Original Meaning

Instructions to Children and Parents (6:1–4)

CHILDREN AND SLAVES are told to obey, a conscious shift from Paul’s direction for wives (“submit”) and a recognition that children and slaves had even less status than women. All relations in the house codes are redefined by relation to Christ.

“Obey your parents in the Lord” does not mean “obey your Christian parents.”6 Rather, it means to obey as part of one’s relation to the Lord. The meaning is virtually synonymous with “as to the Lord” in 5:22 or 6:6. That obedience to parents “is right” means essentially that it is right from a Christian perspective. This phrase has the same impact as “these are improper” and “which are out of place” in 5:3–4. The sexual sins described there are wrong because they do not fit with life in Christ. In other words, Paul never argues merely ethically, even if his ethical conclusions might be the same as his society’s. Instead, he argues theologically from a Christian framework. That children should obey their parents was a given in his society, but for him it was “right” because of their relation to Christ.

“Children” could be understood to include adults, for a father in that society maintained authority in the family until he was about sixty years old or even until his death. Yet although adult children were expected to honor their parents, the concern of the text seems to be on young children, for they are still in the process of learning and being shaped (cf. v. 4).

The command for children to honor father and mother is quoted five other places in the New Testament.7 The source of the quotation is identified in the NIV margin as Deuteronomy 5:16, but the LXX form of Exodus 20:12 (also an account of the Decalogue) is virtually the same as the Deuteronomy text. Neither of them is exactly like the text of Ephesians.8 The use of this command and of other Old Testament texts as motivation throughout the ethical teaching of Ephesians shows that the law has not been set aside.9 We may find Paul’s teaching on the law difficult, but he did not think he was abolishing the law.10

The intent of the Old Testament promise of a long and good life had to do with life in the land of Israel, which God had given his people. Honoring parents was an essential foundation for God’s covenant people (note Lev. 19:3). Paul omits the focus on Israel, however, to make the statement more general and proverbial. God’s promise is based on the presumption that obedience to parents leads to order and stability. This promise applies to the community and is not a guarantee to the individual.11 This passage should not be spiritualized to refer to future life.

The Greek word for “fathers” in verse 4 can mean “parents,” but more likely Paul is turning attention specifically to fathers. Fathers had legal control of children and were responsible for their instruction from about age seven. Girls did not normally receive formal education, but were taught household duties. Leon Morris is probably correct in saying it is significant that Paul wrote “children” instead of “boys.”12 Girls were valued less in ancient society, but Paul did not accept such a limitation.

In the ancient world fathers had absolute control and were sometimes harsh; that is why Paul includes the warning against provoking children to anger. The verb used for “exasperate” is rare and appears elsewhere in the New Testament only at Romans 10:19 (NIV, “make you angry”). The noun form occurs only in the prohibition of anger in Ephesians 4:26.

“Bring them up” does not do justice to the notion of care expressed by the verb, particularly since Paul’s previous use of the verb in 5:29 (NIV, “feeds”) conveys the idea of “nurture.” “Instruction” translates a word that often connotes “warning” or “admonition,” but “training and instruction” is probably an instance of two nouns expressing one concept, explaining the teaching that fathers are to do. “Of the Lord” is ambiguous. Most likely, it means that the instruction is subsumed under and determined by the Lord.

Bridging Contexts

BRINGING THE SECTION on slaves into our age is more difficult than the section on children. Slavery is foreign to us, while the relation of parents and children is essentially the same, even if attitudes are radically different. However, the foreignness of the grouping wives-children-slaves ought not be glossed over. Only by facing the patriarchal structure of the ancient world and the reasons these topics had to be treated will our eyes be open sufficiently to apply the text.

Children and parents (6:1–4). In both the Jewish and Greco-Roman world, honoring parents was second only to honoring God. In fact, some writers said parents were like gods to their children.19 Honoring parents was expected as an ethical starting point, an expectation New Testament writers shared.20

The power of fathers was almost unlimited in the Greco-Roman world. They determined whether a newborn baby had the right to live or die, and many baby girls in particular were abandoned to die. Fathers could and did sell their children, especially girls, into slavery. They could punish them as harshly as they wished, work them hard, or even put them to death. Public opinion served as restraints and real family love was common, but the abuses are chronicled. Ecclesiasticus 30:1–13 is representative of attitudes in the ancient world: A father who loves his son will whip him and beat him often while he is still a child (vv. 1, 12). A father should not pamper his son, play with him, or share in his laughter (vv. 7–10).21

In many sectors of this ancient society people did not desire marriage or children, both for economic reasons and for the bother involved. The situation was so bad toward the end of the first century B.C. that the emperor Augustus passed laws against adultery and excessive spending and laws that encouraged marriage and children with monetary rewards.22 Women who could afford to do so often hired wet-nurses to breast feed their babies, and as children got older slaves or hired teachers helped care for them.

