won’t ask their mate to do something contrary to Scripture! Christians are asked every day by the world to do things contrary to Scripture. Are we so naïve to think that an ungodly spouse will not ask the same?

Paul, therefore, covers just such an occurrence with the words as unto the Lord. Grammatically this means that the wife renders submission to her husband as if it were actually being rendered to Christ.[13] You see, the husband is only the representative of Christ, not the replacement for Christ. If a husband tries to lead contrary to godliness, he forfeits his authority! As we saw in our study of verse 21, the same is true of human government—if it dictates that which is contrary to Scripture, it forfeits its authority before God. As one commentator adds, “The words [in everything] mean within the proper circuit of conjugal obligation. If the husband trespasses beyond this sphere he usurps, and cannot insist” upon the wife’s submission.[14] As another writes, “No wife would be expected to [submit to] her husband if he required her to compromise her loyalty to the Lord Jesus. But in all the normal relationships of life,” she is to submit, “even if he is an unbeliever.”[15] Still another agrees, “Neither a husband nor an emperor has authority to command anything contrary to God’s law.”[16] What utter folly to think that a wife is obligated to blindly obey her husband no matter what he demands! That is slavish slavery, not saintly submission.

Expositor John Phillips brings out a wonderful truth here, that the words as unto the Lord lift the command to submission to “a higher, holier, and more heavenly plane.” He goes on:

What woman in all the world who has met and fallen in love with Jesus would not willingly do anything for Him? Never in the Gospels do we find a woman treating Him badly, speaking against Him, or doing anything to harm Him. The women of the New Testament loved and honored Jesus. He was so manly, so honorable, so attractive, so thoughtful, and so kind. It is the men in the Gospels who opposed Him, not the women.

The wife should, indeed, look to her husband as Jesus’ representative, loving, honoring, and aiding him. And, as we’ll see in our study of the husband, what a tremendous responsibility this puts on him to act like Christ.

“But what if a wife is more gifted than her husband?” it is asked. “What if she is smarter or better educated? Doesn’t it seem logical that she should lead?” Martyn Lloyd-Jones answers this with an incident that he personally witnessed. After preaching in a certain church, he stayed the night with the pastor and his wife. As he fellowshipped with them, he observed that there was no comparison between them intellectually. While the husband certainly was intelligent, gifted, and gracious, the wife was simply brilliant. She had earned a degree with honors in a very difficult field. Her sheer intellect and abilities far exceeded those of her husband. But she remained submissive to his leadership. What’s more, she would often put ideas and arguments into his mouth but did so in such a way that made it appear that they were his. She sometimes had the qualities he lacked but complemented him and always looked to him as the head and passed that attitude on to their children.[17] That is a “help-meet.”

Colossians 3:18

Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord.

Here, in the “sister book” to Ephesians, we find a not only a restatement of our main text, but something additional: “as it is fit in the Lord.” The Greek behind “as it is fit” is anekō, which means “to be fitting or proper” and was used to show something that is legally binding. When one studies history, he finds that societies that in any way acknowledged God based their laws on the Bible. America is a good example. Laws against murder, theft, sexual sin, and so forth are rooted in the Mosaic Law. True, many of those are being challenged today because of the influx of rampant and unchecked Humanism, but the fact remains that these were founded upon Biblical precept to one extent or another.

Likewise, the woman’s submission to her husband is an accepted and almost universally practiced norm in human society. Why? Because it is God’s law. This takes us back to our previous discussion of the wife doing anything the husband says. What if after a woman does something illegal, she comes to court with the following defense: “My husband told me to do it?” No, the husband is the legal representative of the family in our patriarchal society, but he is not a replacement for the law.

Oh, how all this is being violated today and how our society is being damaged because of it! The humanistic, self-willed, self-assertive philosophy of the day is destroying these God ordained distinctions between men and women. Paul says, “Submit yourself to your husband as it is legally binding under to God’s law.”

