Most modern women do not like reading Ephesians 5:22-33. Some might consider it draconian. In the current political and cultural environment, I can see why it is viewed that way, and with the long history women have of abuse at the hands of men, I understand women’s fears behind it. But I want to take you back in history to when these words were first written to show you how Paul’s words in Ephesians were revolutionary for women. They would not have seen it as draconian but as empowering. If we understand the history, then we will be better able to appreciate the beauty in these scriptures.
The View of Women in the Greco-Roman World
Paul wrote the book of Ephesians to the church at Ephesus in approximately 60-64 C.E. Ephesus was located in what is today Turkey, and at the time of Paul’s writings, was greatly influenced by Greek and Roman culture. Even though the famous Greek philosopher, Aristotle, had lived several hundred years before, his works greatly influenced philosophers of the first century, and his ideas about marriage and the relationships between husbands and wives were mirrored by first-century writers.
What kind of ideas did these writers espouse?
While philosophers like Musonius Rufus (25-95 AD) called for a more egalitarian view between the sexes, the prevailing view of the marriage relationship was a domineering patriarchal one. Men were to rule their homes and a double standard was common. A woman, for example, was expected to remain faithful in a marriage, but she was expected to overlook her husband’s indiscretions.
Here are some other direct examples,
Plutarch (46-120 AD)
“A wife ought not to make friends of her own, but to enjoy her husband’s friend in common with him. The gods are the first and most important friends.” Plutarch, Moralia “Advice to the Bride and Groom” (Chapter 48)
Philo of Alexandria (20 BC-50 AD)
“It is the nature of a woman to be inferior to a man, because the one is rational and the other more inclined to the senses.” Philo, Special Laws Book 3 (Section 169)
“The male, because he is superior, takes the lead in every way and the female, because she is inferior, is led.” Philo, Questions and Answers on Genesis (Book 1, Section 26)
“In the case of husband and wife, the husband, as the head of the household, is to command and the wife to obey, as it is fitting for the one who is superior to govern those who are inferior.” Philo, Special Laws, (Book 3, Section 169)
“Women are expected to remain indoors and live quietly, for it is shameful for them to be seen in public….A woman’s virtue is her chastity, but a man’s virtue is his wisdom, and these are not the same in nature. Philo, Special Laws (Book 3, Section 169)
Seneca the Younger (4BC – 65AD)
“Women are a fragile thing, a burden to guard and a danger to protect.” Seneca, Consolation to Marcia (Chapter 16)
“Men can be forgiven for indulging in the pleasures of the flesh, but a woman’s chastity is her only shield against shame. A woman who is unchaste has nothing left, while e a man can recover from such indulgences.” Seneca, Consolation to Marcia (Chapter 16)
Pliny the Elder (23 AD-79 AD)
“Woman is an imperfect animal, compared with man, and it is her natural condition to be subordinate.” Pliny the Elder, Natural History (Book 7, Chapter 13)
“Men by nature, are free to pursue knowledge and public life, while women must remain in the household. Their duties are distinct: men are born for leadership, women for submission.” Pliny the Elder, Natural History (Book 7, Chapter 13)
Arius Didymus (was advisor to the first Emperor of Rome Augustus who rules from 27 BC to 14 AD)
“The man is naturally superior, and the woman inferior; the one rules and the other is ruled. This is the arrangement of nature. Stobaeus, Anthology 2.31.21 (=Arius Didymus, Epitome of Stoic Ethics)
While have given you several examples of philosophers’ views about men and women per their writings, what was the reality on the ground? I believe it was worse. While some philosophers were kinder to women, in the Roman empire (when Paul’s letter was written) women were ruled by men. Some women, especially upper-class women were given certain legal rights, but it was usually always under the guidance and guardianship of a male. Women, almost always, were dominated by the men around them.
How Paul Used Greco-Roman Words
By reading the words of these 1st-century philosophers, one can see that some elements of their writings can be found in Paul’s epistle. There are strong parallels between Ephesians 5:22-6:9 and Greco-Roman thought on household discipline. Read the following quote from Aristotle.