Our society may be less harsh in its statements, but the attitudes and diversity of the ancient world are strangely mirrored in our own. The bother and expense of marriage and children still cause many to reject both. Parents do not have the free rein fathers in the ancient world did, but in far too many homes children are subjected to constant abuse—anger, violence, and sexual abuse. We perpetuate cycles of violence; hostile homes produce hostile children. Our problems within the family are even greater than in the ancient world, for little pressure exists today for children to honor parents. Teenagers are expected and even encouraged to be disrespectful and rebellious.

But the text instructs children to obey and honor their parents. What this means in practical terms will depend on the age of the child and the integrity of the parents. Obedience will be different for a five-year-old and a twenty-year-old, even though honor may be much the same. Especially in our culture the freedom of young adults is a given, but even with that freedom honor of parents should remain.

The text assumes an ideal, but what if the reality is far worse? The less integrity a parent has, the more difficult honor will be. At times honor may even be reduced to honor for the “office” of parent rather than the person. Showing honor should never require distorting the truth. The guideline here, as everywhere, is speaking the truth in love. Where the parents’ will conflicts with God’s will, again the attitude of the early church is the right path: “We must obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29). All application of this section must remember that these commands are an application of the larger ethic of Ephesians to a specific area. The whole letter is the framework for applying these instructions.

As in all relations, anger is out and nurturing is in. This is the body theology applied to the home. Concern for the anger of children is emphasized because of the destruction it causes in the family. At the same time, too often children are the targets for the hostility or threats from parents because of their potential for greater success. Jealousy and contempt lead to children being belittled and blocked, but in the process the parents destroy themselves. Again the issue is the use of power. Will it be used positively to enhance or negatively to destroy?

As in earlier sections, this text underscores the importance of teaching. Christians are to be nurturers, especially in their own homes. But the emphasis placed on teaching cannot be confined to the family. The church also has a responsibility to teach and nurture children. The text implies a value on children that should not be taken lightly. They are not to be ignored or merely tolerated, but cared for and instructed about life in Christ. If stewardship is the proper management of assets, Christian stewardship should focus first of all on nurturing children. Neither the church nor the family has an asset more valuable than its children.23

Slaves and masters (6:5–9). Not only is slavery foreign to us, but our understanding of it has been determined by nineteenth-century slavery in the United States. This increases our difficulty in understanding why the early church did not call for a wholesale rejection of slavery.

In the Greco-Roman world slavery was so much a part of life that hardly anyone thought about whether it might be illegitimate. Only the Therapeutae, a Jewish sect in Egypt, and perhaps the Essenes, rejected slavery in principle. It was considered an economic and practical necessity, an assumed part of life as much as birds and trees. Scholars are reluctant to hazard estimates about the numbers, but as many as one-third of the people in Greece and Rome were slaves. In addressing them Paul was addressing an enormous number of people. People became slaves through various avenues: birth, parental selling or abandonment, captivity in war, inability to pay debts, and voluntary attempts to better one’s condition. Race was not a factor.

No doubt for many slaves life was harsh and cruel, but their circumstances depended on their owners. They did not merely do menial work; they did nearly all the work, including oversight and management and most professions. Many were educated better than their owners. They could own property, even other slaves, and were allowed to save money to buy their freedom. No slave class existed, for slaves were present in all but the highest economic and social strata. Many gained freedom by age thirty, especially in urban areas. Even after gaining freedom, however, they were still under obligation to their former owners in times of need.

Laws attempted to prevent gross abuse of slaves, but owners did have free rein to treat slaves as they wished. Some were loved and treated like family, but they had no rights. Others were treated cruelly, and if owners wanted to torture, crucify, or kill slaves they could. The main limitation of physical abuse was the loss of value in the slave. Threat and violence were assumed necessary to control slaves. In a Jewish framework slaves were somewhat better off, and the Old Testament prohibited Jews holding other Jews in permanent slavery.24 In the Greco-Roman world slaves were often dehumanized. Aristotle, for example, said that the free man rules over the slave because the slave has no deliberative faculty and is a living tool. He considered it inappropriate to speak about justice with regard to slaves.25

Ephesians 6:5–9 describes an ideal situation. What would Paul have said to slaves who were being sexually abused or asked to perform unlawful acts, possibly against their will?26 A glimpse into the difficulty is provided in 1 Peter 2:18–25, which instructs slaves to submit even to harsh masters and to hold on to their convictions even when they suffered unjustly. These Christians were called to take their identity from Christ, regardless of the circumstances. Revolt was out of the question, but their lives were to be a quiet protest and a witness to a higher calling.

For the early church to advocate revolt would have been the death of the Christian movement. Slavery and other social issues were not their focus; the gospel and its description of life were.27 They did not work out the sociological implications of the gospel except where it related to reception of the message and relations within churches. But as they presented life in Christ, they put in motion a process that would eventually destroy slavery. The painful fact is that it took far too long to accomplish the job, and the attempts by Christians to defend the legitimacy of slavery in the nineteenth century are disturbing.28

This forces us to question whether we too simply assume the necessity of the structures of our society. People are still being dehumanized and tyrannized by relationships and employers. While not slaves, they are enslaved by our economic and social system. We are prone to throw up our hands and say, “That’s the way it is.” Like Paul, we must find ways to say, “The slave is your brother,” so that the system is subverted by the way people are valued and nurtured. Churches should lead the way in such thinking.