I Peter 3:1-6

Peter gives us some tremendous counsel on the home:

Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives;

While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear.

Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel;

But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price.

For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands:

Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement.

As in Ephesians 5:22, the wife is told here to submit to her own husband. This submissiveness is softened by the possessiveness. Since the husband belongs to the wife, and vice-versa, according to I Corinthians 7:3 and 4, her submission is a welcome response. Submission is indeed a welcome response toward one who truly loves you. But may we also point out that if the husband does not show love, the wife should submit anyway. The words “without word” show that she is a witness of Christ not through “preaching” or “nagging” but through consistent living in word and deed.

Verses 2-4 go into more detail concerning the wife’s conduct. “Chaste” (hagnos) means “modest and pure.” A Godly woman is not obsessed with outward adornment. Peter literally says here, “Let not your adornment be merely external.” The Greek behind “adorning” is kosmos, which basically means “order” and is actually the word from which “cosmetic” is derived. There is nothing wrong with jewelry and some make-up, and certainly outward appearance should not be neglected or ignored. But all this should be to bring joy to the husband and should reflect the inner beauty of the heart.

A submissive woman does not draw attention to herself. How opposite this is from our world today! Historically, the Roman women were obsessed with dress and hairstyle. They wore jewel-studded combs in the hair and elaborate garments. The same is true today. There is such a preoccupation with appearance that it has turned into idolatry. There is very little modesty in dress today, which merely proves the lack of purity that is characteristic of our society. Oh, how careful Christian ladies need to be to wear that which is modest. Inner beauty is much more important than outward adornment.

Peter goes on to say that the submissive woman has a “meek and quiet spirit.” That doesn’t mean that the wife can never talk or offer her opinion or counsel. In fact, the husband who does not listen to his wife’s feedback and Godly counsel is a fool. After all, two have become one, and what wise man doesn’t listen to himself? Rather, what this means is that she offers opinions and counsel with a humble and quiet spirit. Paul referred to this in I Corinthians 14:34-35 and I Timothy 2:11-15 where he says that women are to keep silent in the church and are not to usurp the authority of men. Questions and comments are to be directed to their husbands at home. In light of what we have now studied, may we interject here that women are not to have leadership in the home, in the church, or in government. These situations are a growing reality today, but they are not Biblical. We’ll say more about this later in this chapter. What a “great price” godly women are in God’s sight!

Peter then sums up his thoughts on women in verses 5 and 6 by saying women who do these things are truly “holy” and mentions Sarah as the great example (Gen. 18). Some ladies are afraid to submit to their husbands out of fear that the husband will take advantage of them. This might happen, but God will take care of her, and such a man will most certainly answer for his deeds.

May we also point out, as the reader may have observed, the word “obey” (hupakouō) is used here in reference to the wife. Does this destroy our previous discussion about the wife not “obeying” her husband? Indeed not, for even though “obey” is used, it is still tempered by the word “subjection” (hupotassō, submission) in verses 1 and 5. This obedience cannot be equated to the obedience of a child or a slave because the relationship of husband and wife is much deeper and more mature than those. Plus, this obedience certainly cannot be equal to what some believe about Christian marriage, that the wife does whatever her husband says regardless of the content. Rather, a wife “obeys” in the sense that she willingly submits, willingly follows; that is, she willingly follows the Godly leadership of the husband whom God has placed over her.

Titus 2:3-5

Please consider another important passage:

The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things;

That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children,

To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.

In verse 3 we find the pattern for older women. As spiritually (and chronologically) older Christian women, they are mature; they are not guilty of the common fault of gossip, they are pure in conduct, and they are “not given to much wine.” But may we key-in on another duty of these older women; they are to “teach the younger women.”

Now, we might be tempted here to interpret this to mean that there is a special Sunday School class for young women in the local church that is taught by one of the older ladies. But that, of course, certainly cannot be the case since what we call “Sunday School” was not invented until about two hundred years ago. Rather, what Paul means is that by their own godliness, personal discipling, life-style, and manifestation of Christ they encourage the younger women in these principles. The younger women should be able to look at the older women and say, “That’s the kind of wife and mother I want to be.”