Household management falls into departments corresponding to the parts of which the household in its turn is composed; and the household in its perfect form consists of slaves and freemen. The investigation of everything should begin with its smallest parts, and the primary and smallest parts of the household are master and slave, husband and wife, father and children; we ought therefore to examine the proper constitution and character of each of these three relationships, I mean that of mastership, that of marriage（there is no exact term denoting the relation uniting wife and husband, and thirdly the progenitive relationship. Let us then accept these three relationships that we have mentioned. Aristotle (Politics, 1253b)
In the quote from Aristotle above, he divides the household into three elements, husband and wife, father and children, and master and slave. Paul does the same thing in Ephesians addressing each element directly. Aristotle lived several hundred years before Paul, but his works greatly influenced writers who lived closer to the times of Paul like Arius Didymus.
“The man has the rule of this house by nature, for the deliberative faculty in a woman is inferior, in children it does not yet exist, and it is completely foreign to slaves. Rational household management, which is the controlling of a house and of those things related to the house, is fitting for a man. Belonging to this are fatherhood, the art of marriage, being a master, and moneymaking.” Arius Didymus (Epitome II, 149,5-10).
In Didymus’ words, we can also see the three household categories, women, children, and slaves. Therefore, we can deduce that Paul, in the book of Ephesians, was responding to these Greco-Roman ideas of how households should be managed. Paul does not completely destroy the paradigm, but he certainly turns it upside down.
How Paul’s Words Were Revolutionary for Women
Transport yourself back to the 1st century AD and think about how women would have read Paul’s words. The idea of submitting to a husband would not have ruffled any feathers, but the way Paul addresses husbands, fathers, and masters definitely would. He is calling free men into account. In Ephesians 5:25 he is commanding men to love their wives like Christ loved the church and to give themselves up for them. He is telling them to put their wives’ needs before their own.
A common theme in that era was for women to make sacrifices to meet the needs of men (particularly in the sexual arena). On the other hand, in other epistles, Paul stresses that men do not get a pass for any type of fornication. Paul takes it further, in I Corinthians 7, he equates the sexual needs of the wife to that of the husband’s. His words would have been life-giving for women.
The radical nature of Paul’s words is even more pronounced in Ephesians 6:9 where he essentially equates the slave to the master. There was a hierarchy in Roman culture, and a woman was considered more valuable than a slave. But in Ephesians 6:9, he is taking the lowest member of society and raising them to the level of master by reminding them that in God’s eyes, there is no favoritism between one or the other.
Paul is often characterized as anti-woman by secular scholars, but in reality, he was very much pro-woman. We would have never seen it that way without the historical context in which his words were written.
Paul’s intention is not to destroy the authority structures, but he is rectifying the perversion that tends to seep into those structures in this broken world. He is trying to bring people back to the godly model of authority (read more in Biblical Authority: Glorifying God, Not Man).
The Biblical Context of Ephesians 5:22-33
Authority structures are not inherently bad. As a society we submit to authorities all the time. Employee to boss, citizen to government, player to coach, etc. The problem we tend to have with Ephesians 5:22-33 is that we read it, ironically enough, in the Greco-Roman way. Those 1st century philosophers thought that men should rule because women were dumber, less valuable, and less capable than men. So we think that is what Paul is saying in Ephesians without looking at the text contextually.
What do we know about the biblical context of men and women?
God never picked an authority figure because of their capabilities and amazing resumes (Moses, David, Gideon, etc.) Time and time again, God chose deeply flawed men for positions of authority. He picked them so He could glorify Himself through them. He loves men. He has a purpose for them, but he didn’t pick them because he thinks they are better than women.
What does God think about women? You can read any of my research on women in the Bible and you will leave with the impression that God thinks they are pretty darn capable. And like men, they have their flaws, but God will glorify himself through them as well.
If we circle back to Ephesians 5, we can then see that Paul is telling women to conform to the authority structure in a marriage where the man is the head of the household. But, he is also telling men, she is your equal and you better be so good to her, that you would be willing to sacrifice yourself for her. And that, ladies, is why the letter to the Ephesians was revolutionary in the Greco-Roman world.
Other articles you might enjoy….
Resources in Spanish
Downloadable Bible Studies in Spanish
Books, Journals and Notebooks in Spanish
If you liked this content, please share on….