But the attitudes of people in such situations need to change too. Many people are caught in the system or are underemployed, but need the jobs they have. They tend to become resentful and uncooperative or passive, waiting for some external force to remedy the situation. What Paul tells slaves is directly relevant. Our jobs and our role in the culture do not determine who we are. We live in, to, and for Christ in all we do. Moreover, our value and identity do not derive from our circumstances, but from Christ. By directing all our actions to Christ, all of life—even the most mundane parts—is elevated to meaning and service to God.

The message of this text obviously moves from ancient slavery to modern employer-employee relations, but it pushes us far beyond that. Its theology concerns who we really are, what motivates us, whom we seek to please, and how we use power. Every part of life is redefined. No action or relation is seen by itself, and nothing is treated at merely a surface level. Everything we do involves a direct encounter with Jesus Christ. He is the origin and the recipient of every act. If this is true, no act is mundane and no person is unimportant. Power must be used for him, not against him. And all of us stand on equal footing with the same Lord, who cares deeply how we treat each other and will hold us accountable.

Contemporary Significance

THE VERY FORM of this text is an indictment of modern-day churches. As passages like this show, early Christian congregations were made up of a cross-section of society, but the usual valuations of the society were rejected. In most of our churches the valuations of society are retained so that no real cross-section comes together. We have churches for different socio-economic groups; we do not draw people to a common place where hierarchies and valuations are set aside and people know they stand on equal footing before God. As long as a church is a “group of our kind,” it fails its mission. Application of the text requires creation of a place where grace is evident and all people come together as equals.

Parents and children (6:1–4). The text addresses children first because that is the subject of the traditional house codes. Ideally parents should be addressed first, for they nurture long before children can obey. This text is an attempt to bring into the home the ethic of 4:1–5:21. Humility, tolerant love, and mutual submission belong first of all in the family.

Unfortunately, too many people, including Christians, have a public and a private persona. They appear as warm, congenial, righteous people in public, but are demons at home. We are our worst selves with the people closest to us. Christians should have only one persona, or we are no longer living in truth. We need to live tirelessly the humility, tolerant love, and mutual submission of the gospel both in private and in public. The most important witness we have is at stake—the witness within our families.

Life is painful when children turn their back on the Christian faith of their parents, but it is tragic when the misconduct and hypocrisy of their parents has caused them to do so. Integrity of faith starts in the family.

Parents. Being a parent is a hard job, but if God grants a person the privilege, nothing in life is more important. As brief as verse 4 is, the instructions cover a lot of ground: nurture and do not exasperate [or make angry]. The practical consequences of this instruction include:

(1) creating a context of grace, love, support, respect, and encouragement

(2) always speaking the truth in love

(3) attending to the material and emotional needs of children

(4) teaching, enlightening, warning, holding accountable, and disciplining, all as part of life lived to Christ; giving them a theology

(5) giving experiences, especially in work and in caring for others

(6) refusing to put down, demean, or damage them (shrill and angry speech does not belong)

(7) rejecting jealousy and contempt

(8) granting freedom within legitimate boundaries

(9) avoiding unhealthy pressure or expectations

(10) refusing to live through the children.

All of this takes time, communication skill, and discipline. Care of children is never an afterthought. In our society frequently both parents work outside the home, and children suffer. Christian parents need to think through this issue and how schedules can be arranged so that children receive attention. Communication skill is required, for children are constantly changing and every child is different. Without attention not only to what is said, but how it is heard, the relation will not flourish.

Then, as the guidelines suggest, parents discipline themselves first.29 They need to have good mental health, for their children’s lives depend on it. It is never too late to implement these guidelines, but they should start when the child is an infant. Mental illness is by and large caused by an absence of or defect in love that a child requires.30 The feeling of value essential for good mental health is acquired in childhood and is difficult to find later in life.31

The teenage years do not have to be times of rebellion and disrespect. In fact, they can be some of the most enjoyable years, for teenagers are old enough to enter into discussion and participate in a range of activities that smaller children cannot. Parents should affirm repeatedly that they are on their children’s side; they should be for their children. They are not the enemy. No one is perfect, but families can work together to enable each other.

A wrong turn. Focus on children, however, can become an idolatry of children or a wrongful indulging of them. Both of these lead to heartache. Like all else, being a parent is subsumed under life in Christ. Children are not the goal of life, but a context for living out life in Christ. The family is the primary place for discipleship.

Children. In effect, children are asked to give back what their parents give them: respect and love within the framework of their commitment to Christ. By obedience they give attention to parents, express their gratitude, and seek to assist. This is still the proper response for Christian children.

Obedience should never be blind obedience. The ideal situation within the text assumes the parents’ request is legitimate, but sometimes parents are insensitive or misguided in what they ask. Children too must learn to speak the truth in love, and their obedience to parents cannot mean disobedience to Christ. The most difficult circumstances for Christian children involve parents who are antithetical to Christianity or who are not emotionally balanced. Families are not only the primary place for discipleship; sometimes they are the most trying place. But even in extreme cases children must still love and respect their parents.