Notice also that Paul did not tell Titus that it was his duty to teach these things. Yes, he certainly would preach those things within the local church, as we should today, but a pastor can’t be an example of these things because he’s not a woman. He can’t talk to a woman about her hormones, her cycle, or the everyday challenges of being a wife and mother. But the older women can; they are the ones who teach these things by example and personal discipling; they are the evidences of these things; they are the illustrations that prove these principles are true, necessary, and practical. Their lives prove that God’s Word and His principles for the home work.

Verses 4 and 5 tell us specifically what the older women are to teach the younger women.

First, the phrase “teach the young women to be sober” is actually only one word in the Greek, sōphronizō, which literally means to “train to think and act soberly, discreetly, and in moderation.”[18] If there’s one thing true of Christianity today, it is people don’t think straight, they’re not discerning. But the older women are to challenge the younger women to think correctly, not be driven by hormones and emotions.

Second, she is also to teach them to love their husbands and children. We have heard it taught that the husband is commanded only to love his wife and the wife is commanded only to submit to her husband. What a warped teaching that is! But we see here that the wife is commanded to love her husband. We also see it in our Ephesians text. As commentator R. C. H. Lenski puts it:

Is this love not to be mutual? . . . No wife can cultivate the self-subjection intended by the Lord without this intelligent and purposeful love. When Paul asks for her self-subjection he asks for it as the outstanding evidence of her love. Without the presence of this conclusive evidence no wife “loves” her husband with true Christian intelligence and purposefulness.[19]

Additionally, many teach that women respond to love, that if a man loves and cherishes his wife, he can be assured she will love him in return. While that’s true, men also respond to love. While the world says, “For men it’s always just about sex,” that is not true. Men do respond to affection. We will examine “love” in greater detail in our study of the husband (v. 25), but the idea here in Titus is that the wife is to be totally devoted to her husband and children. If that is not the desire of a young lady who is contemplating marriage, she is not ready for marriage. This is another example of the importance of adequate premarital counsel. As we’ll study in a moment, there are some tremendous applications of this principle.

Third, the older women also teach the younger women to be “discreet.” The Greek here is sōphron and is actually the root of sōphronizō, which we noted earlier. For Paul to repeat a principle underscores how vitally important it is. Sōphron conveys several things: “to be rational, prudent, restrained, and disciplined.” So, “discreet” doesn’t mean a woman must act dead, or act like a “zombie.” But neither does this mean she is a giddy teenager. She is to be restrained and disciplined in every area of life.

Fourth, the older women also teach the younger women to be “chaste” (hagnos), which Peter used in I Peter 3:2. This, of course, means “pure.” One of the most important, if not the most important, thing a young lady (or young man, for that matter) can learn is to remain pure. Success or failure in a marriage often hinges on this. If a person remains pure before marriage, he or she will better understand “the covenant of companionship” that marriage is. But if one is impure before marriage, there is a greater chance that he or she will be impure after marriage. Fidelity is non-existent in many marriages today because of the sexual attitudes that were held before marriage.

Fifth, the older women also teach the younger women to be “good.” Why would Paul insert this after “chaste?” Isn’t chaste enough? As in 4:29, the Greek behind “good” is agathos, which has a wide range of meanings, including: benevolent, profitable, useful, beneficial, excellent, virtuous (which is outlined in detail in Prov. 31:10-31), and suitable. This is certainly the picture of the godly wife.

Sixth, the older women are to teach the younger women to be “subject to their own husbands” (literally translated, hupotassō). As we’ve already studied, this does not mean “obey;” rather it means the wife is to willfully place herself under the spiritual leadership of her husband.

