Church: Reformed Baptist Church of Franconia | Text: Colossians 3:18-19 | Date: May 9, 2021 | Speaker: Fred Zaspel

All right, we are continuing in Colossians chapter 3. Why don’t we begin with a word of prayer?

Our Father, we are grateful for the opportunity to be back. We’re grateful for the privilege of meeting together around your word. We’re thankful for the treasure that your word is. We pray that you will enlighten our minds and our hearts to it today, particularly now today with regard to husbands and wives. In this passage in Colossians, we pray that you would make us the kinds of husbands and wives that you’ve called us to be in Christ. In his name we pray, amen.

All right, by way of reminder, it’s been quite a while. Paul developed some doctrinal themes in chapters one and two that were important in combating the Colossian heresies that were there in the church. And he had the great emphasis on the sufficiency of Christ—that Christ is enough; we don’t need anything to be added to that in whatever details they had in that particular situation. We get to chapter three, and he turns to some practical applications of that. What does it look like to be a Christian?

And he starts out in verses one to four, laying the groundwork or providing the framework or the broad theological setting for the exhortations that will follow throughout chapter three, even into chapter four. Then there are a number of commands that he gives: behave this way, behave this way, don’t behave that way. Act like this, not like that—a lot of commands. But he lays the foundation for that in verses 1 to 4, showing that we have both died and have been raised with Christ. The old life is gone, the new life has come, we’re united to Christ, and we have Christ himself enabling us by his Spirit to live for him in the way that he has called us to do.

Now there are reminders of that all through the passage, as I pointed out the last couple of times. But that’s the framework he wants to start out with as well, to show that what God commands, he provides. He gives the enablement to do whatever it is he has commanded. So in any of these commands that we come across now, and today with regard to husbands and wives, we cannot say, “I can’t.” What we must say is, “I can because Christ has enabled me to do this, and I must strive to be what I am in Christ.”

So verses 5 and following then, he begins with these specific applications of the old man and the new man—what the old one was like and what the new one now is like in Christ. We’ve seen the various areas of application. Today we come to the home and the workplace: chapter 3, verse 18, through chapter 4 and verse 1. How about someone read that passage for us so I can save my voice a little? Chapter 3, verse 18, through chapter 4 and verse 1.

[Scripture Reading]

All right. If we have died with Christ, if the old self has been put off, and we have become new creatures in Christ—that’s what he’s told us now so far—the question here is: how will that show itself in the home? And so he deals with husbands, wives, parents, masters, and slaves. Today we’ll look at probably just the first of these.

There are three pairs of relationships that he specifies here: husbands and wives, and then children and parents, and then masters and slaves. It may seem odd to include masters and slaves in a home setting like this, but in their world, slaves were often an integral part of the home. Luther famously—Martin Luther, the reformer—famously named this the Haustafeln. That is the household table, or the household code, or something like that, that here Paul outlines for us: the code for living in the home.

What’s interesting, I think, by way of some background here historically, is that that household code—household code, I’m having trouble with that—the Haustafeln has some background behind Paul as well. It wasn’t waiting for Luther to do that. There were, as far back as Aristotle, the Greek philosophers—the Jews picked it up as well, Philo and some others—household codes. Here are some directions as to how to live. And in a broad sense, Paul is picking that up here, which is somewhat familiar to the people, I imagine, to some degree. But there are some striking differences between the way Paul outlines and states this household code.

Why am I having so much trouble saying that? The way Paul states this code is very different in some important ways from the way that both the Greeks and the Jews did it in their outlining it. Let me mention a couple.

One—this is very important—all of these relationships in these three areas that I’ve mentioned, all of these relationships in Paul are governed by the lordship of Christ. That theme overrides the passage. All of these relationships are governed by the lordship of Christ. So, verse 18: “Wives, submit to your husbands as is fitting in the Lord.” We’ll explore that a little bit more. Verse 20: “Children, obey your parents in everything, for this pleases the Lord.” Notice his framework for it. You’re Christians now; we live unto Christ. And so all of these relationships are shaped by the lordship of Christ.

