Okay yeah my mind is blown. This context is incredible. I keep thinking to myself, “How have I never known this? Do more conservative expresses of Christianity just ignore this stuff because it’s easier to be a textual literalist?”
Sometimes there’s even outright misconceptions spread about the Roman household. In the ESV translation of the Bible, the editors (without citing any evidence) claim that Roman slavery was a seven-year contractual business relationship.
I am reminded of the 2nd century Letter to Diognetus (c. 130 A.D.), which notes that "Christians are neither distinguished are distinguished from other men neither by country, nor language, not the customs which they observe" and then describes how they are distinguished:
"They marry, as do all; they beget children; but they do not destroy their offspring. They have a common table, but not a common bed...They obey the prescribed laws, and at the same time surpass the laws by their lives."
Clearly, Paul's admonitions were being taken to heart by the early Christians.
It definitely helps to be exposed to other cultures' practice of family to see the subtleties in Ephesians and Colossians. I certainly saw those passages very differently after working in a West African context where polygamy was not only practiced, but pressure was placed on men with only one wife, and where families could negotiate marriages and divorces without regard for the wishes of man or woman. I have also found it eye-opening to watch films and read books from the older cultures in India and China. There is a Hindi language film 'Hum Saathe Saathe Hain' (1999), which on the surface appears to be fluff with lots of Bollywood song and dance, but what it reveals about traditional societies' family dynamics really placed a lot of the New Testament statements about family in a new light.
The part that was eye open was a wife still being under the authority of her father-and he outranks her husband! It makes sense to me why Paul would admonish submission to the husband. The practice of leaving and cleaving appears to be completely abandoned in this Roman system, and I have a feeling Paul is trying to redirect believers back to the arsenic ideal?
As a note: I read Ephesians 5:22 in the Orthodox Jewish Bible and it ways wives are to be accountable to their husbands, which fits better given the context you described.
This was such a great read! Looking forward to the next installments.
Okay yeah my mind is blown. This context is incredible. I keep thinking to myself, “How have I never known this? Do more conservative expresses of Christianity just ignore this stuff because it’s easier to be a textual literalist?”
Sometimes there’s even outright misconceptions spread about the Roman household. In the ESV translation of the Bible, the editors (without citing any evidence) claim that Roman slavery was a seven-year contractual business relationship.
I am reminded of the 2nd century Letter to Diognetus (c. 130 A.D.), which notes that "Christians are neither distinguished are distinguished from other men neither by country, nor language, not the customs which they observe" and then describes how they are distinguished:
"They marry, as do all; they beget children; but they do not destroy their offspring. They have a common table, but not a common bed...They obey the prescribed laws, and at the same time surpass the laws by their lives."
Clearly, Paul's admonitions were being taken to heart by the early Christians.
It definitely helps to be exposed to other cultures' practice of family to see the subtleties in Ephesians and Colossians. I certainly saw those passages very differently after working in a West African context where polygamy was not only practiced, but pressure was placed on men with only one wife, and where families could negotiate marriages and divorces without regard for the wishes of man or woman. I have also found it eye-opening to watch films and read books from the older cultures in India and China. There is a Hindi language film 'Hum Saathe Saathe Hain' (1999), which on the surface appears to be fluff with lots of Bollywood song and dance, but what it reveals about traditional societies' family dynamics really placed a lot of the New Testament statements about family in a new light.
The part that was eye open was a wife still being under the authority of her father-and he outranks her husband! It makes sense to me why Paul would admonish submission to the husband. The practice of leaving and cleaving appears to be completely abandoned in this Roman system, and I have a feeling Paul is trying to redirect believers back to the arsenic ideal?
As a note: I read Ephesians 5:22 in the Orthodox Jewish Bible and it ways wives are to be accountable to their husbands, which fits better given the context you described.
This was such a great read! Looking forward to the next installments.