PART 3 STUDY GUIDE - AZ · battle between wisdom and folly within humankind. The Essenes—known as the authors of the Dead Sea or Qumran Cave Scrolls, the contents of which were

STUDY GUIDEPART 3

2

August 19 / Week 31Be Filled with the Spirit

August 26 / Week 32Spirit-Filled Marriage, Part 1 (Wives)

September 2 / Week 33Spirit-Filled Marriage, Part 2 (Husbands)

September 9 / Week 34Spirit-Filled Marriage, Part 3 (Christ & Church)

September 16 / Week 35Spirit-Filled Parents & Kids

September 23 / Week 36Spirit-Filled Work

September 30 / Week 37Spiritual Warfare

October 7 / Week 38Spiritual Armor

October 14 / Week 39Spiritual Impact

October 21 / Week 40Conclusion & Review

SERMON ORDER(EPH., PT. 3)

3

WEEK 31

BE FILLED WITH THE SPIRITEPHESIANS 5:17–21

THESPIRIT-FILLED LIFE

17Therefore do not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is. 18And do not get drunk with wine, for that is debauchery, but be filled with the Spirit, 19addressing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody to the Lord with your heart, 20giving thanks always and for everything to God the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, 21submitting to one another out of reverence for Christ.

4

STUDY THE TEXT

1) In this week’s five-verse section, we find ourselves at a nice transition between where we left off in Week 30 at the end of the last study guide and what we will get into beginning in Ephesians 5:22 next week. To briefly recap, if we slice the body of Paul’s letter into two main sections, an approach we indicated in Study Guide 1, Week 1, Study the Text #1.2, we have the first part spanning 1:3–3:21, broadly covering the significance of Christ, and the second part from 4:1–6:20 as essentially describing how Christians should live in light of such truths (not to say that there is not any overlap in subject matter). 4:1–16, then, covers what the Church ought to look like as a unified body and how the various gifts given to us by God can make true oneness possible. And then 4:17–5:16, and really through 5:20, picking up on where we are this week, covers what we need to put off from our former way of life and put on instead, as we “(w)alk as children oflight” (5:8).

If you are studying in the ESV or NASB, your Bibles place 5:21 at the end of a long sentence beginning in v. 18. If you are using the NRSV or an NIV printed in 2011 or later, v. 21 is both its own sentence and appears in the section about wives and husbands. While the earliest Greek manuscripts lacked chapter, section, or verse divisions, it is safe to say that the NRSV and NIV (2011) are truer to the original text, on this point anyway; however, v. 21 begins a sentence that continues through v. 24 (for the Greek geeks, this is true in both NA28 and UBS5). This distinction is important, as it shows that v. 21, “Be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ” (NRSV), is an introductory or summary verse for the section continuing all the way through 6:9, and that which we will cover through Week 36—rules for conduct within the family of God. For that reason, we will end with v. 20 this week: “…giving thanks to God the Father at all times and for everything in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.” (NRSV)

There is not any specific question here, but feel free to jot down any notes that help you transition from where we left off in Week 30 to where weare now.

5

2) Backing up to 5:15 and reading through v. 20, we find a series of “not…but” clauses that parallel material Paul used in his earlier letter to the Colossians. Keep a finger in Ephesians 5 and then turn to Colossians chapters 3 and 4 and look at the following pairs: a) Eph. 5:15, Col. 4:5; b) Eph. 5:16, Col. 4:5; c) Eph. 5:19a, Col. 3:16b; d) Eph. 5:19b, Col. 3:16c; and e) Eph. 5:20, Col. 3:17. Make note of the similarities in the space provided below and/or underline them in your Bible. Now flip back first to Eph. 1:6 and write one main purpose of this new community God has formed and then turn to 2:10 and write down another primary purpose. Making a table with two columns labeled with your main purposes from these verses, place the pairs a) through e) above into the column you think is the best fit (some can probably be stretched across two columns). Now, above your two columns, write “wise,” stretching across both. Then, begin a third column with the heading “foolish,” and fill the column with words from Ephesians 5:15–20 that fit that category.

6

3) If you were with us during our series on Proverbs last fall, you might see how Paul’s contrast relates to Proverbs’ wisdom/folly contrast in chapters 4 and 9—two examples that we covered. Paul’s Jewish audience, anyway, was quite familiar with these contrasts. Some Jewish communities in the first century, especially the Essenes, had a tradition of reading these texts in a rather apocalyptic/eschatological fashion, in which they saw a spiritual battle between wisdom and folly within humankind. The Essenes—known as the authors of the Dead Sea or Qumran Cave Scrolls, the contents of which were written before Ephesians—wrote, “Until now, the spirits of truth and injustice feud in the heart of humankind, and they walk in wisdom or in folly” (1QS 4:23–24). Whether or not Paul saw such a spiritual contest at hand, he wrote to an audience understanding the significance of this contrast, using language specifically in v. 15, “Look carefully then how you walk” and in v. 16, “because the days are evil,” in order to give his exhortation in light of an eschatological reality. He was not writing about evil days decades, centuries, or millennia after the time of his first century Asia Minor audience; he was writing for those readers to “(make) the best use of (their) time, because the (current) days are evil.” And we are still in those days. Jesus has yet to return to finish reversing the curse of the fall and making all things new. Though Jesus’ life, death, resurrection, ascension, and exaltation launched this present age of redemption, total restoration has yet to occur (see Rev. 21), so evil is still in our midst. How can we make use of those items under our “wise” columns in order to combat evil?

7

4) As we indicated in the last study guide in Week 20, 4:1 begins what many scholars consider a paraenesis, a type of discourse giving moral advice, though not necessarily signaling that it is in response to any specific vice held among readers. We can see that same Hellenistic/Pauline style here in 5:15–20, which arguably concludes a single paraenesis from 4:1–5:20. With that said, we do not need to assume that Paul’s audience was widely foolish, drunk, and debaucherous. With being drunk specifically, a clear sin, what is important to this text is what it is in contrast with: “be(ing) filled with the Spirit.” This pairing is not without biblical precedent, as we can see Eli the priest assuming Hannah was drunk when she was “pouring out (her) soul before the LORD” (1 Sam. 1:12–18), or the crowds assuming the apostles were drunk on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:13). Spirit-filled behavior apparently has the tendency to make onlookers think the Spirit-filled are under the influence of alcohol. But they are indeed intoxicated—they are πληροῦσθε (plērousthe), filled, flooded by, and influenced by the Holy Spirit. Entrants into Christian covenant community (i.e., all of us who have trusted in Christ) receive the Spirit of God as the “seal” and “guarantee of our inheritance” (Eph. 1:13–14), the source of our wisdom (Eph. 1:17), our access to the Father (2:18), our source of power (Eph. 3:16), and our unifier (Eph. 4:3). We are all intoxicated by the third person of the Trinity and ought to live as such.

Like one might hear loud, slurred singing coming from a pub, one should also witness our Holy Spirit intoxication exploding in doxology. And yes, this is in the form of songs of praise and worship in corporate gatherings on Sundays, but the way Christians address one another also serves a didactic or instructive function, which makes sense in the flow of Paul’s argument beginning in v. 15. We are to mind how we walk, and do so wisely, understanding the Lord’s will. As we address one another (v. 19), we encourage one another in these things, in biblical truths.

What scholars consider fragments of hymns are found in the midst of Pauline instructive contexts in places like Philippians 2:5–11 and 1 Timothy 3:16. This does not mean that we must greet one another on the street corner through song. That very well might indicate that alcohol is involved, or at least that we think life is a Broadway musical. But, we indeed should joyfully encourage one another with biblical wisdom and truth about the beauty of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and what he has done for the sake of the cosmos. And surely, we not only address one another, but we sing “to the Lord,” “giving thanks” (vv. 19–20). While our praise and worship are not only through song, and not only in the context of a church service, as our entire lives ought to pour out in doxology through work, friendships, family, etc. (“give thanks always and for everything”), we indeed gather and sing, as we do together each Sunday.

Write down any reflections you have from vv. 17–20 (or 15–20) and anything we have covered here, and then use your pen and journal to express thanks for whatever is on your heart. Then, as a little homework assignment, call, FaceTime, text, PM, DM, or better yet, visit someone you have not spoken to in a several days or longer (a fellow believer, since that is the context here) and encourage them and thank them for some way that the love of Christ

8

and the Father has flowed by the Spirit from them to you. Write down one name, and get in touch with them soon.