Then verses 22 and following with masters and servants: “Bondservants, obey in everything those who are your earthly masters, not by way of eye-service as people-pleasers, but with sincerity of heart, fearing the Lord. Whatever you do, work heartily,” here it is again, “as for the Lord and not for men, knowing that from the Lord you will receive the inheritance as your reward. You are serving the Lord Christ, for the wrongdoer will be paid back for the wrong he has done.” And then with masters also: “Masters, treat your bondservants justly and fairly, knowing that you also have a master in heaven.”

So this idea of the lordship of Christ is closely bound over all of these relationships. So there may be a broad way in which Paul is reflecting the code—household code of his day—but there is just the striking difference that this one now is distinctively Christianized. The motivation in each of these relationships is distinctly Christian. Do this as unto the Lord. It’s Christ being Lord over every area of life.

And then there’s another. Not only are these relationships in Paul’s rendering of the code governed by the lordship of Christ, but also the one in authority—and this is very distinctive as well—the one in authority must show concern for those under their care. The one in authority must show concern for those under their care. Now that is absolutely unprecedented in Paul’s day. Husbands, treat your wives with gentleness, verse 19: “Love your wives, do not be harsh with them.” Parents, treat your children with gentleness also; don’t provoke them. Masters also, chapter 4 and verse 1, treat your slaves fairly.

So we have a distinctly Christian ordering of the home under the lordship of Christ and then also reflecting the Lord Jesus himself in his meekness and his submitting himself to what must be done to serve the interests of his people.

All right, now we have those three pairs of relationships. Today I want to expand a little on the husbands and wives. I’m sure that’s as far as we’ll go today. Let’s look at verses 18 and 19 again. “Wives, submit to your husbands as is fitting in the Lord. Husbands, love your wives and do not be harsh with them.”

All right, let’s start with verse 18. “Wives, submit to your husbands as is fitting in the Lord.” The idea here is plain enough. There’s an ordering in the home. The husband is the leader; the wife willingly follows. And the reason that is given is this is “as is fitting in the Lord.” So she submits to her husband as an expression of her submission to Christ.

Now, when it says “wives, submit yourselves to your husband as is fitting in the Lord,” I think that also restricts the authority that the husband has. He can’t be demanding things that the Lord forbids to be as fitting in the Lord, but she is to submit to him within that framework. And then verse 19: “Husbands, love your wives and do not be harsh with them.” So don’t abuse your position, but in fact show love and concern for those who are under your care.

Now I want to give some general remarks about the husband-wife structure as we find it in scripture.

God’s Will With Regard To The Authority Structure Of The Christian Home Is Clear

Number one—and this has become such a touchy subject with the rise of equal rights and feminism and all, this has become such a touchy subject that we can barely look at it, even in the church, without having to qualify it and back away and be careful. And sometimes those qualifications end up neutralizing the command itself. So I want to start with this.

Number one: God’s will with regard to the authority structure of the Christian home is clear. There’s nothing particularly difficult about this verse, except, of course, implementing it and living by it. But there’s nothing difficult about the verse in terms of understanding it. It’s plain that the husband is to be the leader; the wife is to submit willingly. And in fact, this is not the only place in the scriptures where we find this.

We have it in Ephesians 5 at some length as well. Paul deals with it in Titus chapter 2. We have it in 1 Peter chapter 3, where the apostle Peter gives the illustration of Sarah obeying Abraham and so on. So, I’ll say it again: God’s will with regard to the authority structure in the home is clear.

I say that because it’s often argued that this command, “wives, submit to your husbands,” is just reflecting the culture of Paul’s day. That’s not the culture of our day, and so that no longer applies. Now the arguments for that position get more sophisticated than that, but that in a nutshell is what they are doing. That’s just a cultural matter and it doesn’t apply to us today.

Well, what’s interesting is that consistently in the New Testament, when we find this command given—any restrictions on the roles of women or structuring of the order in both the home and the church—Paul’s reasoning is grounded in creation, not culture. Specifically grounded in creation.

So for example, if you’d like, look at 1 Timothy chapter 2. Now here Paul is speaking in reference to the church. And let me clarify that. This is not a command, when Paul says “wives, submit to your husbands,” that all women should submit to all men. Wives, submit to your husbands. There is one other area of submission demanded, and that is in the church. And here we have it in 1 Timothy chapter 2, verses 12 and 13: “But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.” And notice his explanation: “For”—that is because, here’s my reasoning—”Adam was first formed and then Eve.”

