Lessons #253 and 254
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ 1. It is best to use this note after you have listened to the lessons because there are +
+ comments given in the actual exposition not in the note. +
+ 2. The Bible abbreviations are as follows: CEV =Contemporary English version, +
+ CEB = Common English Bible, ESV= English Standard Version, +
+ GWT = God’s Word Translation, ISV = International Standard Version, +
+ NAB=New English Bible, NASB= New American Standard Bible, +
+ NEB= New English Bible, NET = New English Translation, +
+ NLT = New Living Translations NJB = New Jerusalem Bible, +
+ NJV = New Jewish Bible, TEV = Today’s English Version. +
+ 3. Notes have not been edited for grammatical errors. +
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Children-Parent responsibilities (Eph 6:1-4)
…. 4 Fathers, do not exasperate your children; instead, bring them up in the training and instruction of the Lord.
The section of Ephesians 6:1-4, as we indicated previously, is concerned with children’s and parents’ responsibilities as it pertains to the Christian household. Thus far, the apostle had focused on the responsibilities of children with respect to their parents, the major responsibility being that of obedience to them. As the apostle finished expounding on that major responsibility, he shifts his attention to the major responsibility of parents with respect to their children, which is to rear up their children in accordance to God’s word. But before we get to this responsibility, we need to make two observations with respect to verse 4 that we are about to study.
A first observation is that the primary responsibility of rearing up children is directed to both the father and the mother, that is, both parents. This observation is warranted because verse 4 begins with the word fathers. This fact may give the impression that the apostle addressed only the fathers as the male parents of children as many interpreters contend. It is not that there is no basis for such an impression. You see, the apostle had used a Greek word (goneus) that means “parents” in verse 1 so based on this fact someone could develop the impression that the apostle wanted to address fathers only since he did not use the same Greek word in verse 4 that meant parents in verse 1. The argument would be that if the apostle intended to address both parents that he should have used the Greek word that means “parents” instead of the Greek word that is translated “fathers.” True, but it is also true that the word the apostle used includes both parents. The Greek word (patros) translated “fathers” may refer to the male parent as the Apostle Paul used the word in his description of the believer in Corinth who was involved in sexual relationship that is not sanctioned in the Scripture, as we read in 1 Corinthians 5:1:
It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that does not occur even among pagans: A man has his father’s wife.
However, the Greek word in the plural, as it is used in Ephesians 6:4, may refer to both parents. It is certainly in this sense that the word is used by the apostle to describe both male and female ancestors of Israel in 1 Corinthians 10:1:
For I do not want you to be ignorant of the fact, brothers, that our forefathers were all under the cloud and that they all passed through the sea.
When Moses wrote our forefathers were all under the cloud he meant that Israel was under the protection of the cloud or that the cloud above them was giving them a covering. But, we know that historically, those that were protected by cloud when Israel was in the desert consisted of male and female who came out of Egypt so the use of the word “forefathers” is inclusive of men and women as the ancestors of Paul and those he included in the use of the pronoun ours. In a family setting, the plural usage of the Greek word translated “fathers” in Ephesians 6:4 refers to both the father and the mother. That this is the case is evident in the description of Moses’ parents in Hebrews 11:23:
By faith Moses’ parents hid him for three months after he was born, because they saw he was no ordinary child, and they were not afraid of the king’s edict.
The phrase Moses’ parents is more literally his fathers. Clearly, the author of Hebrews did not mean that Moses had more than one biological father nor is he saying that Moses’ ancestors hid him. No! He meant that his father and mother, that is, his parents hid him. Of course, in the original narrative of the event referred here it is the mother who is said to have hidden Moses although that would not have been possible without the cooperation of the father, as implied in Exodus 2:2:
and she became pregnant and gave birth to a son. When she saw that he was a fine child, she hid him for three months.