9

FOR A DEEPER REFLECTION:

The New Testament is full of clear directions on the subject of establishing and maintaining a close relationship with the Holy Spirit, and our text is one of the most comprehensive, “Be filled with the Spirit.” It is addressed to the whole congregation; to the people as a body and to every single individual in the church. It is not at all that Paul is saying that there are those in the church who are full already and they can switch off at this point because they’ve got it. He is speaking to the most holy members, to the church leaders, and he is directing his exhortation to them too. He is saying this to those who were the founder members of the congregation as much as to the novices. “I want all of you to go on being filled with the Spirit.” That is the thrust of his exhortation.

You will see that this is one of a series of basic principles of conduct which began at the opening of chapter four. In the first three chapters he has expounded a series of doctrinal statements concerning all that God has done. He has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenlies in Christ. Then as a sequel Paul turns to the principles that should mark our conduct. Orthodox belief must lead to godly practice. Orthopraxis follows from orthodoxy. So, Paul tells this congregation to walk worthy of the vocation with which they were called (Ephs. 4:1), and then he exhorts them not to behave as the other Gentiles behave (Ephs. 4:17). He directs them all to be imitators of God (Ephs. 5:1), as dear children. Soon he is going to tell them about distinctive Christian family life, and how they are to work as bosses and workmen, and to be good soldiers of Jesus Christ. This commandment, to be filled with the Spirit, is in this same strain. He is not going into a wholly different realm here and exhorting them to have mystical experiences and euphoria. He is talking about the power that enables the church to face up to the ethical rigours of the Christian life.

Be Filled with the Spirit — Eph. 5:18 (excerpt)1

by Geoff Thomas

1Geoff Thomas, “Be Filled with the Spirit — Eph. 5:18,” Monergism, accessed June 13, 2018, https://www.monergism.com/be-filled-spirit-eph-518.

10

2) Jesus promised to send the Holy Spirit after his ascension to “be with (us) forever” and to “dwell with (us) and be in (us)” (John 14:15–17, cf. Acts 6:7–8). So, when Paul says for his readers to “be filled with the Spirit” in 5:18, he is not suggesting that there is something they must do in order to be filled. But he is demonstrating what being filled ought to look like. Further, as we explored already in Study the Text #4 for this week, the Greek verb Paul used for “be filled” is πληροῦσθε (plērousthe), which is in the second person plural, meaning he is collectively telling the community of believers to be filled with the Spirit. The Holy Spirit, much like Jesus “in our hearts,” is not something to hoard or keep as a private possession. It is a gift given to the Church. With these two things in mind—that the Holy Spirit is a continual, abiding presence, and one that is within the community, not just the individual—imagine with your discussion group what this communal presence of the Spirit should specifically resemble. What have you observed already? What do you hope to see going forward?

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS:1) Paul wrote in Ephesians 5:17 that we are to “not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is.” How can we discern the Lord’s will in community? How do we walk with and shepherd people who have perhaps wrongly discerned what his will is? How can we tell? How do we point that out?

11

SERMON NOTES:

13 13

WEEK 32

SPIRIT-FILLED MARRIAGE, PART 1 (WIVES)EPHESIANS 5:22–24

22Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. 24Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands.

14

STUDY THE TEXT

1) As we noted in Study the Text #1 last week, we are diverting slightly from how the ESV divides the sections here in Ephesians 5, and from how our preaching schedules have been organized (with perhaps some slight variation between congregations), since in this study guide, we are following how the NRSV and NIV (2011) more closely follow the Greek, at least in these verses, by making v. 21 a new sentence placed in the same section as that of the instruction for wives and husbands. Thus, we begin with, “Be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ” (NRSV) as an introductory or summary statement of everything that follows in 5:22–6:9, with instruction for submission within marriages, by children toward parents, and by slaves toward masters—three relationships that existed rather differently in a first century Greco-Roman milieu than they do in the twenty-first century west. So, we will need to lay a little bit of groundwork before getting into each of these relationships—how rules for conduct within the family of God compare and contrast with that of the social situation in which Paul was writing, and what we can take away from such today.

In the first century Greco-Roman world, sets of household codes were in place, such that they saw the role of the community above that of the individual, and the family was seen as the basic social unit in the Roman empire—“family” meaning “extended family” or “household,” including husband, wife, children, slaves, and anyone else living in the household. So, there was an element of fictive kinship, or social ties, not reliant upon marriage or blood. We can see this understanding of family in Acts 16:15, where Lydia and her οἶκόν (oikon), household, were baptized—household likely including slaves or servants as well. We also see this in v. 33, where the Philippian jailer αὐτὸς καὶ οἱ αὐτοῦ (autos kai hoi autou)— “he and his” (ESV adds “all his family, while NASB adds “all his household”)—were baptized (probably the same understanding as 16:15 either way). Unlike in the Christian household, however, a distinction we will cover shortly, the Greco-Roman household existed in a way in which the husband/father had an incredibly authoritarian role. He, and he alone, could legally determine at the birth of a child, whether his own flesh and blood or that of a slave, if that child would remain within his household, be given up for adoption, sold as a slave, etc. Women and children had few legal rights or protections. On top of this, the empire itself was seen as a household, with Caesar as everyone’s father, as well as their savior. Julius Caesar even became posthumously deified by decree in 42 BC, making him Divus Julius (“divine Julius”), and his adopted son, Octavian, became Divi Filius (“son of a god”).

It is within this context that Paul, as well as Peter, borrowed from the rubrics of these household codes, or Haustafeln, a German term coined by Martin Luther, but drastically changed the content in many in their epistles (see Col. 3:18–4:1; Tit. 2:1–10; 1 Pet. 2:13–3:7; and several places throughout 1 Tim.). The New Testament writers were not working outside or beyond their social context or trying to turn it on its head, but they were set on changing the

15

rules in a way that was comprehensible to their audiences. In continuing the tradition of Jesus, as well as the Old Testament, they were set on protecting the weakest and most vulnerable in their communities, which were women, and then children, and then slaves as the lowest of all. Their Haustafeln, in the Christian context, began at the top, with recognizing the true God as Father, rather than Caesar, and Jesus as Son (Eph. 1:3).

It is with this understanding, then, that the household of God is to submit “to one another out of reverence for Christ.” And here, in v. 21, rather than the ESV translation of ὑποτασσόμενοι (hypotassomenoi) as “submitting” or the NRSV’s “be subject,” “subordinate” or “rank under” is probably more appropriate in this context. This is because ὑποτασσόμενοι is a participial form of ὑποτάσσω (hupotassó), a compound of ὑπό (hupo), meaning “under,” and τάσσω (tassó), meaning “to place in a certain order.” So, ὑποτάσσω literally means “place under order.” Granted, none of these terms communicate well in our postmodern culture, but what is important to emphasize here is that Paul was not implying domination and obedience, but rather that one was occupying their proper place in the order of things—that there was proper functioning within the proper order of the family. And what is critical to understand here is that quite unlike in the Greco-Roman context, in the Christian household, proper order is defined by Christ’s self-sacrificing love. Now, we can begin to unpack the relationship between wives and husbands.

Make note of a few differences you see between how family order is defined by our twenty-first century culture and how the modern Christian family ought to function. You may or may not change some of your answers as we move further, but that is fine. Just make your own observations and reflections here.

16

2) In v. 22, wives are told to submit to their husbands as they submit to the Lord. One thing to note first of all, going back to v. 21, is that all believers are commanded to “submit to one another,” whether or not they are in the same household. However, we can also understand this in the context of submitting within the order established by God, and by realizing that each of the relationships Paul gets into is unique. The submission of wife to husband is not at all like that of child to parent or slave to master. In 6:1, children are told to “obey (their) parents,” and in 6:5, slaves are told to “obey (their) earthly masters”—wives are not told to obey their husbands. Further, women are not told to submit to all men, only their husbands. So, this instruction ought not carry over to the workplace, government, etc. While Paul did write in the pastoral epistles and elsewhere (e.g., 1 Tim. 3:1–7; Tit. 1:5–9) on gender roles in church leadership, there is zero reason to conclude from any biblical text that a woman should not be a head of state, CEO, etc., as some have unfortunately taught. God created women and men equally in his image (Gen. 1:26–28); it was only after the fall that the husband “shall rule over” the wife (Gen. 3:16), and even still, this does require inequality. Further, both women and men are equally “heirs according to promise” (Gal. 3:28–29). These biblical understandings are quite unlike that of the Greco-Roman system.