In other words, that Adam was created first and not Eve was not just a coincidence; it was not for nothing. It was not insignificant. It was from the beginning, Paul says, God’s declaration of structure in the home. We’ll see more of that in just a second.

Another passage—we’re running a little short on time; I think I’ll just refer to this. In 1 Corinthians chapter 11, verses 2 to 12, you can glance through that while I’m talking if you would like. 1 Corinthians chapter 11, verses 2 to 12, Paul is giving some instructions specifically there with regard to the wearing of head coverings, which in that culture did reflect submission. And so, should the woman’s head be covered in the church? And he says, yes, it should. You shouldn’t shed that off.

But he gives some explanation for that, if you have it in front of you, 1 Corinthians 11, verse 8: “For”—here we have an explanatory statement again—”man was not made from woman, but woman from man.” So again, just as it was significant that Adam was created first, so also it is significant that Eve came from Adam and not Adam from Eve. It was God’s declaration of structure in the home. Verse 9: “neither was man created for woman, but woman for the man.” He wasn’t created for her; she was created for him. She is to be his “helpmeet,” and that is something that is not said of him. She is to be his helpmeet. She was created for him.

And Paul says all of that has been declared from the beginning. That Adam was created first, that she came from him, not him from her; that she was for him and not him for her—all of that was God’s declaration from the beginning of structure in the home.

Now, there’s more to say on that, and we’ll get there in a second. But this is much to say that God’s instruction is clear. It is not merely culturally bound, but it is grounded in the created order itself. So what Paul gives us here, in effect, actually, in 1 Corinthians 11, is his answer from the scriptures to the argument that, “Oh, that’s just a cultural matter.” Verse 8: Eve was made from Adam. Verse 9: Eve was made for Adam. It’s a created order and purpose.

All right, let’s look at Genesis chapter one. Genesis chapter one, verses 26 and 27. Here we have the account of the creation of the first man and woman, Adam and Eve. They’re not named yet; we’ll wait for chapter two for that. But here’s the account of their creation in brief. Genesis 1:26: “Then God said, let us make man in our image.” What I want you to notice here is the name that God gives for humanity. Note the name that God gives for humanity. “Then God said, let us make man in our image, after our likeness, and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the heavens, and over the livestock, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth. So God created man in his own image. In the image of God, he created him. Male and female, he created them.”

Isn’t that interesting? “Let’s make man male and female.” The name for humanity is “man.” Now, we’ve gotten really shy about that in our day. Even in biblical translations, we have to be careful now to be sensitive. Using this word “man” for humanity, or for men and women both, becomes a touchy thing, but that is what God does here in verses 26 and 27.

Look at chapter 5. Genesis 5, verses 1 and 2: “This is the book of the generations of Adam. When God created man, he made him in the likeness of God. Male and female, he created them. He blessed them and named them man when they were created.” He named them “man” when they were created. So here we have, from the beginning, the use of the word “man” as encompassing humanity, male and female. He makes the distinction, and we’ll talk about that sometime soon. Our next series, I think, in Sunday school is going to be in Genesis. We’ll deal with that then.

But now what’s interesting is in Genesis chapter 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5—Genesis 1 to 5—we have the word “Adam,” the individual man, referred to something like 27 times. And yet in Genesis 1:26 and 27, and here in chapter 5 verses 1 and 2, which kind of brackets the whole passage, we have “man” as humanity, inclusive of man and woman. So throughout we have man as distinct from woman, but on the front end and the back end of the whole passage, we have “man” as representing all of humanity, both male and female. And in fact, it’s explicitly said in verse two of chapter five here: “He named them man.”

Well, from all of that, man’s intended headship in the home is made clear. And in fact, if you’re wondering, if you’d like to look, chapter 3, verse 20, this authority structure is reflected after the fall as well as before the fall. In Genesis chapter 3 and verse 20, Adam named Eve. That’s a function of authority. Parents name their children. You might remember in the book of Daniel, Daniel and his three friends were captured and they were renamed when they got to Babylon. It’s a function of authority. And Adam named Eve as an expression of his authority in the home.