This is true not merely for small children and adolescents. In the ancient world, obligations to parents extended to death. We will not show obligation in the same way, but adult children must still honor their parents. Honor requires care and attention. Even totally independent children can and should learn from parents—and teach them—throughout life. Granted, past sins or present demeanor sometimes make relations intolerable, but for good or ill our psyche is tied up with our parents. We are rarely whole without being whole with them. Admittedly, circumstances sometimes are so bad that direct communication is harmful, but we need to find ways to address each other, honor our parents before God, exercise forgiveness, and speak the truth in love. Vengeance and punishment cannot be the goals, for they do not fit with the cross of Christ.

In our day, possibly the crying need in honoring parents has to do with care for the aging. We do not do it well, and no easy answers exist. Institutional help is sometimes necessary, but many institutions for the elderly leave a lot to be desired. If honor involves care and attention, we cannot marginalize and forget elderly family members by removing them from sight.

Slaves and masters (6:5–9). The application of the teaching on slaves and masters is obviously relevant for work relations, but it actually involves every relation and act. No relation is merely a relation; it is a context for relating to Christ. No job is merely work; it is a context for serving Christ.

Relations with people. The first application of this text concerns the way we understand ourselves and others. Society sends signals that declare our relative value and tell us where we fit in the hierarchy, but this text gives a different system of valuing. The hierarchy does not exist. We all have roles and tasks, but they do not render people more or less valuable. We all have the same Lord and face the same judgment. Arrogance and feelings of inferiority are out of place, as is favoritism. If God does not show favoritism, neither should we. We typically show favoritism to the rich and powerful, but little respect for the poor and powerless.32 Both are sins.

It is so easy for us to demean people we consider to be “low on the totem pole.” We do not have slaves, but we do have “service personnel” and people who “do not count.” It is easy to dehumanize and tyrannize them. We “chew them out” when we are unsatisfied. We view them as faceless numbers when the time comes to downsize. By lack of attention, body language, or attitude we communicate to them, “We do not really care about you.” Yet such people are as important as any “star” or power-broker, and our Christian witness depends on how we treat them. We must relate to them as if we were relating to Christ.

Application of this text also lifts people out of dehumanizing situations and gives them control. Others may seek to dehumanize them, but they have a high calling: They serve Christ. They do not work in response to some authority figure, but because they seek to do the will of God. No human controls them, for they serve the Lord Christ.

What we do matters. The most important application of this text is the realization that we are slaves of Christ. The language should not be dampened. We belong to him and serve him. If we take seriously that he is the origin and recipient of every act,33 all our work takes on meaning and our treatment of people changes. Work will be done with care, not just to get by. People will be nurtured, not used or ignored. With this consciousness we come close to mirroring the creative activity of God. This requires a fundamental change in handling life.

For example, a worker with an airline could do enough to get by, but in the process neglect safety hazards or maintenance problems. That is an ethical issue and certainly not fitting with Christ. His work is not merely a job, but an opportunity to demonstrate integrity and obedience. By knowing that he serves Christ, he must make the plane as safe and efficient as possible.

A teacher could easily go through the routine, present material, give tests, and go home. Everyone would agree the teacher had fulfilled his or her contract, but it would not be enough. If the teacher teaches as to Christ, teaching is no longer a job; it is the care and nurture of souls. It is excellence of thought joined to the value of a person.

A waitress could give menus, take orders, bring food, and clean up. Maybe it would be enough, but if she serves as to Christ, she values herself and the people she serves.

A man sells papers in the street. He can take money and give papers, and no one will care. If he knows he serves Christ, he cares for people and values them even if they do not value him. What he does is important—not irreplaceable perhaps, but important.

But this is not a text solely to keep the lowly happy and working hard. The people who buy the papers are to relate to the man selling them as to Christ. There are no people whom we may treat as unimportant. Even those without importance are important, and we are to treat them as we would Christ.

What we do and how we do it matters because all of life is lived in, to, and for the Lord. By necessity we are to reflect his love and truth. People and tasks are to be handled with care, for that is what the Lord requires.

To what audience do we play? Most people spend their lives seeking respect and admiration from a poorly defined audience. But as interests become focused, the audience becomes more defined. We choose the sector we want to impress. We act in direct response to the audience we think is watching. The more we care about the audience, the more diligent we are. We work hard if the boss is watching. We dress carefully if certain people will see us. We guard our tongue in certain groups. But if the audience is not present, neither is the effort. This is why we demean some people but go overboard to impress others. With the first we do not care about the audience; with the second we do.

Christians are asked to remember only one audience, the audience always present and to whom we are accountable—God. We are not to play to a secondary audience, and we are not to seek to impress another constituency. We are to honor God by living in truth and love.

Original Meaning

Instructions to Slaves and Masters (6:5–9)

THE GREEK WORD translated “master” (kyrios) is usually translated in the New Testament as “Lord,” in reference either to Christ (as in v. 4) or to God. That is why the qualification “earthly”13 is required in verse 5; it also is important in verse 9, where a wordplay between “masters” and “their Master” exists.