In vv. 23–24, Paul wrote that the “husband is the head (κεφαλὴ— kephalé) of the wife” and drew an analogy to the relationship between Christ and the Church, which he wrote about earlier in the letter in 1:22 and 4:15. Christ is not a tyrant over the Church; rather, he is “its Savior” (5:23) and “gave himself up for her” (5:25). We will get to the obligations of the husband next week, but what should be noted here is that the wife is under the headship of one who loves her sacrificially, has her wellbeing in mind, and would even be willing to die for her. She is not willingly submitting to one who barks orders and might have harmful expectations of her. This is also very much unlike the Greco-Roman marriage. As with any analogy, however, there are limitations. The husband is, in fact, not Christ, and only so many parallels can be drawn. For example, Jesus said, “If you love me, you keep my commandments” (John 14:15). Husbands and wives are both expected to keep Christ’s commandments—husbands are not to come up with their own lists. And it should go without saying that while Christ is to be worshiped, anything remotely resembling such between wife and husband would be blasphemy and idolatry. Again, the point is, there are limitations tothis analogy.

The main takeaway here, and we will get into more over the next two weeks, is that within Christian marriages, wives should be willingly placing themselves under the love, care, affection, and protection of a committed, believing husband she can trust and who has her best interest in mind. There is much more that we could cover here, such as Christian wives married to non-Christian men (1 Cor. 7:13; 1 Pet. 3:1), what warrants biblical divorce (Mt. 19:1–12), or chastity (1 Cor. 7:8–9), but these topics require a separate study in order to do them justice. What Paul was describing in our present text is the ideal Christian marriage, one that all believing married couples should strive for.

17

In the space here, jot down the parallels you see between Ephesians 5:22–24 and Colossians 3:18, 11:3; Titus 2:4–5; and 1 Peter 3:1–6, specifically related to wives. What do, or should, some of these traits look like in today’s Christian household? Think of some specific examples that help illuminate this in your mind.

18


Christ has a spiritual and intangible relationship to the Church, but one that is necessarily lived concretely day to day in the lives of ordinary Christians. This relationship is the norm, the context for all other relationships. So defining is it that the most basic of human relationships, marriage between a man and woman, can on one hand be elevated to describe the relationship between God and his people, and, then recast, on the other hand, spiritually through the language of baptism, salvation, sanctification, and creation.

Further, the salvific and sanctifying work of Christ, particularly in his actions as a servant, an obedient Son, and as the sacrificial victim, provide a new and counter cultural paradigm for the Christian person over against the prevailing paradigm in the world—that of self fulfillment and consumerism. Whereas in the world, relationships may be viewed contractually and for a time—as long as they are fulfilling—in the church relationships are characterized by self-sacrifice, service and grace.

This self sacrifice orients the husband and wife towards each other practically. The husband is commanded to love, to give the gift that is needed most. The wife is commanded to respect and honor, likewise a gift freely given regardless of merit. The wife requires love. The husband requires respect. And so, through the overarching work of Christ, the needs of both are met.

The task is only impossible or restrictive without the aid of Christ, who, in submission to the Father, sacrificed himself for the church. The Christian in first submitting to Christ, is then able to submit, out of love, to others. Without the work of Christ, Ephesians 5:22-33 not only becomes impossible to achieve, it becomes impossible to understand.

Men and women are different from each other. They are ordered differently, they have different world views, different ways of communicating and different means of being. These differences are reflected in Ephesians 5:22-33. While the text contains admonitions—submit, honor, love, sacrifice—it is also descriptive. Homes around the world are ordered and divided along gender lines. But this description, this similarity, cannot be taken for granted.

In my own life, because of the cultural impact this text and the others like it have had, I had to discover the love of God for me as a woman, not the imperfect love of a man for a woman, but the perfect transcending love of God for me as I am in myself. It also meant marrying a man who would

Marriage as a Mystery, Husbands, Wives, Christ and the Church in Ephesians 5:22-33 (excerpt)2

by Anne Kennedy

2 “Anne Kennedy, “Marriage as a Mystery, Husbands, Wives, Christ and the Church in Ephesians 5:22-33,” Preventing Grace with Anne Kennedy, accessed June 13, 2018, http://www.patheos.com/blogs/preventingrace/2006/12/16/marriage-as-a-mystery-husbands-wives-christ-and-the-church-in-ephesians-522-33.

19

share every aspect of himself with me—work, worship, children, the care and upkeep of the household—a man worthy of my respect and honor.

As I considered this text and my own life, I discovered on one hand a need for what is given and commanded. I need a husband who will love me. On the other hand I recognized that this man, whom I love, accepts a less traditional ordering of the home. He participates fully in the life of the household, and I participate fully in the life and work of the church. It is therefore my choice to submit to him in all things. This choice is based on his continual sacrifice of himself for me. These two choices, to submit and to sacrifice, are lived out in the context of daily submission and obedience to Christ, Christ who overpowers and overshadows me with his love.

20

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS:1. To make this question applicable to both the married and unmarried in your discussion group, think of a Christian wife, whether your own mother, grandmother, aunt, friend, mentor, etc. who you think has a firm grasp on this idea of submission, subjection, subordination—however you choose to translate it. What specific qualities does she have that show this?

2. Now for the wives, fiancées, or women who hope to be married someday (this gets women with no intention of marrying for the first time, or again, as well as men off the hook), what two or three qualities do you hope to develop or further develop that could enable you to better live out what Paul was describing here? If it helps, fast-forward to Ephesians 5:33. This is fairly open-ended. We are not suggesting anything here about who the wage earner(s) ought to be, what responsibilities around the home should be, etc. Faithful, Bible-believing folks have diverse and valuable suggestions here. This is just within the context of how your home functions. If something major needs to change, that is worth wise marital counsel. Set up an appointment with your counseling and care pastor soon.

21

SERMON NOTES:

22

WEEK 33

SPIRIT-FILLED MARRIAGE, PART 2 (HUSBANDS)EPHESIANS 5:25–31

25Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, 26that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, 27so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. 28In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, 30because we are members of his body. 31“Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall becomeone flesh.”

23

STUDY THE TEXT

1) An initial observation here should be how much more Paul had to say to husbands than wives, roughly three times more. With a higher ordering, if you will, in the household, comes greater responsibility. And that responsibility includes greater sacrifice. As we noted last week, the analogy between Christ and the Church and the husband and wife is just that, an analogy. It by no means suggests that the husband does for the wife everything that Christ does for the Church in vv. 26–27 (i.e., sanctifying, cleansing, washing, presenting). The husband is not his wife’s savior. But the husband should indeed support and encourage his wife in her Christian walk—or rather their walk, as the husband and wife have become one (Gen. 2:24; Eph. 5:31) and ought to be moving forward together in their journey. Similarly, the wife’s righteous living ought to be a positive influence upon her husband, something we can infer from 1 Corinthians 7:14 (even though Paul is specifically referring to Christian wives and unbelieving husbands).

In reality, either spouse could be more mature in their faith, and that may vary from season to season. What a couple should hope for, however, is a forward-moving trajectory, wherever they are along on their walk, as they support and encourage one another, pray for one another, pray together, study the Scriptures together, raise godly children together, participate in the life of the local church together, serve together, etc. If the husband happens to not be taking a leadership role in this regard, which unfortunately occurs all the time, the wife indeed must still be respectfully alongside her husband, praying for him, raising their children in the Lord, etc., though this is not the ideal case.

Paul’s language here indeed does stress the importance of the husband as the spiritual head, with the greater burden of that sacrificial responsibility. The husband who is not at least aiming to be as Christ is to his bride, the Church, is falling short. If love were a competition, the husband should be striving to outdo the wife—a notion not lacking Pauline precedent: “Outdo one another in showing honor” (Rom. 12:10). The husband absolutely should not see his headship as license to walk in the door after working away from the kids all day, expect to sit down in his easy chair with a beer immediately placed in his hand and a neck massage from his wife, perfectly adorned of course, and who has been on her feet all day. And he certainly should not be doing anything more tyrannical than that. Again, marriage is not a master/slave relationship, and even that has a greater degree of expectation on the master’s part, which we will get to in Week 36. There may be some incredible sacrificial ways that a wife chooses to love her husband, and there ought to be, but a wife should not feel any sense of obligation to meet her husband’s demands.

This section is a little more practical than exegetical in comparison to others, but the topic seems to demand that. Husbands (women and single men

24

can take a break here), surely most of us are at least periodically guilty of wrongly playing the “headship card,” neglecting to follow Christ’s example, as he came “not to be served but to serve” (Mt. 20:28). Instead, what are some ways to honor, serve, and love our wives, not just on birthdays, anniversaries, Mother’s Day, etc., but regularly?

