What Makes a Christian Marriage?

God’s Good Design

God created marriage as the most intimate and enduring human relationship. When God made Adam and put him in the Garden of Eden, he had no companion. He had God above Him, and animals under him, but no one alongside him. In God’s kind providence, He gave him Eve as a helper—not above him to rule, nor under him as a slave, but beside him as his companion and fellow worker in God’s world. He made Adam and Eve, and their marriage, “very good” (Gen. 1). No abuse, no manipulation, no fear.

When Adam met Eve, he loved her and rejoiced over her with singing. They were naked and unashamed, signifying not only sexual intimacy but also full disclosure and full delight. They laughed together, played together, worked together, rested together, and worshiped together. They had no fear of being exploited by each other. They had nothing to hide and everything to enjoy. Theirs was a perfect marriage, unfettered by selfishness and untainted by sin.

The Fall and Marital Conflict

Everything changed when they rebelled against God’s command. The fall brought death which infected every part of their world—especially this most intimate relationship. When God came to Adam and Eve after their sin, He pinpointed marriage as one place where they would acutely experience the effects of their sin. God intended marriage for mutual benefit, but now, because of sin, they would have continual conflict.

God described this when He came to Adam and Eve after they listened to Satan and rebelled against God by eating the forbidden fruit. His words to Eve were:

I will greatly multiply your sorrow and your conception;
In pain you shall bring forth children;
Your desire shall be for your husband,
And he shall rule over you.

As a result of their sin, Eve would experience suffering in two areas: childbearing and marriage. The second half of the verse above describes the second area—marriage—and the conflict which will persist within the relationship God originally intended for mutual enjoyment.

It’s important for us to understand the phrase “Your desire shall be for your husband.” The words “Your desire shall be for your husband” translate three words which literally mean “to/toward | your man | your desire.” But what does it mean that her desire is toward her husband?

Some translations take this as sexual desire (i.e. childbearing will be difficult, yet you will still want sex with your husband). But most translations keep closer to the original meaning. The NIV, NASB, LSB, CSB, and KJV are all essentially the same as the NKJV (“Your desire shall be for your husband”). This is good for transparency but less helpful for our understanding. The ESV is similar, but it uses “contrary to” rather than “for” (“Your desire will be contrary to your husband”). This is legitimate, since the Hebrew ʼêl is a preposition that can mean toward, with, for, or against. “Contrary” follows the meaning against.

The ESV is also supported by the contrast in the text between the woman’s actions (she will act contrary to her husband’s authority) and the man’s actions (he will overrule/dominate her). The man’s ruling is juxtaposed to the woman’s desire to control. Taken this way, “Your desire shall be for your husband” means “You will desire to supersede or evade your husband’s authority.”

The NET makes this contrast even stronger: “You will want to control your husband, but he will dominate you.” While this translation is not strictly literal, I think it most clearly represents the intended meaning of the Hebrew. There will be conflict between the man and the woman, a battle for supremacy. They each seek to have their own way with the other. A note from the NET translators is helpful here. “The LORD announces a struggle, a conflict between the man and the woman. She will desire to control him, but he will dominate her instead.”¹ Sin will now manifest in this most-intimate relationship, causing conflict where once there was peace and delight.

In response, Adam will exert his physical advantages and subdue his wife. The word “rule” doesn’t speak of loving care but of assertive mastery, of forced dominion. The Hebrew verb mashal means “to rule over,” but in a way that emphasizes powerful control. The NET uses “dominate.” Because of sin’s pervasiveness, Adam and all husbands after him will typically attempt to control their wives. They will tend to overrule, not caring for their wives but rather treating them as inferior and using them for their own advantage. This oppression may be economic, social, or sexual. Whatever its manifestation, it is far from God’s original creation.

We need to understand that the man’s domination is not caused by the woman’s behavior. Sin is the cause. God describes the effects of sin in parallel. As an effect of the fall, wives will usually relate sinfully to their husbands by trying to control them, and husbands will usually relate sinfully to their wives by trying to control them. His behavior is not a legitimate or excusable response to his wife’s behavior. Rather, it is the sinful manifestation of a selfish heart.