The fact that the Greek word translated “father” when used in the plural may mean both parents, supports our claim that when Apostle Paul addressed fathers in Ephesians, he meant both parents. We should remember that the quotation in Ephesians 6:2 with respect to the fifth commandment involves father and mother so it is most certainly that the apostle was thinking of both parents as he writes the instruction of verse 4. Furthermore, we are certain that our explanation is correct because the responsibility of rearing children as indicated in Ephesians 6:4 involves mothers as well. For example, mothers are supposed to teach their children as well as the fathers. If this was not the case, then we would not have the instruction given to a son with respect to both parents in Proverbs 1:8:
Listen, my son, to your father’s instruction and do not forsake your mother’s teaching.
In any case, it is our assertion that the use of the word fathers in Ephesians 6:4 refers to both parents. However, we know that the apostle had used a Greek word that means “parents” in verse 1 of Ephesians 6, so why did he not use it in verse 4? The passage does not directly tell us but there are at least two possible reasons for using the Greek word that means “father.” First, it is because the man is the head of the family. Thus, it will be appropriate that in dealing with the primary responsibility of parents towards their children that the apostle should address the one in authority in the Christian household. Second, it is probably because of the next instruction that he gave is one that is connected with discipline. This being the case, it is appropriate to use a word that is associated more with discipline than a word that may not convey the concept of discipline as such. Fathers are usually associated with strict discipline of the children in any household, as we read, for example, in Hebrews 12:9:
Moreover, we have all had human fathers who disciplined us and we respected them for it. How much more should we submit to the Father of our spirits and live!
This does not mean that mothers do not discipline their children but fathers are the ones who are more prone to doing this, especially when it involves physical punishment. Mothers are more often associated with tender care and nurturing, as we can gather from the comparison made by the apostle in 1 Thessalonians 2:7:
but we were gentle among you, like a mother caring for her little children.
The apostle in comparing himself to a mother implies that mothers are more nurturing than fathers but this does not mean that fathers are not compassionate towards the children, for they are, as also implied in the comparison of God’s compassion to His children to that of human fathers towards their children in Psalm 103:13:
As a father has compassion on his children, so the Lord has compassion on those who fear him;
This notwithstanding, mothers are usually associated with nurturing of children as fathers are more often associated with discipline. It is probably for this reason the apostle used the Greek word that means “fathers” instead of the Greek word that means “parents” in dealing with the primary responsibility of parents towards their children.
A second observation of Ephesians 6:4 is that it is the only verse where the apostle in dealing with responsibilities of those in Christian household began with a negative instruction since he wrote do not exasperate your children. The primary responsibility of the wife is given positively in that the apostle wrote Wives, submit to your husbands in Ephesians 5:22. The primary responsibility of the husband is given positively as Husbands, love your wives in Ephesians 5:25. The responsibility of children begins positively as in the command children obey your parents of Ephesians 6:1. Likewise, the instruction to slaves begins positively in the command obey your earthly masters in Ephesians 6:5. This being the apostle’s pattern of providing instruction for the primary responsibility of each member of the household of a Christian family at that time, we have to wonder the reason the apostle did not begin the instruction to parents in the same manner but began with a negative command. It seems that it is because of the vulnerability of children. Furthermore, they are in a position that they would suffer most if they did not carry out their responsibility towards their parents. Wives if they are mistreated could endure it or in the worst case they would divorce their husbands. Slaves, although vulnerable, could if they are mistreated run away with minimal consequences but children have no such options. If they disobey their parents, they have serious consequences to contend with all their life on this planet. It is probably because of this that the Holy Spirit wants the parents to recognize the precarious nature of children in their relationship with their parents and so to be careful in dealing with them. In effect, it seems that the Holy Spirit directed the apostle to begin with negative command to parents to ward off any kind of child-abuse. Rearing children is a difficult task and so parents have to be on guard to ensure they are not truly abusive of their children in that process. Children are in precarious situation in that they have the tendency to be rebellious and so any abuse of authority will put them in a situation that they will not only resent authority but be hurt by not obeying their parents. This reason we have given is similar to the reason the apostle gave to the Colossians when he used similar instruction to fathers, as we read in Colossians 3:21:
Fathers, do not embitter your children, or they will become discouraged.
