The PuritanBoard - View Single Post

Presbyterian Deacon · #5 (**permalink**) 05-04-2008, 08:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by py3ak

I think it would be quite a stretch to think that Matthew Henry was not clear on the proper role of authority between a husband and a wife. Consider this from the commentary on Ephesians 5:22

Quote:

The duty prescribed to wives is submission to their husbands in the Lord (v. 22), which submission includes the honouring and obeying of them, and that from a principle of love to them. They must do this in compliance with God's authority, who has commanded it, which is doing it as unto the Lord; or it may be understood by way of similitude and likeness, so that the sense may be, “as, being devoted to God, you submit yourselves unto him.” From the former sense we may learn that by a conscientious discharge of the duties we owe to our fellow-creatures we obey and please God himself; and, from the latter, that God not only requires and insists on those duties which immediately respect himself, but such as respect our neighbours too. The apostle assigns the reason of this submission from wives: For the husband is the head of the wife, v. 23. The metaphor is taken from the head in the natural body, which, being the seat of reason, of wisdom, and of knowledge, and the fountain of sense and motion, is more excellent than the rest of the body. God has given the man the pre-eminence and a right to direct and govern by creation, and in that original law of the relation, Thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee. Whatever there is of uneasiness in this, it is an effect of sin coming into the world. Generally, too, the man has (what he ought to have) a superiority in wisdom and knowledge.

It seems to me, that Henry in Genesis was not trying to be overly theological. His commentary at this point seems more devotional than expositional. When the quote in the OP is read in its devotional context, it is a very moving and thought provoking sentiment.