25

2) Taking this idea further in vv. 28–29, Paul wrote that “husbands should love wives as their own bodies”… “(f)or no one ever hated his own flesh,” but he instead “nourishes and cherishes it” the same way Christ does with his own body, the Church. Paul reinforced the notion from 1:22–23 that the body is indeed Christ’s. While he is, of course, ontologically distinct from the Church itself, for we are not pantheists, Paul’s imagery does stress the idea of unity and fidelity. And that same sense of oneness should exist between husband and wife. As Paul wrote to the Philippians to “look not only to (their) own interests, but also to the interests of others” (Phil. 2:4), he extorted his readers to follow Christ’s example as he “made himself nothing, taking the form of servant”…and became “obedient to the point of death” (Phil.2:7–8).

There is one other thing to highlight from this hymn in Philippians in v. 6, where though Christ “was in the form of God, (he) did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped.” Without going into detail, as shelves of books, dissertations, and theological journal articles have been written on this, Christ having been “in the form of God,” refers to his preexistence before being born in Bethlehem (and eternal preexistence, which we can argue from other passages that we will not get into here), and also his equality with God. The former combats an ancient heresy claiming that Christ is a created being (Arianism and its descendants), and the latter claims that Christ is eternally subordinate to the Father, not in his ontology, or being, but within the Trinity’s social dimensions. This latter view is used today by some complementarian scholars to use the Trinity as an analogy for marriage (where the Holy Spirit fits in this is confusing at best). What we should instead understand here, at least for the purpose of relating it to marriage, is that Christ, though equal to the Father from eternity past, willingly “did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped”—he willingly became subject to the will of the Father (see Mt. 26:39). While the ESS (eternal subordination of the Son) camp sees the Father as an analogy for the husband and Christ as an analogy for the wife, at least in terms of subordination (an analogy not found in the Scriptures), in Ephesians, Paul saw Christ as an analogy for the husband, as we have discussed. In Philippians, we see that Christ surrendered his status for the sake of humanity. So here, we can focus on what the husband ought to surrender, not what he ought to claim (e.g., expecting the wife to surrender to his will as the Son surrenders his will to that of the Father).

This may seem like a bit of a detour, and if the Trinitarian debate is over your head or beyond your interest, do not worry about it. The important takeaway, and the reason for briefly mentioning it, is to highlight Christ’s humility, which is what husbands ought to exemplify.

Our question here is for the women, but men should reflect on how women might respond here as well. For those who are wives, how have you felt nourished, cherished, and sacrificed for by your husbands? For women who plan or hope to be married one day, how do you expect to be nourished, cherished, and sacrificed for?

27


A husband is one of God’s greatest inventions, equipped to shine a bright light into God’s world. He is called to illuminate his surroundings. How? By reproducing in his marriage the radiance of God’s own glory.

Few husbands understand the full nature of their calling, instead imagining themselves to be joined to their wives merely for the pleasures of romantic affection, common interests, and raising kids. To a degree this is true, but there is far more to marriage than mutual fulfillment. In the Bible, husbands and wives unite for a purpose beyond themselves: to spread God’s glory in a dark world.

And it’s especially the husband who’s called to stoke that glory.

No Taller OrderTo that end, the apostle Paul issues a remarkable injunction: “Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her” (Eph. 5:25). Husbands are to lavish on their wives the same kind of love Christ lavishes on members of his family, the church.

There could be no taller order.Who can measure the self-giving love of Christ? It spans a gulf infinitely wide, originating in the perfections of heaven and descending to the depravities of Calvary. No wonder Paul prays for strength to comprehend its breadth and length and height and depth (Eph. 3:18). And husbands are uniquely positioned to know, and to enable their wives to know, this matchless love.

Fit Receptacle, Vast ReservoirBut how is it possible to impart so great a love? Not every husband can. But to Christian husbands God gives a special gift. Cleansed of sin by the blood of Jesus, they are made fit receptacles for the indwelling Christ. And when Christ dwells in husbands, he transforms them into his own image, from one stage of glory to the next (2 Cor. 3:18), stamping his love on their hearts (Eph. 3:17). Through the Spirit’s internal work, Christian husbands can draw on the vast reservoir of Christ’s love and pour out that love for their wives.

Three-Stage ProgressionSo what does this love look like? We must take our cue from Jesus himself, whose love unfolds in a three-stage progression.

How the Cross Shapes a Husband’s Love (excerpt)3

by Tim Savage

3 Tim Savage, “How the Cross Shapes a Husband’s Love,” The Gospel Coalition, accessed June 13, 2018, https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/how-to-replicate-cruciform-love-as-a-husband.

28

1. Love looks deeply.First, the love of Christ looks deeply. He examines us with X-ray vision, peering past our outward veneers and into our hearts. There he identifies our greatest problem: in sinful neglect of God, we are separated fromour Maker.

In a similar way, a husband indwelled by Christ can “go to school” regarding his wife, prayerfully asking the Lord to reveal what makes her tick at the profoundest level, what explains her dispositions, what brings her joy, what provokes her sorrow and, above all, what constitutes her deepest need. This is the love of Christ in a husband: it is a love that looks deeply.

2. Love acts quickly.Second, the love of Christ acts quickly. He not only examines our hearts and identifies our needs; he moves promptly to address them. Not regarding equality with God something to grasp for himself, Jesus does just the opposite: he gives himself. In self-emptying love, he serves us at our point of deepest need (Phil. 2:6–7).

Similarly, a husband in whom Christ dwells regards his wife’s needs as more urgent than his own. “I’m going to take care of her concerns before I deal with my own.” “I’m going to put my interests on hold while I attend to hers.” This is the love of Christ in a husband: it is a love that acts quickly.

3. Love empties fully.Third, the love of Christ empties fully. He identifies and addresses our greatest need. But he doesn’t stop there: “By this we know love, that he laid down his life for us” (1 John 3:16). To resolve our greatest need, to redeem us from our sins, the royal King of heaven submits his limbs and heart to be split open on the beams of a despicable cross. He empties himself fully.

For a husband, it’s one thing to see what a wife needs; it’s another thing to do something about it. And it’s quite another to do whatever it takes to resolve her needs, even to the point of laying down his life. This is the love of Christ in a husband: it is a love that empties fully.

To put it succinctly, a Christian husband lays aside his own life in order to pick up his wife’s. He treats hers as though it were his. He makes her life—her needs, her interests, her griefs, her joys—his primary concern.

29

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS:1) The answers to this question might largely only be speculative, or at least anecdotal, but that is okay. The hope here is that it generates good, and perhaps personal, discussion. What functionally happens to a household when the husband refuses to image Christ as he loves the Church? How does this look in households with children? And those without? What are some practical steps such couples can take to move toward Paul’spicture of marriage?

2) How can Christian community surround single women, whether those choosing celibacy, those hoping to one day be married, single mothers, divorced women, and widows? And not in an “I feel sorry for you” way, but in a way that affirms their inherent dignity, worth, and place in the family of God as equal to that of anyone else, whether man or woman? Do any biblical passages come to mind here? Have you seen the Church fall short in this regard? If so, how can we correct this? To ask one more related question, what about married couples without children, whether by choice or as a result of fertility issues? Has the Church also treated them as second-class members? How can such couples be affirmed as well?

30

SERMON NOTES:

31

WEEK 34

SPIRIT-FILLED MARRIAGE, PART 3 (CHRIST & CHURCH)EPHESIANS 5:32–33

32This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church. 33However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.

32

STUDY THE TEXT

1) Paul used μυστήριον (mustérion), “mystery,” for the fifth of six times here in Ephesians (also in 1:9, 3:3, 3:4, 3:9, and 6:19) to refer to the hidden purposes of God. In 3:6, where Paul did not use the word, though it is inferred from 3:4, he wrote that the mystery “is that the Gentiles are fellow heirs,” etc. In both senses, mystery refers to aspects of God’s saving power and the scope of his reconciling work. But even further, in 5:32, the mystery he referred to traces back to his quotation of Genesis 2:24 in the prior verse, Ephesians 5:31. This mystery is not only redemptive in light of Christ’s work after the fall, but it is also creational, before the fall. Hence, long before the New Testament Church came into existence (refer back to Study Guide 2, Week 17, Study the Text #1 for further background on ἐκκλησία [ekklésia] or “church”), God had this relationship in mind as part of his perfect created order. Further, this model of marriage is also established as God’s ideal for any time period. While Paul wrote of this within the first century Greco-Roman milieu and its household codes, the principles he outlined within the rubric are far more ancient and are sustained through our present day and beyond. This is not to say that the Church has always interpreted and applied these principles properly. We still often botch it today, whether we are too fundamentalist or too progressive in our views of marriage, or if we miss the mark somewhere in between. But as we faithfully and prayerfully work out this analogy between Christ and the Church within our own marriages, no matter our unique balances of employment and domestic responsibilities, we can trust that the Holy Spirit will guide us.