What a twist the fall brought. When God brought Eve to Adam, he delighted in her. “This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh” (Gen. 2:23). But the relationship God created as the best of all human relationships became the source of greatest conflict. Now there is fear, mistrust, and exploitation. Rather than delighting in each other, they take advantage of each other. Mutual love disintegrates into mutual manipulation.

Genesis 3 Marriages

The story of history looks very much like the end of Genesis 3:16 — “he shall rule over you.” Men have typically used their physical advantages to subdue women, using them for their own benefit. Men usually dominate by force. This might be exercised in physical intimidation, threats, or outright abuse, or in other ways such as financial control (since men are usually the primary income-generators). Some men seem to believe it is their prerogative as head of the house to have their needs met first, assuming that the home should revolve around him from the moment he walks in the door. Others control more subtly by making life miserable for everyone around them when they don’t get what they want. This kind of man says, “Put up with my brooding, or I will make your life miserable.” This, too, is sinful domineering, a self-centered black hole that sucks the life from everyone else.

Women don’t usually control by superior physical strength, but there are other ways for her to take advantage of her husband. Strong words—especially those which highlight the husband’s failures or shame him—reduce him to a shell-of-a-man who subdues to her desires. Her desires rule the house, and her husband is a pawn in her game. Other times this takes a different tack. If her sense of fulfillment is bound up in her husband, she may go along with her husband’s sin or abuse because he fulfills her desires. Instead of helping him fulfill God’s purpose for him, she accomodates his sin because she thinks she needs what she gets from him (security, appreciation, affection, etc.).

Without the redemptive grace of the gospel, marriages in a fallen world will resemble Genesis 3:16. All of us are born slaves to our sinful desires, turned in on ourselves and hell-bent on using those around us for our own benefit. The most intimate relationships suffer the most. The husband, in his sinful self-worship, subjugates his wife and uses her for his own benefit. The wife, in her sinful self-worship, struggles against his authority. Gospel-less marriages always manifest Genesis 3 behaviors.

We may want to act like these kinds of marriages don’t exist in Anabaptist circles, but that simply won’t do. We have dysfunctional marriages. They don’t always come to light, but many couples smoulder on in a stale, clammy coexistence. Just because couples continue to live together (and don’t file for divorce) doesn’t mean their marriage honors God. Manicured exteriors sometimes mask bitter relationships.

But this text applies to more than dysfunctional marriages. Each of us has residual sin that needs to be cut out. The Christian life is a lifelong day-by-day battle. Which means each of us—man or woman—have aspects of Genesis 3 manifesting in our hearts and lives. We all need to die daily to self-centered sin and resurrect by the power of Christ to self-sacrificing love.

Ephesians 5 Marriages

Let’s fast forward from Genesis to the 1st century AD, in which the apostle Paul writes his epistle to the Ephesians. In chapter 5 of this epistle he describes Christian marriages in ways reminiscent of pre-exilic Eden. Because of the gospel, husbands and wives can again enjoy relational intimacy like what God intended in the beginning.

I think Paul has the opening chapters of Genesis in mind when he describes Christian marriage in Ephesians 5. These verses read like the redemptive mirror of Genesis 3. Genesis says that Adam, because of his fall into sin, will seek to take advantage of his wife. In contrast, Paul tells Christian husbands to love their wives. Genesis describes Eve’s sinful tendency to control her husband, but in Christian marriages wives submit to their husband’s authority.

In Ephesians 5:22, Paul begins describing Christian marriage by telling wives they must “submit to [their] own husbands.” This is not a call to subservience but to loving service. She is not her husband’s pawn but his equal, given a different role but not a different worth (see Gen. 1:27, 5:1-2).

This is the redeemed opposite of Genesis 3:16. More significantly, it is a return to God’s design in pre-exilic Eden. He created Eve as a “helper comparable to [Adam]” (Gen. 2:18).  She was his partner, working with him to help him accomplish God’s purpose for them. The gospel leads us into this kind of marriage—the wife and husband joined together in doing God’s work.

As sin turns us inward and thereby induces us to seek our own, so the gospel turns us outward and leads us to seek the good of others. For wives, this begins in the home as she seeks her husband’s good. 

