I am of the belief that starting with Ephesians 5:22 and ignoring Ephesians 5:21 is very intentional. It happens so often, even here on CF, that I begin to wonder if some people's bibles are missing that verse entirely, or perhaps they've just blotted it out.
Well so often it's blocked off that way in our Bibles. THAT is intentional and wrong. I'm grateful that lately Bibles are starting to block it off at verse 21. EVEN BETTER is when they indicate 5:21-6:9 is one section.
The new NIV Study Bible makes notation of that. This is a NEW note:
5:21—6:9 In chs. 2–4 Paul showed the way God brought believing Jews and Gentiles together into a new relationship in Christ. In 4:1–6 he stressed the importance of unity. Now he shows how believers, filled with the Spirit, can live together in a practical way in various human relationships. This list of responsibilities is similar to the pattern of ancient household codes (Col 3:18—4:1; 1Pe 2:13—3:12) with key differences based on Christian theology and mutuality (see article) Ephesians 5:21 (NIV Study Bible, Fully Revised Notes)
And the referenced article:
Household Expectations in the First Century
1Pe 2:13—3:7
The form of a household or domestic code occurs at a few places in the NT: Eph 5:21—6:9; Col 3:18—4:6; 1Pe 2:13—3:7. This literary genre was commonplace in the Mediterranean world prior to and around the time of the NT. These codes provided a set of expectations for the key relationships in the household, directed toward the head of the house—often called the paterfamilias. The typical pattern would include instructions for the husband toward wives, master toward slaves, and father toward children. In other words, these codes provided directives to the male head to rule well his household, including his wife, slaves, and children. For example, Aristotle in his Politics delineates the key relationships of the house as “master and slave, husband and wife, father and children” (1.2.1, 1253b) and comments that “it is a part of the household science to rule over wife and children” (1.5.1, 1259a).
If we compare Greco-Roman household codes with those in the NT, we see that these three common categories are used in Ephesians and Colossians. 1 Peter omits the category of children to fathers and adds the relationship of the Christian to those who govern (2:13–17), which is particularly important to his audience who is experiencing suffering because of their withdrawal from civic life centered around pagan temples (4:3–4).
Yet the NT’s household codes do not simply follow cultural expectations in every way, though they do in their calls to submission: slaves to their masters; wives to their husbands; children to their fathers or parents. This exhortation would not have struck any reader as odd or unusual. There are, however, a number of features of the NT codes that were unusual or unique and that imply that Christian households were to be less autocratic and patriarchal than their pagan counterparts.
First, in contrast to the household code formula, Paul and Peter directly address the household members with less power (wives, children, and slaves), providing them a greater sense of agency in their relationships. Peter’s address to Christian wives of unbelieving husbands is particularly surprising in this regard, since his call for their submission has as its goal the winning of their non-Christian husbands to faith. This is quite an amazing goal, given the context in which the cultural expectation was for a wife to follow her husband’s gods and not pursue religious devotion on her own. The Greek moralist Plutarch expressed this cultural expectation: “it is becoming for a wife to worship and to know only the gods that her husband believes in” (Advice to Bride and Groom 19, Moralia 140D).
Second, the power of the household head is significantly curtailed in comparison to extra-biblical domestic codes. Instead of the husband ruling over his wife (as in Aristotle), in the spirit of mutual submission (Eph 5:21) he is to love her sacrificially and to avoid any harsh treatment toward her (5:25; Col 3:19). This is quite a counter-cultural stance for the paterfamilias in that culture. Christian husbands are even warned that their prayers will be ineffectual if they do not respect (give honor to) their wives (1Pe 3:7).
Finally, we should remember that Christians were a small and often struggling religious group within Judaism in the first century. They would likely have had no pretensions of ridding their world of slavery, patriarchy, or the Roman Empire. Their calling was to live out the gospel as those without much cultural power and to be missional both within the household and outside of it. The NT household codes positioned those first-century Christians to accommodate to cultural expectations as much as possible, while remaining true to Christ, the gospel, and their mission. 1 Peter 2:13 (NIV Study Bible, Fully Revised Notes)
IMO this is a HUGE step forward. (I studied the Bible for 30 years, but never heard of the household codes until I became an egalitarian.)