Seeing that marriage is an institution established before the fall, unlike other institutions established because of the fall, like the criminal justice system, for example, what further hope can we have for our marriages in light ofthat realization?

33

2) In v. 33, Paul first directly addressed husbands in the second person as ὑμεῖς (humeis), the plural “you,” telling them to love their wives as themselves. The Greek word Paul used for love here is ἀγαπάτω (agapatō), the third person present active imperative verb of the much more familiar noun, ἀγάπη (agapē), which is distinct from στοργή (storgē), or “familial love”; φιλία (philia), or “brotherly love”; and ἔρως (eros), meaning desire or sexual attraction. Aγάπη was apparently coined by the Septuagint, where the word was used to translate instances of the Hebrew word (ahabah) in Song of Solomon (see 2:4, 5, 7; 3:5, 10; 5:8; 7:6; 8:4, 6, 7). In the New Testament, it is used in a sense of self-denying and compassionate devotion—it is the highest conceived form of love. In his first epistle, the Apostle John wrote that “There is no fear in ἀγάπῃ, but perfect ἀγάπη casts out fear” (1 Jn. 4:18). This is the same love John wrote about in what became his most famous verse, where “God so ἠγάπησεv4 the world…” (John 3:16). And this is also the same love we read about two weeks ago when we covered Ephesians 5:25: “Husbands, ἀγαπᾶτε5 your wives, as Christ ἠγάπησεν the church and gave himself up for her.” As we understand love in this self-denying, compassionate devotional sense, we think of Christ and the standard of love that he set.

Thinking about the form of love Paul commanded husbands to have (again, he used an imperative verb), what can we conclude about the level of obligation a husband is to have toward his wife? What does this say about his wedding vow and the commitment he is making to her, in the presence of God, a minister, and his loved ones?

4 ēgapēsen, the third person singular aorist active indicative of ἀγαπάω5 agapate, the second person plural present active imperative of ἀγαπάω

34

3) The wife, on the other hand, is to φοβῆται (phobētai) her husband. From φοβέω (phobeó), φοβῆται has a range of meaning including fear. Wait a second. We just covered where John wrote that “perfect love casts out φόβον (phobon).” And yet the wife is to fear the husband who is to love her with a love that casts out fear? How does this make any sense? The range of meaning for φοβέω also includes “to revere” or “to respect,” much like where Mary proclaimed in her Magnificat, “(The Lord’s) mercy is for those who fear him” (Lk. 1:50). We might recall this as an idea from the Old Testament, in places like Proverbs 1:7, “The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge,” where the Septuagint used φόβος (phóbos) to translate the Hebrew (yirat), also giving a sense of reverence or respect. YHWH, the LORD, is deserving of reverence and respect because he has shown himself worthy of it. Read all of Mary’s Magnificat in Luke 1:46–55 to see why she considered him worthy. Look to Hannah’s prayer as well (1 Sam. 2:1–10), which was echoed in Mary’s. What makes YHWH worthy of reverence? Yes, that includes what he does to his adversaries (1 Sam. 2:10), but what about that which he does for those whom he has covenantally loved (Lk. 1:54–55)? This is the love with which Christ loves the Church. Reverence is due because he is worthy. As we discussed last week, the greater burden of sacrifice is on the husband. This makes him worthy of respect. But it by no means makes him entitled to be a tyrant who circumvents his role in loving, protecting, caring for, sacrificing for, and treasuring his wife. It certainly does not give the husband license to be a terror to his wife, striking fear into her and demanding devotion. Any justification of such notions is an abuse of Scripture and a slap in the face to God’s intended order.

What does this biblical idea of respect look like in today’s marriages? What about when husbands are failing to properly love their wives? How might 1 Corinthians 7:13–16 speak to this?6

6 Please note that by no means is it being suggested here that a woman remain in a dangerous situation—get help; tell someone with your best interest in mind, the authorities if necessary; and get yourself and your children to safety.

36


As the head in the Christian context of the kingdom of God, he should be the first to sacrifice. But I do have a caveat. Every situation is different. If we are talking about where to eat dinner, husbands submit to your wife and sacrifice for her in that way---unless your wife seems to have no concern about pleasing you ever. If she is never willing to sacrifice and submit her own desires to please you, then you have a problem. That doesn’t mean it’s time to “rule over her,” but it probably means it is time for a conversation about how you are to love one another. You don’t demand submission, it is a voluntary gift. Wives, care about where your husband wants to eat too. Don’t take advantage of his being the first to sacrifice. But most of us already know this, right?

In a marriage, decisions are made together.

When it comes to something more substantial, like uprooting the family for a career, both husband and wife should empathize with one another. I do believe the husband is called to sacrifice first for the wife. But the first priority of that sacrifice for his wife is to consider the effects of their deci-sion under the mission of God he is entrusted to for his family. The point of headship is unity. There is a theological mission attached to being the head of the household, and the husband is to tend to this. It is eschatolog-ical. We are moving toward something---our mission to be summed up in Christ’s household, to be sanctified for his purposes, and to reign with him on the new heavens and the new earth. This eschatological goal shapes the mission of the household. This mission needs to reach the next generation and the ones after that. And so the head needs to ensure that our faith is ar-ticulated well, that the members of the household live accordingly, and that it is passed down to the next generation. This is true of the family, and of the household of God, his church.

So there are other factors to consider, such as the condition of their financ-es, is the spouse’s job unbearable, how much time does each spouse have to spend away from the household to earn a living, how it will affect the wellbeing of the rest of the family, or how this career and move supports or sabotages the mission. As the head, the husband bears a responsibility to which the wife should lovingly submit to and not try and sabotage. In a godly marriage, the wife knows how much her husband wants to please her. She knows he’s called to be the first to sacrifice, the first to love. So she shouldn’t manipulate that by her own selfishness.

Does Complementarity Just Boil Down to a Tiebreaker? (excerpt)7

by Aimee Byrd

7 Aimee Byrd, “Does Complementarity Just Boil Down to a Tiebreaker?” Housewife Theologian, accessed June 13, 2018, http://www.alliancenet.org/mos/housewife-theologian/does-complementarity-just-boil-down-to-a-tiebreaker#.WyFRoEiUvIV

37

The thing is, everyone is called to submit in the tiebreakers. A marriage is a unity and decisions are made together. But the special responsibility of the husband as head isn’t about a moment in a tiebreaker decision. As Rob-ert Wall describes, the leader is to continuously “think about the mission, describe it, communicate it, keep it constantly before the group, and develop goals on the basis of it” (Robert Wall with Richard Steele, 1 & 2 Timothy & Titus, 259). This kind of care for the family will nurture mutual submission on all kinds of daily decision-making. And when the big ones come up such as moving for a job, the foundation will be properly laid.

The thing about the tie-breaker argument is that it is over simplifying. Men can exercise their muscle and women can exercise their manipulation, which is precisely why both men and women need to heed the exhortation in Eph. 5. … (T)here will still be serious conflict in both egalitarian and com-plementarian marriages, because we are dealing with sinners after all. But I do hope that in both types of marriages, that will be alleviated by our unity in Christ and our mission to consummate that union.

38

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS:1) We did not cover this in depth in our Study the Text section, but take some time anyway to discuss with others the importance of a married couple establishing themselves as an entity separate from their parents. What exactly does this mean in our context? What does it not mean? Can this instruction vary from culture to culture, depending on how closely connected adult children remain to their parents?

2) Paul did not say that wives should not love their husbands or that husbands should not respect their wives. After all, we as the Church are also to “(L)ove8 the Lord (our) God…” (Mt. 22:37), rather than only receiving love from Christ—though Paul did give specific commands to each party using such terminology. We discussed in the Study the Text section for this week how these two ideas apply between husbands and wives. Discuss with your group how the whole marriage can function rightly, as a loving and respectful unit, when husbands and wives are each following Paul’s commands here. And what can it look like when things are out of place?

8 Ἀγαπήσεις (Agapēseis) is the Greek word used here, which is the second person singular future active indicative of ἀγαπάω.

39

SERMON NOTES:

41

WEEK 35

SPIRIT-FILLED PARENTS & KIDSEPHESIANS 6:1–4

1Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. 2“Honor your father and mother” (this is the first commandment with a promise), 3“that it may go well with you and that you may live long in the land.” 4Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord.

42

STUDY THE TEXT

1) The section Paul began in 5:21, where Christians are to submit “to one another out of reverence for Christ,” continues here in 6:1–4 to show how this proper ordering of the Christian household in the broader Greco-Roman context looks when children are considered. As we went over in Week 32, in the Greco-Roman world, husbands/fathers legally held an incredibly authoritarian role. Wives and children had very few rights, and those were largely determined by the husband. The Church, as a contrast community, does not stand outside the cultural context of the time and place in which it exists, but it certainly is supposed to follow how things have been redefined in a rather profound way, which we saw as we discussed husbands and wives over the course of three weeks.