On the one hand, the directions given to slaves removes any suggestion that this new faith upset the cultural order; on the other hand, these verses are still extremely subversive. Slave owners may have been pleased with the service they would get, but in the process they lost control, for slaves now had a higher allegiance than to their owners. Slaves no longer belonged to their owners, did not really serve them, did not merely do their will, did not seek to please them, and were no different from them. They were slaves of Christ, served him, and did God’s will, and the slave owners were to treat them the same way as slaves were to treat owners. The idea that in dealing with human beings they were really dealing with Christ is reminiscent of Matthew 25:40: “Whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.”

This section makes specific to slaves (and masters) what was asked of everyone in 5:10, 17, 21: pleasing the Lord, doing his will, and mutual submission. To apply mutual submission to slaves and slave owners was a startling redefinition of slavery. In 1 Corinthians 7:21–23 Paul even told slaves that slavery should not matter, that they were Christ’s freed people, that both free and slave were slaves of Christ, and therefore that they should not be slaves of humans! The ease with which Paul made these points was based on his conviction that slaves, their owners, and he were all slaves of Christ. He referred to himself frequently as a slave of Christ, which should not be surprising insofar as Christ himself took the form of a slave.14 The background for this theology is already in the Old Testament (see esp. Lev. 25:55).

In verse 5 we again meet the difficulty of understanding the word “fear” in the ancient world,15 but to this word is added “trembling” (NIV, “respect and fear”). The combination of these two words is traditional and should be seen as an intensification.16 Some suggest that the respect and fear are paid to God rather than the owners, but this is unlikely. Paul used this same combination in 1 Corinthians 2:3 to describe his demeanor in coming to Corinth and in 2 Corinthians 7:15 to describe the church’s reception of Titus (see also Phil. 2:12). The combination expresses deference in a relationship, not actual quaking (cf. also 1 Peter 2:18).

Slaves are asked to serve “in sincerity of heart” in both verse 5 and verse 6.17 “When their eye is on you” (v. 6) translates a compound word that means “serving the eye.” The slave is not to play to a human audience. In effect, verses 6–7 comment on verse 5, each verse repeating the point that slaves serve Christ, not other human beings. Slaves were notorious for being lazy and for lying. Neither avenue remained as an option for Christian slaves.

The primary motivation for this ethic is the final judgment (cf. 5:5–6). Paul assumes here that judgment is according to works, the consistent expectation of the whole Bible (cf. esp. Rom. 2:6–11, though this section deals with equality in judgment for Jews and Gentiles, not for slave and free). Other New Testament texts also reject valuations based on being slave or free.18

That masters are asked to treat their slaves “in the same way” is cryptic, but still shocking. For them to follow this instruction, they would have to treat their slaves with respect and fear and with sincerity of heart as to Christ. That alone should have abolished slavery for Christians! Owners would also have to give up playing to audiences and do the will of God as slaves of Christ. Moreover, just as slaves had to give up slacking off, masters had to give up threatening, which fits neither service to Christ nor the life of humility and gentleness called for in 4:2–3. This ethic moves beyond the Golden Rule, that is, beyond treating others as we want to be treated; it instructs us to treat others as we would treat our Lord.

A structural parallel exists between the knowledge slaves have about judgment (v. 8) and the knowledge owners have of a common Lord in heaven, who shows no favoritism. Every thought of privilege evaporates before Christ.

Bridging Contexts

BRINGING THE SECTION on slaves into our age is more difficult than the section on children. Slavery is foreign to us, while the relation of parents and children is essentially the same, even if attitudes are radically different. However, the foreignness of the grouping wives-children-slaves ought not be glossed over. Only by facing the patriarchal structure of the ancient world and the reasons these topics had to be treated will our eyes be open sufficiently to apply the text.

Children and parents (6:1–4). In both the Jewish and Greco-Roman world, honoring parents was second only to honoring God. In fact, some writers said parents were like gods to their children.19 Honoring parents was expected as an ethical starting point, an expectation New Testament writers shared.20

The power of fathers was almost unlimited in the Greco-Roman world. They determined whether a newborn baby had the right to live or die, and many baby girls in particular were abandoned to die. Fathers could and did sell their children, especially girls, into slavery. They could punish them as harshly as they wished, work them hard, or even put them to death. Public opinion served as restraints and real family love was common, but the abuses are chronicled. Ecclesiasticus 30:1–13 is representative of attitudes in the ancient world: A father who loves his son will whip him and beat him often while he is still a child (vv. 1, 12). A father should not pamper his son, play with him, or share in his laughter (vv. 7–10).21

In many sectors of this ancient society people did not desire marriage or children, both for economic reasons and for the bother involved. The situation was so bad toward the end of the first century B.C. that the emperor Augustus passed laws against adultery and excessive spending and laws that encouraged marriage and children with monetary rewards.22 Women who could afford to do so often hired wet-nurses to breast feed their babies, and as children got older slaves or hired teachers helped care for them.