As in Ephesians 6:4, fathers are given negative instruction with respect to their children. However, in Colossians, the reason for the negative instruction is given in the clause or they will become discouraged. But what does it mean for a child to be discouraged in the context of parent-child relationship? It means that a child has reached a conclusion that there is nothing he or she can do to please the parents; as a result, they either become timid, always nervous before the parents or they become rebellious. This being the case, when the apostle instructed fathers in Ephesians 6:4 do not exasperate your children, he is concerned with ensuring that parents do not place their children in a position where they may become rebellious and so endanger themselves because of the consequences of not obeying them. In effect, we are saying that the command is one that is intended to ward off any kind of child abuse where parents misuse their authority over their children in that they exercise their authority unnecessarily.
Be that as it may, what does the command do not exasperate your children mean? To answer this question, we need to examine briefly the Greek word the translators of the NIV rendered “exasperate.” It is translated from a Greek word (parorgizō) that means to cause someone to become provoked or quite angry hence “to make angry, exasperate.” It is a word that is used in the Septuagint to describe Israel’s provoking God to anger through idolatry as, for example, in Deuteronomy 4:25:
After you have had children and grandchildren and have lived in the land a long time—if you then become corrupt and make any kind of idol, doing evil in the eyes of the Lord your God and provoking him to anger,
In the NT, the word is used only twice by the Apostle Paul; in our present passage of Ephesians 6:4 and in Romans 10:19:
Again I ask: Did Israel not understand? First, Moses says, “I will make you envious by those who are not a nation; I will make you angry by a nation that has no understanding.”
Of course, the apostle quoted from Deuteronomy 32:21:
They made me jealous by what is no god and angered me with their worthless idols. I will make them envious by those who are not a people; I will make them angry by a nation that has no understanding.
The expression “make angry” in Deuteronomy is translated from a Hebrew word (kāʿǎs) that means “to prove, to make angry”, used mostly to describe Israel provoking God through idolatry but it is used rarely for human provocation of another. An example of its usage for human provocation is that of Peninnah towards Hannah, the mother of Samuel, as we read in 1 Samuel 1:6:
And because the Lord had closed her womb, her rival kept provoking her in order to irritate her.
It is not clearly stated in what way Hannah’s rival provoked her. However, the context implies that she taunted or ridiculed Hannah for not having a child. She would probably often make remarks that would remind Hannah that she did not have a child. For example, since according to the context their husband gave double portions of the sacrificial meat to Hannah, Peninnah would probably say something like, “our husband gave you double portions to compensate you since he gave all my children their portions.” The point is that the provocation has to do with the infertility of Hannah. In effect, the provocation has to do with limitation of Hannah. This background helps us to understand what the Holy Spirit intended to convey to parents when He through the Apostle Paul instructs them not to provoke their children to anger. The instruction is that parents should not say things that are intended to ridicule their children or convey the fact they are powerless before their parents. In effect, the instruction is one that is designed for parents to guard against their words to their children. They must be careful in what they say and how they say it to them. They should not be loose with facts when they speak to their children. They should be careful that whatever they say to their children are based on truth in order to avoid making their children angry. Children are prone to anger once their parents rebuke them but it is important that the reason for the rebuke is something truthful and not imagined. In short, we are saying that the instruction do not exasperate your children means that parents are to be careful that what they say or do, does not lead to their children being unnecessarily angry. This means several things. First, parents should not say things that are not factual and so place their children in a position where they have the continued tendency of rebellion. Second, they should not ridicule their children to the point that they feel worthless. No! They should rebuke them in love and be encouraging to them while not ignoring their failures. Third, parents should also be careful not to be inconsistent in their actions. For if they instruct a child about certain behavior and turn around and do the same thing they instructed against, this will make a child angry or confused and so is provoked to do things that are not right. Fourth, they should themselves ensure they are not constantly angry for any and every reason. Parents who are constantly angry are bound to pass that to their children so that they will also have angry children. Fifth, parents should not unnecessarily wield their authority over their children by demanding things that are either unreasonable or impossible for a child to carry out. The point is that the instruction do not exasperate your children involves both words and actions, that is, that parents should be careful about their conduct before their children.