In 6:1, we immediately see something that stands in contrast to standard Greco-Roman household codes. Children are to obey their parents, both father and mother, while it was otherwise typical for the father to be the one primarily charged with disciplining the child (however, Paul did speak directly to fathers in v. 4). “(I)n the Lord” is also key. While the command is given here to children, Paul implied in v. 1 that parents are to raise their children in the Lord. The discipline and instruction given to children are to be shaped by the teachings and example of Christ—a notion that also countered the Greco-Roman milieu, where children were largely without rights, and parents, namely fathers, could do whatever they wanted, including selling their children. The fact that fathers are even given explicit guidance on their childrearing, especially in v. 4, shows stark contrast from the authoritarian father who reigned supreme in his household.

One further note should be made about children. The Greek word here is τέκνα (tekna), which indeed can be translated as “children,” and works in the immediate context here, but it can also be translated as “descendent” or “offspring,” which helps shed light on the further instruction in vv. 2–33. We will go over that further in #2.

While in the first century Greco-Roman context, Paul’s Christian revision of the household codes gave children greater liberty, in many of our contexts today, the Christian household may be seen as more restrictive than non-Christian households, at least on the surface. But is there a way for us to see that there is still greater freedom for children when they are raised in the Lord? Elaborate on this with some specific ideas. How might the rather famous Proverb (Pr. 22:6) speak to this?

43

2) In vv. 2–3, Paul cited a rendering of the Fifth Commandment that is closer to the Septuagint’s Greek translation of Exodus 20:12 than that of Deuteronomy 5:16, though in both texts, the reader can find that this is the only one of the Ten Commandments that comes with a promise. And this commandment is not one that goes away once a child becomes an adult. While ὑπακούετε (hypakouete), meaning “obey,” refers more specifically to hearkening unto a command, as a child should toward a parent (though not to say that a parent giving guidance to an adult descendent is beyond the context here), τίμα (tima), meaning “honor,” goes even further to ensure that adults are not off the hook. The Greek idea here refers to reverence, and the Hebrew one Paul cited, (kabbêḏ), literally means “to become heavy” or “to make weighty.” There ought to be a tremendous degree of weight to which we give honor to our parents. This same word is used in Proverbs 3:9, where we are told to “Honor the LORD with (our) wealth.”

This inclusion of a monetary situation is also seen in an Essene writing from the Dead Sea Scrolls: “Honor your father in your poverty and your mother in your low estate” (4QInstruction 416). In 1 Timothy 5:4, Paul commanded widows to pay some degree of financial support to their parents, implicitly showing this idea of honor. Jesus made this clearer in Mark 7:9–13, where he cited both Exodus 20:12 and 21:17 and tied it to an understanding of parents being honored by their children who were caring for them financially. However, by declaring what would have otherwise been withheld for their parents as (qārbān or Corban—“dedicated to God”), Jews, adhering to their tradition, could choose to not care for the vulnerable and weak in their midst, which is at the heart of the Mosaic law, by not caring for their aging parents no longer able to provide for themselves.

This is what Paul had in mind as he cited the Fifth Commandment in our present text. Failing to do so, at least under the Old Covenant, came with a curse (see Ex. 21:15, 17), while obeying the command came with a promise (“that your days may be long in the land...” from Ex. 20:12”). In our New Covenant context, while we are redeemed from the curse, as Christ became a curse, we still receive the blessing (Gal. 3:13). As we discussed previously, this promise of land is no longer restricted to a small strip of land east of the Mediterranean; we are heirs of the kingdom, which stretches to the ends of the cosmos. It is not our obedience to this command that gets us “in,” as Christ fulfilled all the law on our behalf; however, this, like any of the commands in Paul’s letter, is a matter of holy living, of living as citizens of heaven unto resurrection life, and as a people striving for unity.

Practically speaking, why is it important for us as adult descendants of our parents to continue to honor them? Why is it important for those of us with children to raise them in the Lord as future adults who will prayerfully one day honor us as well? And how does such not only benefit us (which is not the point here), but also them and the broader Christian community?

44

3) In v. 4, Paul switched his attention to just fathers. As mentioned under #1, Paul already indicated in v. 1 that children are to obey both parents, suggesting that it is not only the fathers who are providing discipline and instruction, unlike in the Greco-Roman household. But here, Paul was further showing how the Christian household was to stand as part of a contrast community over against that of the broader culture. While the Greco-Roman father could legally do whatever he pleased with his children, even get rid of them, the Christian father is not only to show restraint in how he uses his “power,” but he is also to “submit to (them) out of reverence for Christ.” By “submit” here, it means within its proper order. The father is to revere and model Christ, and as such, properly raise his children. Beginning with the negative, Paul exhorted fathers to “not provoke (their) children to anger.” As our heavenly Father, God uses his kindness as he leads his children (Rom. 2:4)—he does not provoke us. Human fathers are to follow the example as they “bring them up in the παιδείᾳ (paideia) and νουθεσίᾳ (nouthesia) of the Lord. The former word, translated in the ESV as “discipline,” comes from the same Greek root from which we get pedagogy and can also mean “training and education of children” or “instruction.” The latter, translated as “instruction,” is probably better translated as “admonition” or “warning.” With both, and in showing our heavenly Father’s kindness, the earthly father is to raise them up alongside his wife.

This command might also be a contrast to what our twenty-first century western parenting often looks like, or at least how it looked more commonly a generation or two ago. This is where the father works long hours while the mother does the vast majority, if not all, of the discipline and instruction of the children. Both biblically speaking and with some practical examples, why is it important for both parents to share in the role of raising up their children in the Lord?

46


God uses three very common relationships in our lives—marriage, family, and work—as laboratories to make us more like himself.

In each of these relationships, we learn a very important quality that defined Jesus, too: submission. When these relationships are focused on the gospel, we submit to one another out of respect for Christ and as a way of serving him.

Paul describes one of these laboratories as the family, where children learn to obey God by obeying their parents: “Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. ‘Honor your father and mother’ (this is the first com-mandment with a promise), ‘that it may go well with you and that you may live long in the land’” (Ephesians 6:1-3 ESV).

“Honor your father and mother” is the fifth commandment, which means it’s right in the middle of the 10. The first four commandments are about our re-lationship to God, and the last five are about our relationship to others. Right in the middle is this commandment, because it joins the rest. It acts as a hinge, reflecting both our relationship to God and our relationship to others.

When we are young, our parents represent the authority of God to us. In a way, they stand in for God for a time. We first learn to obey and submit to God by obeying and submitting to our parents.

That means, for those of you living at home, how you submit to the authority of your mom and dad is how you submit to God.

Parents, this is one of the reasons we take discipline seriously. How our chil-dren learn to respect us and submit to us is how they will learn to submit to God. By the time they leave our homes, they should shift the authority they recognized in us as parents to God. (Of course, it’s also one of the biggest reasons that we shower our children with love and affection—so that our kids don’t grow up imagining God as a divine taskmaster.)

The idea of “standing in for God” as a parent actually brings up a question that I get a lot: What about when you are older? Do you still have to obey your parents?

This is where it helps to understand that parents are only a temporary stand-in for God. They are like the training wheels for learning how to obey God. When you’re learning to ride a bike, training wheels are critical. But the

When It’s OK to Disobey Your Parents9

by J.D. Greear

9 J.D. Greear, “When It’s OK to Disobey Your Parents,” J.D. Greear Ministries, accessed June 13, 2018, https://jdgreear.com/blog/ok-disobey-parents.

47

training wheels were never the point. Riding the bike was. In our relationship to our parents, the goal isn’t mere obedience. It’s a healthy and honoring family relationship—and, more importantly, a trajectory toward God.

The easiest way to see this is to watch the ways it goes wrong. For instance, we have adult couples in our church on the mission field whose (Christian) parents tried to forbid them from going, even when they knew God was telling them to go. I’m glad that they chose to obey God rather than their parents. But they also did everything they could to honor their parents inthe process.

As a child, you honor your parents by obeying them. As you get older, you honor them in different ways. When you are older, you honor them by being the man or woman that God designed you to be and by obeying God, even if that means sometimes you go against your parents’ wishes.

By obeying God, you are honoring the institution of parenting. Which means that for some of you, the best way to honor your father and mother is to defy their wishes and do what God says.