Now I think all of that we have to have in mind when we come to Colossians 3 and verse 18 where Paul tells us, not quite explicitly but undoubtedly tells us, that this command for wives is not a mere cultural matter. This is “as is fitting in the Lord.” This is as is fitting in the Lord.

Now this is where I should stop and make all kinds of applications, and I just don’t have time for it. And it’s Mother’s Day; I’m supposed to be nice to the ladies on Mother’s Day. But ladies, you have to take this seriously. I know it’s been relativized away. And in the debate over the last half century or whatever, there have been some important qualifications that have been brought to the surface that needed to be done. And this is not a call for a domineering husband or anything like that—we’ll talk about that in a second. But the command is pretty clear, isn’t it? That there’s a structure of headship in the home. And that ought to disallow all of the arguing and the fighting and the disputes. This should make some difference in your relations to your husband.

All right, now, my first point was that God’s instruction regarding the authority structure in the home is clear.

Equality And Mutual Dependence Of Man And Woman

Number two: leadership structure in the home must be held in conjunction with the equally clear biblical teaching of the equality and mutual dependence of man and woman. The equality and the mutual dependence of man and woman.

If you’re still in Genesis, look at chapter one again, verses 26 to 28: “Then God said, let us make man in our image after our likeness, and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the heavens, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth. So God created man in his own image. In the image of God, he created him. Male and female, he created them. And God blessed them, and God said to them, be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the heavens, and over everything that moves on the earth.”

So again, they’re both named “man,” and yet, they are both made in God’s image equally, and they are both commanded to have dominion over the earth. They share this what’s called the creation mandate. So there is a structure of authority, and yet there’s an equality and even a mutual dependence.

Well, why don’t we go ahead and look at that. 1 Corinthians chapter 11 again. Here the idea of mutual dependence of man and woman is stressed. 1 Corinthians 11, verse 8 again: “For man was not made from woman, nor woman from man. Neither was man created for the woman, but woman for the man.” There’s the structure and ordering, the authority in the home. But then verses 11 and 12: “Nevertheless, in the Lord, woman is not independent of man, nor man of woman.” Then he goes on to explain why. So here we have mutual dependence and equality within the structuring of order with the man leading the home.

Now, it is extremely important to hold all of this together. All of it. In today’s—our society’s thinking—equality means sameness. To be equal, they must be the same. That’s today’s thinking, so much so that today we scarcely know the difference between man and woman. We minimize, even deny, the unique significance of maleness, of femaleness. In fact, it’s interesting that in the feminist literature that is published and cranked out all the time, you never find an attempt to define: “Okay, what is it to be a man? What is it to be a woman? What’s the difference?” Even if you want to be a trans, what is it now to be a woman? Is it just the clothes you wear?

Now, if we don’t know—if we don’t know the difference between man and woman, then we’ve got no category at all for leadership and submission within a relationship of equality. That’s just too much. We’ve got no category for that if we don’t know the difference between man and woman in the first place, and that’s where our society is. And by contrast, the Bible gives us just the beauty of both manhood and womanhood in complementary harmony—not with an “i,” but an “e.” Complementary harmony, where each complements the other. So we have man and woman equal in value, equal in dignity, equal in standing before God, but just different in their God-given roles in the home and in the church.

That’s not anti-woman. It’s not seeking power for men. It’s simply seeking the fulfillment of how God created us as male and female in the home. Also, I should note, this is not a question really of what a woman can or cannot do. And I offer for an example with that is Proverbs chapter 31 that we looked at, I guess it was late last year in our Proverbs discussions, where we had one Sunday morning given to Proverbs 31 and the valiant wife. The question is not what a woman is able or allowed to do or not to do. There in Proverbs chapter 31, we had the woman who is amazingly industrious, seemed to carry on a couple of side businesses as well as so industrious in the home and so on. And it’s in fact a model of contemporary womanhood that I think any contemporary woman would have a difficulty keeping up with. So the point is not what a woman can or cannot do. The problem is just her role with regard to her husband and how she relates to him.