The nature of the negative instruction or caution in the Greek implies that parents, especially fathers, in pagan societies were prone to being abusive or prone to irritating their children. This being the case, the apostle indicates that Christian parents should distinguish themselves by stopping such conduct that was prevalent in the society in which they live. The apostle implies that it is expected that Christian parents should be different from unbelieving parents in their relationship with their children. Of course, the apostle expects Christian homes to be decidedly different from that of non-Christian so that the apostle instructs Christian parents to break free from the prevailing practice of the ancient world where children are treated and devalued in a way that constantly causes them to be angry.
Having cautioned parents about their conduct towards their children, the apostle under the Holy Spirit moves from the negative that involves caution against their conduct to the positive. The change from the negative to the positive is introduced with the word instead in the NIV of Ephesians 6:4. The use of the word instead or but in some English versions is intended not only to indicate that the apostle is about to proceed to a more positive instruction which is his major concern in the verse but also to emphasize the contrast between the negative and the positive instructions of the verse.
The positive instruction of the Holy Spirit through the apostle is concerned with the primary responsibility of parents in a Christian household, that is, a household where both parents are believers. This primary responsibility, as we have already mentioned, is the rearing up of children and so the apostle writes in the words of the NIV bring them up. The expression “bring up” is translated from a Greek word (ektrephō) that has two general meanings. It may mean “to nourish, to provide food.” This meaning of “to nourish” is used in the Septuagint to describe the nourishment of water to plants in Ezekiel 31:4:
The waters nourished it, deep springs made it grow tall; their streams flowed all around its base and sent their channels to all the trees of the field.
It is with the meaning of “to provide food” that the Apostle Paul used the word to describe indirectly a secondary responsibility of a husband to the wife in Ephesians 5:29:
After all, no one ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cares for it, just as Christ does the church—
Another meaning of the Greek word is “to rear, to bring up a child.” This meaning is found in the Septuagint of 1 Kings 11:20:
The sister of Tahpenes bore him a son named Genubath, whom Tahpenes brought up in the royal palace. There Genubath lived with Pharaoh’s own children.
It is true that the first meaning of providing food is certainly involved in the responsibility of parents to their children but it is in the sense of rearing or bringing up children that the word is used in our passage of Ephesians 6:4 so that we can confidently assert that the primary responsibility of parents towards their children is to rear them or bring them up that certainly involves physical and spiritual upbringing.
The Greek command translated bring them up in the NIV is such that the apostle not only means that parents should repeatedly bring up children but also that they should make it their habit to do so. It is possible that at times parents become discouraged and give up or go easy on their children by being permissive so that in practice they are no longer rearing their children. But the command of the passage we are considering is that such should not occur. Parents should begin and continue to bring up their children. It is their responsibility while the children are at home to bring them up. They cannot afford to be slack in this responsibility. There is a sense that it can be said that a parent’s job of rearing children is never complete even when they leave home, as we will note later. Nevertheless, the rearing of children is a responsibility no parent should ever abdicate, that is, relinquish.