Here are some other practical ways adults can honor their parents:

1. Call them. Keep them involved in your life. No parent ever feels like they are consulted too much or invited into your life too much.

2. Ask their opinion. They have the benefit of a lot of years of expe-rience, and there is usually no one who knows you as intimately or cares for you as deeply as they do.

3. Say “thanks”—for the big things and the small things.4. Make caring for them in their old age your priority.

I’ve heard it said that you can measure the progress of your Christian life by how well you relate to your spouse, your children, and your parents. The truest measure of your Christianity is how you are at home!

If you based your spiritual progress solely on how well you lived it out at home, how do you think you are doing?

48

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS:1) Speaking about fathers specifically can often be a sore subject for people. Whether fathers were absent, abusive, or unknown, many see the role of father as only something destructive or at least unnecessary. Children who had mothers who worked two to three jobs and still managed to keep the home in order and ensure that their kids got to where they needed to be may rightly honor their mothers for their lives of total and committed sacrifice. It can also be difficult for some folks with an upbringing like this to see God as a Father. How can we, as a community, love and support people with stories like this and assure them that they can have comfort, hope, and security in their heavenly Father?

2) As adult children, how can we ensure that we are diligent and improving in our honoring of our parents, no matter our upbringing? How can we foster unity and the “ministry of reconciliation” Paul wrote about elsewhere (2 Cor. 5:18–19) through our honor?

49

SERMON NOTES:

51

WEEK 36

SPIRIT-FILLED WORKEPHESIANS 6:5–9

5Bondservants, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling, with a sincere heart, as you would Christ, 6not by the way of eye-service, as people-pleasers, but as bondservants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart, 7rendering service with a good will as to the Lord and not to man, 8knowing that whatever good anyone does, this he will receive back from the Lord, whether he is a bondservant or is free. 9Masters, do the same to them, and stop your threatening, knowing that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and that there is no partiality with him.

52

STUDY THE TEXT

1) This week, we wrap up the rather long section Paul began in 5:21, and which we began covering in Week 32, on rules for conduct within the family of God. Whether the relationship is between husband and wife, parents and children, or slaves and masters, all are to submit to one another out of reverence for Christ” (Eph. 5:21). And that brings us to what is arguably the most difficult topic to cover.

We should begin here with discussion of both the term and notion of δοῦλοι (douloi), the word the ESV translates as “bondservants,” while the NIV, NRSV, and NASB use “slaves” (in Col. 3:22–25, the earlier passage from which Paul likely adapted this one, ESV also uses “slaves”). Where the ESV uses “servants”10 for δοῦλοι in v. 6, “slaves” would also be appropriate, as “servants” often gets confused with διακόνοις (diakonois), meaning both “servants” and “deacons.” No matter how we translate it, the institution in Paul’s context differed vastly from that to which we are more accustomed as we survey it in North America during the seventeenth through nineteenth centuries. And slavery was quite prevalent in Paul’s day. It is estimated that slaves were nearly one-third of the population of a city like Ephesus.

Greco-Roman slaves in the first century often received wages from their masters (κυρίοις—kyriois) and had the ability to purchase their freedom. Though neither Paul nor any other New Testament writer clearly condemned the practice, human trafficking is condemned in 1 Timothy 1:10, where the ESV uses “enslavers” to translate ἀνδραποδισταῖς (andrapodistais). This word, from ἀνήρ (anér), “man,” and πούς (pous), “foot”—as “bringing men to his feet”—is not used elsewhere in the New Testament, but it was used by Plato, Aristophanes, and others long before Paul to refer to kidnapping, slave-dealing, or forcibly enslaving. This indicates that by no means can one find legitimate New Testament support for the transatlantic slave trade, despite what some southern preachers at the time claimed. Further, in 1 Corinthians 7:21, Paul urged slaves, if they can “gain (their) freedom,” to “avail (themselves) of the opportunity,” hence becoming “freed person(s)” (v. 22, NRSV). Extrabiblical evidence indicates that many freed persons would continue to willingly work for their former masters and would sometimes even take their family name as a form of honoring them.

It can be concluded that while the New Testament did not explicitly forbid the practice of slavery at its time, it also did not affirm it. From a rather neutral standpoint, it simply acknowledged its existence as an institution and gave instruction on how to live with it. What the New Testament certainly does not give us is a prescription of how we should roll it out today. This form of servitude slowly died out in antiquity, and it should stay dead. What we can instead see, whether in passages such as here in Ephesians 6:5–9,

10 This is the case with the ESV published in 2001. The 2016 edition uses “bondservants” in Eph. 6:6.

53

in its companion text in Colossians 3:22–25, in Philemon, or in Galatians 3:28, are initial steps toward the abolition of slavery altogether. In the first century Roman Empire, human rights were hardly recognized as they should be, nor are they today, but the Church has certainly played a vital role in their advancement (e.g., William Wilberforce, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.), despite some horrible violations as well.

How can we, then, apply what Paul wrote here today in our context? Under the following subsections, we will be applying some principles that can be derived from this text to the workplace, whatever it may be. While there is not any specific question here, jot down any remaining questions you may have on the topic or anything that has jumped out at you thus far.

54

2) As mentioned in Week 32, slaves were considered part of the Greco-Roman household, so the household codes applied to slaves and masters as well. As such, in explaining how Christians ought to function in family relationships, Paul needed to give treatment to this topic as well, no matter how he felt about the institution (a fact we simply cannot know). Before Paul wrote his single verse addressing masters, he gave three to slaves (somewhat the opposite of how he gave wives as subordinates one-third of the space he gave husbands). So, beginning with slaves, part of the backdrop here is that, at least as depicted by ancient authors, slaves were seen as unreliable and secretly despising of their masters. If their masters relaxed their stern discipline or were not paying attention (giving “eye-service,” as in v. 6), the slave might act disobediently or try to steal from the household. Instead, Christian slaves were to submit to their earthly masters, with sincerity, as they would to Christ.

This same principle applies today. Christian employees ought to be ethical and above reproach, aiming to conduct themselves honorably, producing good work that benefits both their employer and those their institution serves. And just like slaves here, employees are “doing the will of God from the heart…(r)ender(ing) service with enthusiasm, as to the Lord, and not to men and women…” (vv. 6–7, NRSV). So, they are not to obey unethical, immoral, or unjust orders. Further, they should not seek employment from unethical, immoral, or unjust employers or industries in the first place. This includes, as merely two examples, “adult entertainment” or predatory lenders (e.g., title loan issuers).

“(T)he will of the Lord” can thrive in most any industry, whether health care, education, law enforcement, emergency services, technology, engineering, plumbing, accounting, legal services, bartending, politics, automobile maintenance, etc.—all lines of work in which one can participate in cultivating God’s created order, help turn back effects of the fall, and/or be a foretaste of total restoration in the age to come. And yet in those industries, bosses can still ask employees to do things against the will of the Lord, and that is where the Christian employee should resist (see the Hebrew midwives in Ex. 1:15–22; Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego in Dan. 3; Daniel in Dan. 6; the apostles in Acts 5:27–32). We should not carelessly throw around Romans 13:1–7 in an attempt to justify the following of unbiblical, immoral, unethical, or unjust orders. If there is punishment for insubordination, Christ is our example as one who suffered in the worst way at the hands of an evil and unjust world. It is the Lord who rewards the righteous worker for serving with a sincere heart. While there may or may not be recognition in the company newsletter, around the watercooler, or in the form of a bonus, promotion, or wage increase, good, honest work does not go unnoticed.

Jot down the first five areas of work that come to your mind that have not been mentioned here already. Much like we do from the stage in our All of Life Interviews, write down two to three virtuous aspects of these lines of work. And then write down two to three areas of brokenness that might be prevalent within each. Take some time to pray for folks in each of these lines

55

of work, and if you can think of any, reach out to one or two people in the industries you mentioned to thank them and also ask what else they might need prayer for in their respective industries.

3) As for the master, or the employer or boss (and naturally many of us are both “slaves” and “masters” if we are in middle management, etc.), God judges them in the same manner he judges the slave or employee—“there is no partiality with him” (Eph. 6:9); “there is neither slave nor free” (Gal. 3:28). Slave masters in antiquity, even if they were not traffickers or did not enslave against a person’s will, were known for mistreatment, whether beatings, imprisonment, sale into an even less ideal environment, etc. Like children who had next to no rights compared to their authoritarian fathers, the disparity between slaves and masters was the same, or probably worse. And yet, Paul called Christians to a significantly different expectation than what the law permitted.