And in that regard, I don’t know that I’ve read anything better in that regard that illustrates the difference than this piece from John Piper in his book, What’s the Difference?, dealing with manhood and womanhood:

“When I was a boy growing up in Greenville, South Carolina, my father was away from home about two-thirds of every year. While he preached across the country, we prayed—my mother and my older sister and I. What I learned in those days was that my mother was omnicompetent. She handled the finances, paid all the bills, dealing with the bank and the creditors. She once ran a little laundry business on the side. She was active on the park board, served as superintendent of the intermediate department of our Southern Baptist Church, managed some real estate holdings. She taught me how to cut the grass, splice electric cord and pull Bermuda grass by the roots and paint the eaves and shine the dining room table with a chamois and drive a car and keep French fries from getting soggy in the cooking oil. She helped me with the maps and geography, showed me how to do a bibliography and work up a science project on static electricity and believe that algebra II was possible. She dealt with the contractors when we added a basement and more than once put her hand to the shovel. It never occurred to me that there was anything she couldn’t do.

I heard one time that women don’t sweat, they glow. Not true. My mother sweated. It would drip off the end of her long, sharp nose. Sometimes she would blow it off when her hands were pushing the wheelbarrow full of peat moss, or she would wipe it with her sleeve between strokes of a swing blade. My mother was strong. I can remember her arms even today, 30 years later—they were big, and in the summertime they were bronze. But it never occurred to me to think of my mother and my father in the same category. Both were strong. Both were bright. Both were kind. Both would kiss me and both would spank me. Both were good with words. Both prayed with fervor and loved the Bible. But unmistakably, my father was a man and my mother was a woman. They knew it and I knew it.

And it was not mainly a biological fact. It was a matter of personhood and relational dynamics. When my father came home, he was clearly the head of the house. He led in prayer at the table. He called the family together for devotions. He got us to Sunday school and worship. He drove the car. He guided the family to where we would sit. He made the decisions to go to Howard Johnson’s for lunch. He led us to the table. He called for the waitress. He paid the check. He was the one we knew we would reckon with if we broke any family rule or were disrespectful to mother. These were the happiest times for mother. How she rejoiced to have daddy home. She loved his leadership. Later, I learned that the Bible calls this submission.

But since my father was gone most of the time, mother used to do most of those leadership things too. So it never occurred to me that leadership and submission had anything to do with superiority or inferiority. It didn’t have to do with muscles and skills either. It was not a matter of capabilities or competencies. It had to do with something I could never have explained as a child and I have been a long time in coming to understand it as part of God’s great goodness in creating us male and female. It had to do with something very deep. I know that the specific rhythm of life that was in our home is not the only good one, but there were dimensions of reality and goodness in it that ought to be there in every home. Indeed, they ought to be there in varying ways in all mature relationships between men and women. I say ought to be there because I now see that they were rooted in God. Over the years, I’ve come to see from scriptures and from life that manhood and womanhood are the beautiful handiwork of a good and loving God; he designed our differences and they are profound. They are not mere physiological prerequisites for sexual union. They go to the root of our personhood. This essay is an attempt to define some of those differences as God wills them to be according to the Bible.”

And he goes on then through the rest of the small book. I thought it was a marvelous way of stating it. All right, I have to hurry here.

The Husband’s Position Of Authority Is Significantly Tempered

My third observation here: the husband’s position of authority in Paul’s teaching here is significantly tempered by the corresponding obligation to love your wife and do not be harsh. The husband’s position of authority is significantly tempered by the corresponding obligation to love and not be harsh.

So don’t abuse your position. Don’t use it selfishly. On the one hand, that’s reflective of the male’s superior physical strength. Don’t abuse that. But it’s also reflective of the mutual dignity and the mutual equality of those created in God’s image. And of course, Paul picks that up at further length in Ephesians chapter 5, where he tells the men to love their wives as Christ loved the church. Always for the good of his people, exercising his authority to their good, always.

It seems to me it would be a rare woman who could not follow a love like that. I’ve often said to men, you cannot get your wife to submit by demanding it, but you might love it out of her. And I think if we would learn to love our wives as Christ loved the church, then I think the submission responsibility on the other side would come much more easily.

Well, it was common in the Greek world behind Paul, and even in the Jewish world behind Paul, to command the women to submit. But there was never anything like this. This was revolutionary: use your authority for her good.

Next time, then, we’ll look at parents and children, and then masters and slaves. We’ve got time for a question or two, if you have any. Yes.