Rearing of children involves two related actions that are often not taken quite seriously by parents, especially in the time we live because of the influence of social sciences that advocate methods of rearing children that are not often in line with the Scripture. In effect, there are methods of raising up children that are advocated by social scientists that belong only to the world of unbelievers that should not be adopted by Christian parents. The Scripture is the only true guide for bringing up children. Anyway, the Holy Spirit through the apostle specifies the two related actions consisting of teaching and discipline in the sense of inflicting some form of pain on a child. These two related actions are given in the phrase of Ephesians 6:4 in the training and instruction of the Lord. Some take this phrase as conveying two independent actions because of the Greek words used but we contend that the apostle had in mind a responsibility that involves two related actions that the primary action is to be understood as training. In effect, the primary responsibility of Christian parents toward their children is to train them as in the word training.
What does training of a child mean or involve? To answer this question, we need first to consider the Greek word rendered training in our passage. The word “training” in the NIV is translated from a Greek word (paideia) that in the Greek world without the influence of the Scripture means “education,” as experts tell us. However, because of the influence of the OT Scripture, the Greek word acquired several meanings that are reflected in the Septuagint. To support the point that it is the word of God that influenced the meaning of the Greek word in question, we need to briefly examine how the Greek word used in our passage is used in the Septuagint. Our Greek word is used to translate a Hebrew word (mûsār) with a range of meanings. It may mean “discipline” in terms of “correction,” “rebuke,” or “punishment”, as in Proverbs 15:10:
Stern discipline awaits him who leaves the path; he who hates correction will die.
It is in the sense of “punishment” that the Hebrew word is used in describing the suffering of the Messiah in Isaiah 53:5:
But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed.
The Hebrew word may mean “instruction”, as in Proverbs 15:33:
The fear of the Lord teaches a man wisdom, and humility comes before honor.
The sentence the fear of the Lord teaches a man wisdom of the NIV is literally the fear of the Lord is the instruction for wisdom. Our Greek word is also used to translate a Hebrew word (tôḵǎḥǎṯ) that means “rebuke”, “punishment”, “argument” in Proverbs 10:17:
He who heeds discipline shows the way to life, but whoever ignores correction leads others astray.
Actually, our Greek word is used twice in this passage: for the Hebrew word that we indicated may mean “discipline” and then for the Hebrew word that also means “rebuke” although the Hebrew word is translated “correction” in this passage of Proverbs. So by considering the range of meanings of the Hebrew words that the translators of the Septuagint translated with our Greek word, we get the idea that our Greek word has a range of meanings that are affected by the Scripture and not how the word is primarily used for “education” in classical Greek. Based on these meanings, our Greek word has a range of meanings in our NT. It can mean discipline in terms of punishment, that is, chastisement for improving behavior, as it is used Hebrews 12:11:
No discipline seems pleasant at the time, but painful. Later on, however, it produces a harvest of righteousness and peace for those who have been trained by it.
It can mean “training” or “instruction in the sense of guidance for responsible living,” as it is used in describing the value of the Scripture in 2 Timothy 3:16:
All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,
Examination of the meanings of the Greek word translated “training” indicates that training of a child should involve first instruction. In effect, a parent should instruct the child continuously regarding what is expected of him or her in order to conform to God’s standard. This responsibility of parents was made clear in God’s purpose for choosing Abraham in Genesis 18:19:
For I have chosen him, so that he will direct his children and his household after him to keep the way of the Lord by doing what is right and just, so that the Lord will bring about for Abraham what he has promised him.”
After Abraham, the Lord indicated that it is the responsibility of parents to teach their children the word of God, according to Deuteronomy 6:6–7:
6 These commandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts. 7 Impress them on your children. Talk about them when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up.
This responsibility of instructing children belongs to both parents. This is clear from the information provided in the passage we cited previously, that is, Proverbs 1:8:
Listen, my son, to your father’s instruction and do not forsake your mother’s teaching.
The point is that both parents are to provide instructions to their children as part of training them but parents should be careful never to teach children things that are not true or things that are merely their own prejudices. The minds of children are to be molded with truth of God’s word and not human ideas or philosophies.
