If you will go to these links at BLB: Luke 10:17-20 and Eph 5:24 and scroll down, you will see that the form of hupotasso is exactly the same in Luke 17, 20, and Ephesians 5:24. ὑποτάσσεται=hupotassetai.
If you scroll down further, you will see the parsing of the verb under “Tense” and all three cases are identified as the PASSIVE voice. I also checked the interlinear at: www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/Greek_Index.htm
and interlinearbible.org/ephesians/5.htm They all identify these instances of “subjection” as passive voice where the subject receives the action without volition/will on the part of the subject. (Contrast with Romans 13:1,5 “ Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities.1 … 5 Therefore you must be subject, not only because of wrath but also for conscience’ sake.” – for example- where the hupotasso is middle imperative. “Voluntary self-instigated yielding” would be an appropriate understanding here.)
Though on the surface it’s a shocking parallel, I think the submission of the devils to the apostles actually provides a great deal of insight as to the nature of the submission of wife to husband. Contra many egalitarians who frame the wifely subjection of Eph. 5:24 as “voluntary, self-instigated yielding”, think about this. Do these devils have any will in their submission? Do they choose their submission? Can they decide not to submit? No, they are in subjection without any volition/will on their part. Their subjection is not a “command” that they must “obey”; their subjection their state of being, which they cannot resist even if they wanted to.
Likewise, the submission/subjection of the wife in Ephesians 5 as well as in 1 Peter 3 is stated with verbs using the passive voice. This suggests that a wife’s submission/subjection is descriptive rather than prescriptive. Its not a COMMAND, its her state of being which she cannot resist even if she wanted to.
I suggest that the passive voice of hupotasso is evidence that biblical teaching about wifely subjection is not a command to women. Commands are in the imperative. (eg. verse 25 directed to HUSBANDS is in the imperative love-agapete) . Rather this submission is a state of being and a response. Much like a garden passively receives watering, nourishing, cherishing,. The garden is SUBJECT TO the gardener. If tending, nourishing, cherishing, is neglected, the garden wilts and dies.
I suggest that the statement in Ephesians 5:24 should not make wives sweat at all. Rather, husbands should be sweating. She has no power nor control to resist. When she marries, her husband holds her heart in his hands. Will he be harsh and trample her under his feet? crushing her spirit? or will he be like Christ and minister LIFE?
And a husband has a particular power and influence upon a wife that may not go “vice versa” because she is uniquely “subject to” (being harmed by?) him moreso than he to her. John Gottman observed this in his marriage laboratory (see “Addendum: The Scientific support for “wives are subject“). This view also makes sense of the instruction to wives that they need to PHOBEO their husbands (Eph 5:33).
IMO, Egalitarians err in teaching “mutual submission” from Ephesians 5:21 while ignoring the elephant in the room of Ephesians 5:24 which addresses ONLY the wife’s subjection and says it is in EVERYTHING, with no corresponding description of the husband’s subjection anywhere.
How do I KNOW that wives being subject to husbands in EVERYTHING cannot be understood as Paul/God commanding wives to “be submissive in EVERYTHING”? It contradicts his teaching in the immediate context as well as much biblical teaching everywhere. Obviously, God does not want wives behaving submissively when their husbands are partaking in various sins: Eph 5:3-11. But Ephesians 5:24 does not qualify her subjection, something like this: “you must be submissive in EVERYTHING, EXCEPT FOR…”.
No. EVERYTHING MEANS EVERYTHING!
Understanding it as her condition, her “state of subjection” rather than a command for a certain behavior resolves the conflict. Mutual subjection is also a condition rather than a certain behavior. Although I think a marriage might work well where there is “mutual submission” going on with the couple taking turns voluntarily yielding to one another, I don’t think that is what Paul means when he mentions “being subject to one another” in Eph 5:21. I think he is talking about a body dynamic wherein each part effects the other parts (link).
Oh, and I know from personal experience from the bad years when I believed the lie that I was commanded and obligated to “be submissive to my husband IN EVERYTHING” (as so many versions mistakenly render Eph 5:24- see http://bible.cc/ephesians/5-24.htm) that it’s impossible the way translators have rendered it and teachers teach it!
Even if it is not “sin” he was demanding, it was quite literally IMPOSSIBLE to be submissive to him in everything! Often I would find myself dealing with conflicting demands from my husband, to be in two different places at once, for example. Neither demand would require me to “sin” but it was physically impossible to “submit to” both. see Ephesians 5: Do you submit to your husband in EVERYTHING? OR are you SUBJECT to him in EVERYTHING?
Charis, I am a reader here and not a commenter but I have been following the hard work that you have done here and your comments on other sites such as CBE. I read today on Kyria website this article http://www.kyria.com/topics/marriagefamily/marriage/spirituality/7m1066.html and wonder what if anything is worth saying there, as many self proclaimed Christian women read the articles on that site. I have almost stopped reading many websites because of their insistence on retaining the patriarchy without any examination whatsoever and you definitely are my hero/expert on this topic. God bless you and the work you have and are doing to uncover the truth of God’s love for all of us.
Hi Keetcha,
I recognize you from your “Likes” which I have often seen in the e-mail box. So glad that the things which I learned the really long hard painful way have helped! That’s why I do this. I hope to save others from suffering under a doctrine which is a ball and chain. It grieves me to think that people are trapped in such bondage.
Thanks so much for the encouragement. Lately I have been discouraged, feeling like a voice crying in the wilderness.
Love, Charis
Hey Keetcha,
I left the following reply on the post you linked:
Here’s a post on Myth Busting: The Bible does not Teach that “the husband is the head of the household”!
Hi Charis,
Your response is brilliant! You are so thoroughly versed on this issue it is comforting and refreshing to read your posts. It is indeed a bondage that infuriates me to no end, but I haven’t the savvy on the subject that you have earned through so much hard work. It does give me great joy however, to read your posts and so I “like” them!
Although I am one of the lucky few who do not have a husband who thinks/believes this nonsense it is nevertheless encountered regularly in the real world of mainstream Christianity whether Catholic or Protestant or other. I instinctively found my way to reading on this subject after a sad series of Christian Marriage counseling sessions which seemed to me to be off in this department and hurt me a great deal as a result. And so I have been learning about the word and how it has been twisted to control women, and many other people (example LGBT Christians). It has been an eye-opening journey to discover the true light of Christ’s love is not about lording it over us as much as it is about lifting us up and loving each and every single one of us. Not because we deserve it but because He IS love.
Continued blessings to you Charis in your continued endeavour to reach those who need a bit (or a lot) of eye opening. I look forward to continuing in reading your enlightening discoveries.
Love,
Keetcha
Charis I’m enjoying your posts. I have to come back tomorrow and finish reading. Great writing.
Thanks Matt, and welcome!
I got a chuckle out of the thought that you will “finish reading tomorrow”. I have so much material. But I am glad you are enjoying and I hope you find some bits of insight here and there… I’m encouraged that you started here at “irresistible submission”. Seems a very very difficult concept for most to understand, though its clear as day to me.
I visited your new blog and it looks like noble effort to “encourage and enlighten one another in Christ regarding marriage”.