Seventh and finally, Paul tells Titus that the older women are to teach the younger women to be “keepers at home.” There is, of course, great debate over this clause, which is a single word in the Greek. Added to the debate is the fact that the two Greek texts of the New Testament don’t agree. The Critical Text (on which most modern translations are based) reads oikourgous (plural of oikourgos), which is comprised of oikos (“house, dwelling place, home”) and ergon (“work, employment”). If this is the correct reading, the idea is, as John MacArthur puts it, “A woman is to be employed in the assigned task of working at home.”[20] The Textus Receptus (Traditional Text or Majority Text), however, uses oikouros, which is comprised not only of oikos, but this time ouros (instead of ergon), which means, as Greek scholar Spiros Zodhiates puts it, “a keeper, one who looks after domestic affairs with prudence and care.”[21] Another writer adds this thought: “It is possible to disobey God through neglect of the dishes.”[22]

While I support the Traditional Text, in either case the idea is basically the same—the wife is dedicated to being a homemaker. Of course, that idea enrages some women, who fling accusations such as, “This keeps women down, enslaves them, sentences them to mediocre existence that robs them of their potential.” Well, I’ve talked to many homemakers and I’ve yet to hear such a view. God’s design is for them to dedicate themselves to the home. May we not even use the term “housewife,” a term that makes it sound like a woman is married to a house. Rather, a woman is to be a “homemaker” (or as some prefer, Domestic Engineer). She makes a warm nest for her family.

So, as one commentator puts it, “The devoted wife and mother finds her absorbing interest in the innumerable duties of the home.”[23] As another writes, “The young women are urged to take care of the home as their first responsibility.”[24] Paul conveys the same idea in I Timothy 5:14: “I will therefore that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the house.” The Greek behind “guide the house” is oikodespoteō, which again is comprised of oikos and then despoteō (English “despot”), which means master or ruler of the house. Since the New Testament, however, makes it clear that the husband is the head of the home, this word pictures managing or guiding (AV) the home.

While there is a lot of debate about this issue nowadays, and we could go deeper, if we simply follow the language of the New Testament, questions will answer themselves. When we just read the text of God’s Word, and when we define our biblical priorities and desires, this issue will no longer be an issue.

I Corinthians 11:3-12

Space does not permit us to quote this passage, so the reader is urged to read it before continuing. The passage emphasizes that the man is the head of the wife and that a symbol of this fact was the women’s wearing a head covering. This covering was not a bonnet or other little head covering, as some churches practice today, rather a veil that covered the entire face except for the eyes. The practice followed by some churches today misses the entire Biblical and historical significance.

As we saw in a previous study, the Greek philosophy of marriage was totally perverted. Additionally, there was quite a women’s liberation movement. Women did the same jobs as men, and they looked and acted like men. One evidence of this was that they took off their veils. The feminists took them off as a protest and the prostitutes took them off to advertise. Christian women were lured into this practice, so Paul admonished them that the veil was a symbol of their submission to their husbands. This does not mean women should wear a veil today because this practice was a cultural one. As Paul says, a women’s long hair and her demeanor can accomplish exactly the same thing, as he makes crystal clear in verse 15: “But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.” His emphasis is that the man is to do what he was designed to do, the woman is to do what she was designed to do, and never the twain should meet!

We have that same “liberation spirit” today. In the September 28, 1987 issue of the Denver Post there appeared an article by Cal Thomas, a Christian broadcaster and journalist. Thomas brought out the fact of how Virginia senator Paul Trible was severely criticized (by the liberal news media, of course) for not seeking re-election in order to spend more time with his family. Thomas also referred to how Margaret Dole “sent shock waves through the ranks of the ‘remolders’ of America” when she resigned her position as Transportation secretary to help her husband in his bid for the presidency. Things were said about Mrs. Dole such as, she “sold out” by “forsaking” the cause of women achievers. How troubling that is! Thomas summed up the matter this way:

The comments about Trible and Mrs. Dole reinforce the idea that materialism has become malignant in our culture. Things, goals, careers are more important than wife, husband, family, and children.