Instructions usually involve verbal communication but at times that may not be enough to train a child in that a child may not get the importance of being obedient to a given instruction then such a child should be taught that there are consequences for disobedience. The way to teach this involves the second aspect of training which is discipline that involves some form of pain. The best way to do this is to use corporal punishment that involves the use of rod. This is exactly where social scientists collide with the Scripture since they tell parents never to use rod or to whip a child because it teaches them violence. This is not true. That teaching is a direct assault on God’s word. The Scripture teaches the necessity of whipping a child correctly. The scripture tells us that those who refuse to whip or discipline their children do not love them, according to Proverbs 13:24:
He who spares the rod hates his son, but he who loves him is careful to discipline him.
Whipping or true discipline is necessary because it is in the nature of children to be foolish and so that foolishness has to be removed through whipping, as implied in Proverbs 22:15:
Folly is bound up in the heart of a child, but the rod of discipline will drive it far from him.
We should be careful that whipping is to be used only when a child does not respond to verbal instruction meaning that the foolishness in that child cannot be removed without it. A child would not die from correct use of whipping, as stated in Proverbs 23:13–14:
13 Do not withhold discipline from a child; if you punish him with the rod, he will not die. 14Punish him with the rod and save his soul from death.
Parents should not abuse their children by whipping them without reason and in loss of self-control for that will defeat the purpose of whipping which is to remove foolishness and impart wisdom on the child, according to Proverbs 29:15:
The rod of correction imparts wisdom, but a child left to himself disgraces his mother.
Parents who use correctly the rod of correction and instruction will save themselves from eventual pain that would come to children that were not properly brought up, as implied in Proverbs 29:17:
Discipline your son, and he will give you peace; he will bring delight to your soul.
A parent gets peace when he or she has brought up a child properly. A child brought up properly will not get into trouble with the society and so gives peace to the parents. On occasion when children are rebellious so that they grow up with the same spirit of rebellion that gets them into trouble, a parent can also have peace knowing that he or she did what was expected of him or her and so will not be filled with guilt that robs people of peace. To ensure that you can truly say you have done your best, then as a parent you should not protect your child from suffering the full consequence of the law when as a young person that child violates the law. Some parents want to use their influence in their community to shield their children from the punishment of the law. This is wrong. Remember that God instructed parents in Israel to turn in children who are rebellious to be stoned to death to purge evil from the society, as we can gather from Deuteronomy 21:18–21:
18 If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him, 19 his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him to the elders at the gate of his town. 20 They shall say to the elders, “This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a profligate and a drunkard.” 21 Then all the men of his town shall stone him to death. You must purge the evil from among you. All Israel will hear of it and be afraid.
So, to shield a child from punishment of the law is to create problem not only for the parents but for the society at large. Children who are left without discipline will suffer seriously in their life that may end up in death. This was the case of Ahijah the son of David, as recorded in 1 Kings 1:5–6:
5 Now Adonijah, whose mother was Haggith, put himself forward and said, “I will be king.” So he got chariots and horses ready, with fifty men to run ahead of him. 6 (His father had never interfered with him by asking, “Why do you behave as you do?” He was also very handsome and was born next after Absalom.)
This passage suggests David did not discipline Ahijah and so he suffered from lack of discipline. Anyway, training of a child involves instruction and discipline or punishment that involves the use of the rod.
It is our assertion that training of a child involves instruction and use of discipline in the form of whipping or other painful punishments but the emphasis should be on instruction. We say this because that is what we believe the Holy Spirit did through the Apostle Paul when he wrote the phrase and instruction of the Lord of Ephesians 6:4. This may not be clear but there are two indicators in this phrase that it is intended to give priority to instruction in the process of training. The first indicator is the conjunction and. The Greek conjunction (kai) translated “and” in our passage is taken by some either as a marker of coordinate relation or a marker of a hendiadys. However, it seem that it is here used to emphasize or state the importance of instruction in the process of training a child. This means that the conjunction may be translated and indeed so that there can be no doubt that the apostle wanted to emphasize instruction as the climax of training or the most important aspect of training a child. A second indicator of the emphasis of instruction in training a child is the very use of the word “instruction” in the phrase.