Our society may be less harsh in its statements, but the attitudes and diversity of the ancient world are strangely mirrored in our own. The bother and expense of marriage and children still cause many to reject both. Parents do not have the free rein fathers in the ancient world did, but in far too many homes children are subjected to constant abuse—anger, violence, and sexual abuse. We perpetuate cycles of violence; hostile homes produce hostile children. Our problems within the family are even greater than in the ancient world, for little pressure exists today for children to honor parents. Teenagers are expected and even encouraged to be disrespectful and rebellious.

But the text instructs children to obey and honor their parents. What this means in practical terms will depend on the age of the child and the integrity of the parents. Obedience will be different for a five-year-old and a twenty-year-old, even though honor may be much the same. Especially in our culture the freedom of young adults is a given, but even with that freedom honor of parents should remain.

The text assumes an ideal, but what if the reality is far worse? The less integrity a parent has, the more difficult honor will be. At times honor may even be reduced to honor for the “office” of parent rather than the person. Showing honor should never require distorting the truth. The guideline here, as everywhere, is speaking the truth in love. Where the parents’ will conflicts with God’s will, again the attitude of the early church is the right path: “We must obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29). All application of this section must remember that these commands are an application of the larger ethic of Ephesians to a specific area. The whole letter is the framework for applying these instructions.

As in all relations, anger is out and nurturing is in. This is the body theology applied to the home. Concern for the anger of children is emphasized because of the destruction it causes in the family. At the same time, too often children are the targets for the hostility or threats from parents because of their potential for greater success. Jealousy and contempt lead to children being belittled and blocked, but in the process the parents destroy themselves. Again the issue is the use of power. Will it be used positively to enhance or negatively to destroy?

As in earlier sections, this text underscores the importance of teaching. Christians are to be nurturers, especially in their own homes. But the emphasis placed on teaching cannot be confined to the family. The church also has a responsibility to teach and nurture children. The text implies a value on children that should not be taken lightly. They are not to be ignored or merely tolerated, but cared for and instructed about life in Christ. If stewardship is the proper management of assets, Christian stewardship should focus first of all on nurturing children. Neither the church nor the family has an asset more valuable than its children.23

Slaves and masters (6:5–9). Not only is slavery foreign to us, but our understanding of it has been determined by nineteenth-century slavery in the United States. This increases our difficulty in understanding why the early church did not call for a wholesale rejection of slavery.

In the Greco-Roman world slavery was so much a part of life that hardly anyone thought about whether it might be illegitimate. Only the Therapeutae, a Jewish sect in Egypt, and perhaps the Essenes, rejected slavery in principle. It was considered an economic and practical necessity, an assumed part of life as much as birds and trees. Scholars are reluctant to hazard estimates about the numbers, but as many as one-third of the people in Greece and Rome were slaves. In addressing them Paul was addressing an enormous number of people. People became slaves through various avenues: birth, parental selling or abandonment, captivity in war, inability to pay debts, and voluntary attempts to better one’s condition. Race was not a factor.

No doubt for many slaves life was harsh and cruel, but their circumstances depended on their owners. They did not merely do menial work; they did nearly all the work, including oversight and management and most professions. Many were educated better than their owners. They could own property, even other slaves, and were allowed to save money to buy their freedom. No slave class existed, for slaves were present in all but the highest economic and social strata. Many gained freedom by age thirty, especially in urban areas. Even after gaining freedom, however, they were still under obligation to their former owners in times of need.

Laws attempted to prevent gross abuse of slaves, but owners did have free rein to treat slaves as they wished. Some were loved and treated like family, but they had no rights. Others were treated cruelly, and if owners wanted to torture, crucify, or kill slaves they could. The main limitation of physical abuse was the loss of value in the slave. Threat and violence were assumed necessary to control slaves. In a Jewish framework slaves were somewhat better off, and the Old Testament prohibited Jews holding other Jews in permanent slavery.24 In the Greco-Roman world slaves were often dehumanized. Aristotle, for example, said that the free man rules over the slave because the slave has no deliberative faculty and is a living tool. He considered it inappropriate to speak about justice with regard to slaves.25

Ephesians 6:5–9 describes an ideal situation. What would Paul have said to slaves who were being sexually abused or asked to perform unlawful acts, possibly against their will?26 A glimpse into the difficulty is provided in 1 Peter 2:18–25, which instructs slaves to submit even to harsh masters and to hold on to their convictions even when they suffered unjustly. These Christians were called to take their identity from Christ, regardless of the circumstances. Revolt was out of the question, but their lives were to be a quiet protest and a witness to a higher calling.

For the early church to advocate revolt would have been the death of the Christian movement. Slavery and other social issues were not their focus; the gospel and its description of life were.27 They did not work out the sociological implications of the gospel except where it related to reception of the message and relations within churches. But as they presented life in Christ, they put in motion a process that would eventually destroy slavery. The painful fact is that it took far too long to accomplish the job, and the attempts by Christians to defend the legitimacy of slavery in the nineteenth century are disturbing.28

This forces us to question whether we too simply assume the necessity of the structures of our society. People are still being dehumanized and tyrannized by relationships and employers. While not slaves, they are enslaved by our economic and social system. We are prone to throw up our hands and say, “That’s the way it is.” Like Paul, we must find ways to say, “The slave is your brother,” so that the system is subverted by the way people are valued and nurtured. Churches should lead the way in such thinking.

