Posted by Lisa Laree to Beer Lahai Roi
I suppose I ought to start this out with a 'Trigger Warning'...there are words in this passage that are fraught with emotional overtones in our current society. I hope I can navigate around them to get at the message Paul was trying to convey but if those words cause such an emotional response that it's impossible to go past them...well, I'll catch you next week with the wrap-up...
We start with the 'S' word...used in the context of marriage relationships...
Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord. (Col. 3:18).
Most folks stop there. I mean, it's a hard stop. Either they want to wave a flag stating how sexist Christianity is to suggest that women should submit to men (and, may I respectfully point out...that is NOT what the verse says), or they want to hop up on a soapbox and say that women have no business in the workplace and should Stay Home. (Also...that is not what the verse says). It is talking about a relationship between ONE woman and ONE man...and it needs the next verse for the balance of context.
Husbands, love your wives and do not be harsh with them. (Col. 3:19).
This verse gets virtually NO press. Promise Keepers talked about it back in the day...but the anti-Christian crowd didn't even recognize that, jumping on the stereotypical assumption that godly men suppress women. The fact that the PK movement was to encourage men to love their wives was completely overlooked.
Just for grins, let's look up the Greek words used in these verses. 'Submit yourselves' is the Greek word hupotasso, and, according to the Blue Letter Bible site, was a Greek word pertaining to the military; meaning 'to arrange [troop divisions] in a military fashion under the command of a leader.' In a non-military context, it was used as 'a voluntary attitude of giving in, cooperating, assuming responsibility and carrying a burden.' 'Love your wives', well, my friends, 'love' here is agapao... 'To be full of good-will and exhibit the same; have a preference for, wish well, regard the welfare of; take pleasure in, prize above all, be unwilling to abandon...' This is the Greek word for 'love' that especially implies caring for the well-being of the one that is loved; it is the word used in John 3:16 describing the love God had for us. It is a love that sacrifices ones' self for another (John 15:13). Husbands are instructed to love their wives in THAT manner; wives are instructed to cooperate...take responsibility...basically, be a supportive partner. This is teamwork that Paul is describing. Oh, and worth noting...romantic love had very little to do with marriage in that day. Marriages were arranged for a number of reasons...to financially or socially assist a family, to cement friendships between families, to maintain an inheritance, etc etc. So Paul is writing this to people who did not choose their spouses. How much easier should those instructions be for folks who have the freedom to choose? And...given that romantic love isn't a requirement for marriage to begin with...should 'I just don't feel in love anymore' be a reason for dissolving a marriage? The love that is described is not an emotion...it is a behavior pattern. Cherish, care for, nurture, prefer...those are actions, not emotions. Cooperate, support, take responsibility...those are actions, not emotions. We have, in our society, romanticized marriage to the point of nullifying it if the emotions aren't right. It's a shame...because families are shattered and people are damaged, all for the sake of some kind of ethereal emotion that cannot stand up under the pressures of life.
Children are instructed to obey their parents, and fathers are instructed not to embitter their children (KJV...'provoke to anger')...lest they be discouraged (Greek: athymeo...to be disheartened, dispirited, broken in spirit). Notice...instruction for those under authority and those in authority.
Which brings us to the next trigger word, which also starts with 'S'...
Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything ... (Col 3:23a).
What??? Is Paul endorsing slave holding? Cancel him!
Sigh. Slavery was...and is...a horrible practice. But the fact is that it was the foundation of the economy for millennia, in some form or fashion. There were very few folks that we would consider 'employees' in that day...folks who lived at their own house, got up and went to work for another person, got paid in money, and could leave their job whenever they wished. It just wasn't part of the culture. We could, likely, substitute 'employees' for 'slaves' without a great loss of meaning here. Paul is talking about working with a good heart for your employer...just, in that day, 'employer' generally meant 'master'. But look at this, his real instruction:
Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as working for the Lord, not for men, since you know that you will receive an inheritance from the Lord as a reward. It is the Lord Christ you are serving. (Col. 3:23). This is almost a direct quote from 2:17 And whatever you do, whether in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus...
And, look, we also have the balance of instruction to those both under and in authority:
Masters, provide your slaves with what is right and fair, because you know that you also have a Master in heaven. (Col. 4:1) Likewise...you could substitute 'Employers/ employees' here for the modern application...
Do you see the pattern? Whether you are in authority or under it, whether in a family or out of it, treat each other correctly and fulfill your responsibilities with honor...just as if you were doing it for Jesus himself. Because...you are.
No comments:
Post a Comment