Well said. Tragically, countless Christian women have joined the ranks! Christians today are quick to say they don’t believe in women’s liberation, but as far as practical application is concerned they actually do believe in it. What are the values and goals in our homes? What is really important to us?

This brings us to our last Scripture reference, one that truly wraps up this whole issue.

Proverbs 31:10-31

This passage is actually an “acrostic” poem. Each of the twenty-two verses begins with a consecutive letter of the twenty-two letter Hebrew alphabet. This was a common format of Hebrew poetry. What’s more, it was an excellent memory tool. Solomon would have been familiar with this tool since his father had used it in some of his Psalms, most notably Psalm 119, which has 176 verses divided into 22 eight verse sections, with each section beginning with a consecutive Hebrew letter. While Solomon’s own married life was in a sad condition by the time he wrote this passage in Proverbs, he probably hoped that many people would memorize the poem and apply it to their marriages.

This passage paints a beautiful portrait of the godly, capable, “Biblically liberated” wife. Here we read precisely what the truly godly woman is. No Christian woman need ever feel “stifled” or useless in view of God’s picture here. He clearly describes what the women’s true “career” is supposed to be. Let us note ten specific characteristics of the Virtuous Woman.

Her Worth (v. 10)

Who can find a virtuous woman? for her price is far above rubies.

The Hebrew for virtuous is chayil (khah-yil) and ironically is a masculine noun and means strength, force, wealth, and an army. Its basic idea, therefore, is strength and influence, so the picture of this type of women is one of strong moral character and a woman who influences others by that character.

The words who can find do not imply that such a woman does not exist, but rather that such a woman is, indeed, quite rare and of tremendous value. How true that is! The picture painted in this passage is one that fits few and fewer women today, including Christians. How many women have such character and positive influence on other women? Most have been so affected by the world that the things spoken of here are either worthless or at least worth less than what the world says is true womanhood. This should become clearer as we progress.

The best Biblical example of this virtuous woman is Ruth. While there are many wonderful women in Scripture, Ruth is actually the only one who is referred to as a virtuous woman. For her to end up in the royal line of Christ (Matt. 1:5) is all the more amazing. To describe her, Boaz said, “And now, my daughter, fear not; I will do to thee all that thou requirest: for all the city of my people doth know that thou art a virtuous woman” (Ruth 3:11). Here was a pagan woman who, unlike her sister who returned to the “nature-gods” of Moab after both their husbands died, instead not only turned to the only true and living God but also went with the people of God when they returned to Bethlehem. No example of commitment is more graphic in Scripture than Ruth’s own words: “Entreat me not to leave thee, or to return from following after thee: for whither thou goest, I will go; and where thou lodgest, I will lodge: thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God” (1:16). While that verse is oddly quoted at many Christian weddings, it has nothing to do marriage, rather with total commitment to God.

Solomon estimates the worth of such a woman as far above rubies. While rubies are far more precious than diamonds, Solomon says this woman is far more precious than even the rubies. Today rubies are more useful than even in Solomon’s day, as they are used in watches, scientific equipment, and ruby lasers. What we would call in our day “the high maintenance woman” is one who wants rubies, but Solomon tells us that the Virtuous Woman is already worth more than rubies.

Her Honesty (v. 11)

The heart of her husband doth safely trust in her, so that he shall have no need of spoil.

Here is a woman a husband can safely trust. In ancient times, it was common for a husband to lock up valuables so that a distrusted wife could not access them. Sound familiar? Today we have a variation of that called “a prenuptial agreement.” But this woman can be trusted implicitly. He will have no need of spoil, which means “lacking nothing of value.” He won’t have to work sixty hours a week to supply the money she squanders. He can, in fact, as we’ll see, even trust her with the household management, knowing that she will not waste money and that she will use it wisely.

There’s little doubt that Solomon couldn’t have found one woman among his hundreds of wives that he could trust in this way. On the other hand, what else could he expect? He was not devoted to one wife, so why would any of them be devoted to him? Godly marriage is based upon complete commitment and total trust.