But the attitudes of people in such situations need to change too. Many people are caught in the system or are underemployed, but need the jobs they have. They tend to become resentful and uncooperative or passive, waiting for some external force to remedy the situation. What Paul tells slaves is directly relevant. Our jobs and our role in the culture do not determine who we are. We live in, to, and for Christ in all we do. Moreover, our value and identity do not derive from our circumstances, but from Christ. By directing all our actions to Christ, all of life—even the most mundane parts—is elevated to meaning and service to God.

The message of this text obviously moves from ancient slavery to modern employer-employee relations, but it pushes us far beyond that. Its theology concerns who we really are, what motivates us, whom we seek to please, and how we use power. Every part of life is redefined. No action or relation is seen by itself, and nothing is treated at merely a surface level. Everything we do involves a direct encounter with Jesus Christ. He is the origin and the recipient of every act. If this is true, no act is mundane and no person is unimportant. Power must be used for him, not against him. And all of us stand on equal footing with the same Lord, who cares deeply how we treat each other and will hold us accountable.

Contemporary Significance

THE VERY FORM of this text is an indictment of modern-day churches. As passages like this show, early Christian congregations were made up of a cross-section of society, but the usual valuations of the society were rejected. In most of our churches the valuations of society are retained so that no real cross-section comes together. We have churches for different socio-economic groups; we do not draw people to a common place where hierarchies and valuations are set aside and people know they stand on equal footing before God. As long as a church is a “group of our kind,” it fails its mission. Application of the text requires creation of a place where grace is evident and all people come together as equals.

Parents and children (6:1–4). The text addresses children first because that is the subject of the traditional house codes. Ideally parents should be addressed first, for they nurture long before children can obey. This text is an attempt to bring into the home the ethic of 4:1–5:21. Humility, tolerant love, and mutual submission belong first of all in the family.

Unfortunately, too many people, including Christians, have a public and a private persona. They appear as warm, congenial, righteous people in public, but are demons at home. We are our worst selves with the people closest to us. Christians should have only one persona, or we are no longer living in truth. We need to live tirelessly the humility, tolerant love, and mutual submission of the gospel both in private and in public. The most important witness we have is at stake—the witness within our families.

Life is painful when children turn their back on the Christian faith of their parents, but it is tragic when the misconduct and hypocrisy of their parents has caused them to do so. Integrity of faith starts in the family.

Parents. Being a parent is a hard job, but if God grants a person the privilege, nothing in life is more important. As brief as verse 4 is, the instructions cover a lot of ground: nurture and do not exasperate [or make angry]. The practical consequences of this instruction include:

(1) creating a context of grace, love, support, respect, and encouragement

(2) always speaking the truth in love

(3) attending to the material and emotional needs of children

(4) teaching, enlightening, warning, holding accountable, and disciplining, all as part of life lived to Christ; giving them a theology

(5) giving experiences, especially in work and in caring for others

(6) refusing to put down, demean, or damage them (shrill and angry speech does not belong)

(7) rejecting jealousy and contempt

(8) granting freedom within legitimate boundaries

(9) avoiding unhealthy pressure or expectations

(10) refusing to live through the children.

All of this takes time, communication skill, and discipline. Care of children is never an afterthought. In our society frequently both parents work outside the home, and children suffer. Christian parents need to think through this issue and how schedules can be arranged so that children receive attention. Communication skill is required, for children are constantly changing and every child is different. Without attention not only to what is said, but how it is heard, the relation will not flourish.

Then, as the guidelines suggest, parents discipline themselves first.29 They need to have good mental health, for their children’s lives depend on it. It is never too late to implement these guidelines, but they should start when the child is an infant. Mental illness is by and large caused by an absence of or defect in love that a child requires.30 The feeling of value essential for good mental health is acquired in childhood and is difficult to find later in life.31

The teenage years do not have to be times of rebellion and disrespect. In fact, they can be some of the most enjoyable years, for teenagers are old enough to enter into discussion and participate in a range of activities that smaller children cannot. Parents should affirm repeatedly that they are on their children’s side; they should be for their children. They are not the enemy. No one is perfect, but families can work together to enable each other.

A wrong turn. Focus on children, however, can become an idolatry of children or a wrongful indulging of them. Both of these lead to heartache. Like all else, being a parent is subsumed under life in Christ. Children are not the goal of life, but a context for living out life in Christ. The family is the primary place for discipleship.

Children. In effect, children are asked to give back what their parents give them: respect and love within the framework of their commitment to Christ. By obedience they give attention to parents, express their gratitude, and seek to assist. This is still the proper response for Christian children.