Some contemporary parallels can be drawn here. Unless it is fiscally unfeasible, the Christian owner, for example, should not offer her employees the bare minimum legal requirements, like legal minimum wage or minimum benefits. She should not demand that her employees cut corners or costs to produce a faulty or unsafe product simply in order to turn a better profit. She should look out for the interests of her employees, her clientele, her vendors, and any other stakeholders the same way she looks out for her own (Phil. 2:4). Indeed, a wide profit margin can be a great way to serve all the above, but ethics, morals, justice, fair treatment, etc. should never be placed below profits.

What are some areas not mentioned here in which an employer can operate his or her business according to the will of God? What are some ways they can place themselves and maybe their greed above working unto his will?

56


It seems appropriate that during a season when so many of us—myself included—are enjoying times of vacation, we should pause to consider matters of work and vocation. I was recently brushing up on some of these things myself, especially as they are laid out in the book of Ephesians. There we find Paul addressing the relationships of slave to master and master to slave and from that point we are but a short step away from drawing applications for all of us who work.

Slavery was simply a fact of life in that day and time. Today we look back with horror when we imagine all of these people who were masters and slaves—even Christian masters and slaves in the same church. Better theologians than I have told how the Bible views slavery, what it meant in that context, and how the gospel undermines slavery and destroys it from within. But for our purposes we are going to bypass that discussion and move straight to applications for why and how we work.

One unavoidable conclusion we can draw from these verses is that you make a statement about the gospel by what you do and how you behave in your workplace. If this was true for slaves, it is every bit as true for you who have the liberty to choose what you do. If you have a good attitude and do good work you make a completely different statement than if you have a bad attitude and do bad work. When you claim to be a Christian but deliver poor quality work laced with grumbling and complaining, you make the gospel look bad as if it isn’t transformative, as if it hasn’t really changed you from the inside out.

Whether you are an employee or an employer, a manager or a line-worker, a tradesman or a Wall Street executive (that’s Bay Street here in Canada), you will benefit by hearing three instructions from God as given by Paul.

Do your work!His first instruction is this: Do your work! “Slaves, obey your earthly masters.” Your boss expects you to work and to work hard, so obey him and do what he tells you to. Work hard! That seems like an obvious command, but I don’t want you to miss this: The fact that the Lord tells you to work gives your work dignity. It doesn’t matter what you do. It doesn’t matter whether you’re ruling a whole nation or managing a team of two. It doesn’t matter whether you’re making millions in the financial district or if you’re fixing plumbing or flipping burgers. Your work is inherently good and valuable because the Lord tells you to do it. He wouldn’t tell you to do something useless or meaningless.

Working Well11

by Tim Challies

11 Tim Challies, “Working Well,” Challies, accessed June 13, 2018, https://www.challies.com/articles/working-well.

57

You need to work. You also need to obey the people who are over you in that work. Whenever Paul talks about authority he connects it to the authority of Christ; whenever he talks about obedience he makes it a lesser form of the greater obedience to Christ. He does that here. Employees, you need to obey your manager or your employer in the same way you would obey Christ. These are not two different things. The way you understand the employee/employer relationship flows right out of the way you understand your relationship with Jesus Christ. If you want to obey Christ, you need to obey your boss. In fact, you need to obey your boss in the way youobey Christ.

There is the first thing you need to understand and apply in the workplace—you need to work hard and obey those who are over you.

Do your work to please God!Here’s the second instruction: Do your work to please God. How are you to relate to the person who oversees you? Ultimately, the way you relate to Christ himself. “With fear and trembling, with a sincere heart, not by the way of eye-service, as people-pleasers, but as servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart, rendering service with a good will as to the Lord and not to man.” That’s quite a mouthful, but the heart of it is this: Be a God-pleaser rather than a man-pleaser. Do your work to please God. This instruction assumes that you will always be tempted to work for lesser motives, to do your work for the wrong reasons and under the eye of the wrong people.

I can think of at least two different ways that you may be tempted to be a man-pleaser rather than a God-pleaser in your work. The first temptation is to do your work in such a way that you make people happy, but not in such a way that you think first and foremost about pleasing the Lord. It’s often easy enough to please your boss even when you don’t work as hard as you can or deliver your best results. You can spend all day staring at Facebook and as soon as your boss walks into the office you shut down your browser and look like you’re working hard. Your boss might be fooled for a while, but God is not. This shows you are more concerned about the way other people see you than the way God sees you. You may do your work just enough to get away with it in the eyes of the boss. That’s one way that you can be a man-pleaser—when you do your work just well enough to keep the boss happy.

The second way you can be a man-pleaser instead of God-pleasers is when you work to be noticed by men instead of doing your work as a means of worship to the Lord. In this case you work to be noticed. You work long, long hours and drive yourself to the point of burn-out and exhaustion to get ahead and to be noticed. Or you do your work well not because you long to do excellent work as a reflection of an excellent God, but because you want to be the employee of the month or to get your face on the front cover of the newsletter, or you want to receive praise from men.

58

Remember that in this context Paul is talking to slaves, people who were not just employed but were actually owned. Paul reminds them that even as slaves of earthly masters, they are already slaves of Christ. You, too, are a slave of Christ. Your ultimate allegiance, then, is not to your employer or manager but to Him. Ultimately, you are not working to please your boss but to please Jesus. He cannot be fooled. His standards are higher. Not only that, but he is ultimately deserving of your best work at all times. Work in a way that you please him first.

59

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS:1) Think of a time in which you or someone you know, or maybe someone from a story you have heard or read, had to take a stand in their workplace or disobey a direct order when they felt they might otherwise be going along with something contrary to the Lord’s will. What was the result? Was there punishment? Did any positive change get made in the form of a policy, etc.? Any other outcome?

2) Think of a for-profit company (not a church, parachurch ministry, or other non-profit organization) that strives to operate in an ethical, moral, and just manner. They may or may not be run by Christians, but either way, God’s common grace is at work. What makes them stand out? What sort of impact do they have on the world around them? Are there any noticeable risks they take for doing the right thing? Are they a catalyst for broader change in their industry? Are you willing to pay a little more for their products or services than you could for something comparable offered elsewhere? Share with your group anything else that comes to mind about this company.

60

SERMON NOTES:

61

WEEK 37

SPIRITUAL WARFAREEPHESIANS 6:10–12

10Finally, be strong in the Lord and in the strength of his might. 11Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the schemes of the devil. 12For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places.

62

STUDY THE TEXT

1) Here, beginning in Ephesians 6:10, we now come to the final section of the second major part of the body of Paul’s letter, which began in 4:1, way back in our twentieth week of study in early June, and which will end in 6:20 when we cover it two weeks from now. That will only leave us with Paul’s four-verse closing to go over in Week 40.

In this section (6:10–12), Paul again pointed to the types of enemies Christians face. While these forces include human opposition, the language Paul used in each of these sections makes it clear that he was also referring to supernatural evil (“we do not wrestle against flesh and blood”) intent on destroying God’s good creation as well as Christian community, which it apparently finds threatening to its schemes. These forces are far greater than simply non-Christians who do not like people different from them or the occurrence of human mistakes or ignorance. Our opposition is pure evil itself, and it is not anything we are capable of overpowering on our own. We can explore this further by looking at some of the terms Paul used in these verses and see how he used them earlier in his letter. Look at each of these uses in your Bible as well as the sections from the first two study guides (if we covered them) to help shed some light on what Paul was discussing in our present passage, and make some notes below to help withyour understanding.

12 This word has no other NT presence. It is a compound of κόσμος (kosmos), meaning “world” or “universe,” and κρατέω (krateó), meaning “to rule.” So, κοσμοκράτορας means “world ruler,” an epithet of Satan found in ecclesiastical writings.

13 “(T)he spiritual forces of evil” in the Greek is τὰ πνευματικὰ τῆς πονηρίας (ta pneumatika tēs ponērias), where πνευματικὰ simply means “spiritual” (ESV, NIV, NRSV, and NASB add “forces”). The only other places πνευματικὰ appears in Ephesians are 1:3 and 5:19 (“spiritual blessing” and “spiritual songs”), so we did not include it in our word study.

Greek Term in 6:11–12

ESV Translation Earlier Use(s) Study Guide(guide#.pg#.sec#)

μεθοδείας (methodeias)

schemes 4:14 N/A

ἀρχάς (archas) rulers 1:21; 3:10 1.72.2; 2.13.2

ἐξουσίας (exousias) authorities (power in 2:2)

1:21; 2:2; 3:10 1.72.2; N/A; 2.13.2

κοσμοκράτορας12 (kosmokratora

Documents

PART 3 STUDY GUIDE - AZ · battle between wisdom and folly within humankind. The Essenes—known as the authors of the Dead Sea or Qumran Cave Scrolls, the contents of which were