Similarly, husbands are told they must “love [their] wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her.” Again, this is the redeemed opposite of Genesis 3 and is a return to God’s original design. God intends men to exercise their authority, not to benefit themselves, but to benefit their wives (and all others under their care). All their actions are defined by love, modeled after Christ’s love for His bride the church. The husband loves just as Christ loved—and He loved by giving everything for His wife, up to and including His life.

So this sets the upper limit for what God expects from husbands. Have you died yet? No? Then whatever is required of you is within what God expects. Christian husbands must die daily, displaying Christ’s sacrificial love in their own death to self.

The gospel opposite of Adam’s domination in Genesis 3 is Ephesians 5 love which follows Christ’s example. This kind of man embraces God’s design by accepting authority and using it to benefit others.

It’s not too much to say that this kind of love invites submission. Godly women will gladly submit themselves to a man whose love reflects Christ’s. Notwithstanding the ongoing effect of Genesis 3, most women are drawn to this kind of authority—one committed to the good of those who shelter under it.

The defining mark of Christian marriage is Christian love, manifested in the husband and wife submitting themselves to each other by elevating the other person’s needs above their own. Christian love is not self-interested but others-focused. It takes delight in serving rather than being served. It does not seek its own benefit but rather that of the beloved.

Sin on Both Sides

From what I’ve seen, we Anabaptists are more concerned about correcting unsubmissive women than correcting domineering men. The scales of our discourse are tipped way over on one side. Notice that Genesis 3 parallels the particular sins of women and men, giving them equal weight. Women will seek to control, and men will over-rule, suppressing and subduing women. There’s sin on both sides. Yet today I see more effort exerted to make sure the women submit than to make sure the men are not over-ruling. Domineering gets justified because that’s what it takes to keep the women in line.

But doesn’t this look more like Genesis 3 than Ephesians 5? We are glad to quote Ephesians 5:22 (“Wives, submit to your own husbands.”) but neglect to see what Paul says a few verses later. The husband must love his wife, and the pattern for that love is Jesus, who poured out His lifeblood to redeem His bride. That’s a far cry from “a man is the king of his own castle.” Yes, he is given authority, but God expects him to use that authority to benefit those under it. He dies to himself to care for his wife and family. Wives must submit to their husbands, but husbands also submit themselves by laying down their self-centered preferences to serve their wives.

This is what marriages will look like when God redeems them by His grace. So when men instead abuse their power (even God-given positions) to keep women in line and benefit themselves, God is not pleased.

I hear the objection already, so let me be clear. I am not saying men ought to abrogate God-given authority. God established authority structures (cf. Rom 13) for our good, and within that He delegated certain responsibilities to men (Eph. 5:23). This isn’t a matter of deconstructing God’s structures. It is, however, a matter of deconstructing their sinful use. Even good things God created for our benefit can be twisted and used for sinful purposes.

God intends a man to use his authority to serve others. He should not use his position for his own benefit, but rather to care for, serve, and protect those God has put in his care. There’s a bottom-up dynamic baked into the top-down structure. The more authority a person has, the greater responsibility he or she has to use that authority for the good of others. Authority is not a tool to wield for personal gain. It is given so those who are weaker are protected, those who are tender can flourish, and those who are hurting can heal.

Authority is a beautiful thing when exercised for the good of those under it; it is a twisted monster when those who wield it use it to protect and advance their own interests.

We men (especially those in authority) don’t find it difficult to remind women that they must submit to authority. Do we remind each other that we too must submit by laying down our preferences to serve our wives? Without this sort of integrity, we will end up with relationships that look more like Genesis 3 than Genesis 1-2 and Ephesians 5.

We need to pay attention to the neglected portions of Genesis 3 and Ephesians 5. We talk a lot about women’s submission, but far less about men and their tendency to domineer. It is wrong for a man to use his authority to benefit himself rather than to serve others. We need to deal with sin in men too.

Because there’s sin on both sides.

1.  NET Bible, Full Notes Edition (Biblical Studies Press, 2019), 12, Footnote D. ↩︎