Obedience should never be blind obedience. The ideal situation within the text assumes the parents’ request is legitimate, but sometimes parents are insensitive or misguided in what they ask. Children too must learn to speak the truth in love, and their obedience to parents cannot mean disobedience to Christ. The most difficult circumstances for Christian children involve parents who are antithetical to Christianity or who are not emotionally balanced. Families are not only the primary place for discipleship; sometimes they are the most trying place. But even in extreme cases children must still love and respect their parents.

This is true not merely for small children and adolescents. In the ancient world, obligations to parents extended to death. We will not show obligation in the same way, but adult children must still honor their parents. Honor requires care and attention. Even totally independent children can and should learn from parents—and teach them—throughout life. Granted, past sins or present demeanor sometimes make relations intolerable, but for good or ill our psyche is tied up with our parents. We are rarely whole without being whole with them. Admittedly, circumstances sometimes are so bad that direct communication is harmful, but we need to find ways to address each other, honor our parents before God, exercise forgiveness, and speak the truth in love. Vengeance and punishment cannot be the goals, for they do not fit with the cross of Christ.

In our day, possibly the crying need in honoring parents has to do with care for the aging. We do not do it well, and no easy answers exist. Institutional help is sometimes necessary, but many institutions for the elderly leave a lot to be desired. If honor involves care and attention, we cannot marginalize and forget elderly family members by removing them from sight.

Slaves and masters (6:5–9). The application of the teaching on slaves and masters is obviously relevant for work relations, but it actually involves every relation and act. No relation is merely a relation; it is a context for relating to Christ. No job is merely work; it is a context for serving Christ.

Relations with people. The first application of this text concerns the way we understand ourselves and others. Society sends signals that declare our relative value and tell us where we fit in the hierarchy, but this text gives a different system of valuing. The hierarchy does not exist. We all have roles and tasks, but they do not render people more or less valuable. We all have the same Lord and face the same judgment. Arrogance and feelings of inferiority are out of place, as is favoritism. If God does not show favoritism, neither should we. We typically show favoritism to the rich and powerful, but little respect for the poor and powerless.32 Both are sins.

It is so easy for us to demean people we consider to be “low on the totem pole.” We do not have slaves, but we do have “service personnel” and people who “do not count.” It is easy to dehumanize and tyrannize them. We “chew them out” when we are unsatisfied. We view them as faceless numbers when the time comes to downsize. By lack of attention, body language, or attitude we communicate to them, “We do not really care about you.” Yet such people are as important as any “star” or power-broker, and our Christian witness depends on how we treat them. We must relate to them as if we were relating to Christ.

Application of this text also lifts people out of dehumanizing situations and gives them control. Others may seek to dehumanize them, but they have a high calling: They serve Christ. They do not work in response to some authority figure, but because they seek to do the will of God. No human controls them, for they serve the Lord Christ.

What we do matters. The most important application of this text is the realization that we are slaves of Christ. The language should not be dampened. We belong to him and serve him. If we take seriously that he is the origin and recipient of every act,33 all our work takes on meaning and our treatment of people changes. Work will be done with care, not just to get by. People will be nurtured, not used or ignored. With this consciousness we come close to mirroring the creative activity of God. This requires a fundamental change in handling life.

For example, a worker with an airline could do enough to get by, but in the process neglect safety hazards or maintenance problems. That is an ethical issue and certainly not fitting with Christ. His work is not merely a job, but an opportunity to demonstrate integrity and obedience. By knowing that he serves Christ, he must make the plane as safe and efficient as possible.

A teacher could easily go through the routine, present material, give tests, and go home. Everyone would agree the teacher had fulfilled his or her contract, but it would not be enough. If the teacher teaches as to Christ, teaching is no longer a job; it is the care and nurture of souls. It is excellence of thought joined to the value of a person.

A waitress could give menus, take orders, bring food, and clean up. Maybe it would be enough, but if she serves as to Christ, she values herself and the people she serves.

A man sells papers in the street. He can take money and give papers, and no one will care. If he knows he serves Christ, he cares for people and values them even if they do not value him. What he does is important—not irreplaceable perhaps, but important.

But this is not a text solely to keep the lowly happy and working hard. The people who buy the papers are to relate to the man selling them as to Christ. There are no people whom we may treat as unimportant. Even those without importance are important, and we are to treat them as we would Christ.

What we do and how we do it matters because all of life is lived in, to, and for the Lord. By necessity we are to reflect his love and truth. People and tasks are to be handled with care, for that is what the Lord requires.

To what audience do we play? Most people spend their lives seeking respect and admiration from a poorly defined audience. But as interests become focused, the audience becomes more defined. We choose the sector we want to impress. We act in direct response to the audience we think is watching. The more we care about the audience, the more diligent we are. We work hard if the boss is watching. We dress carefully if certain people will see us. We guard our tongue in certain groups. But if the audience is not present, neither is the effort. This is why we demean some people but go overboard to impress others. With the first we do not care about the audience; with the second we do.

Christians are asked to remember only one audience, the audience always present and to whom we are accountable—God. We are not to play to a secondary audience, and we are not to seek to impress another constituency. We are to honor God by living in truth and love.