The word “instruction” is translated from a Greek word (nouthesia) that refers to counsel given about avoidance or cessation of an improper course of conduct hence means “instruction”, “teaching”, “warning or admonition.” It is translated “warning” by the translators of the NIV when the Apostle Paul wrote concerning some of the events that took place in the OT times, as we read in 1 Corinthians 10:11:
These things happened to them as examples and were written down as warnings for us, on whom the fulfillment of the ages has come.
Some English versions such as the NET and the NASB used the meaning “instruction” in place of “warning” in this passage. The word can also mean “rebuke” or “admonition” or “quiet reproof” about the repetition of improper conduct as the word is used in the instruction of how to deal with a divisive believer in Titus 3:10:
Warn a divisive person once, and then warn him a second time. After that, have nothing to do with him.
The translators of the NIV chose to translate our Greek word here as a verb. Actually, the more literal translation of this verse is Reject a divisive person after a first and second admonition. The instruction here is to warn a person who is a trouble maker in a local church concerning the destructive effect of division to a local church. This is to be done twice and after that to have nothing to do with the person in the sense of ignoring the person so that the individual will feel he is no longer a member of the local congregation although some think that it simply means excommunication. Anyway, our point is that the Greek word used in Ephesian 6:4 may also mean “admonition” or “warning.”
We have noted that the Greek word translated “instruction” in the NIV of Ephesians 6:4 may also mean “admonition” or “warning” so which of the two meanings the apostle intended? The meaning the apostle had in mind is determined by the phrase of the Lord. The phrase being translated from a genitive in the Greek is considered by some as a phrase that describes the quality of the preceding Greek word that means either “instruction” or “warning.” Thus, they say that the instruction is truly Christian since it has as its reference the Lord Jesus Christ. However, it seems that the Greek genitive used here is best understood in the sense that the noun “Lord” involved is used in sense that it is both a subject and object of a verbal idea in the noun that precedes it. This means that we should fully unpack the phrase of the Lord to read “about and from the Lord” where the Lord is a reference to Jesus Christ. If we did this, then the Greek phrase rendered instruction of the Lord in the NIV, based on the meanings of the Greek word we are concerned may then be translated either as “instruction about and from the Lord” or “warning about and from the Lord.” If we unpack the Greek phrase in this way, then it is easier to see what was in the mind of the apostle when he used the Greek word that can mean either “instruction” or “warning, admonition.” It is the meaning of “instruction” about Jesus Christ and from Jesus Christ that would have been in His mind. We say this because the apostle’s mind was occupied about Jesus Christ and the teachings from Him. We know that the apostle was occupied with teaching about Jesus Christ because he preached Christ. In fact, we know that during his first missionary journey that he taught about Christ as indicated by the response of the proconsul who saw the miracle of blinding Elymas by the apostle through appealing to the Lord Jesus Christ, as indicated in Acts 13:12:
When the proconsul saw what had happened, he believed, for he was amazed at the teaching about the Lord.
The apostle also encouraged Titus to teach Christian slaves to live in a way that will make the teaching about Jesus Christ attractive to their masters in Titus 2:10:
and not to steal from them, but to show that they can be fully trusted, so that in every way they will make the teaching about God our Savior attractive.
The phrase the teaching about God our Savior attractive should be understood as teaching about the Lord Jesus Christ. This is because the phrase God our Savior refers to Jesus Christ as can be verified from Titus 2:13:
while we wait for the blessed hope—the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ,
It is not only that the apostle was occupied with teaching about Jesus Christ, he was also occupied with teaching from Jesus Christ as indicated in his epistle to the Thessalonians, as we read in 1 Thessalonians 4:2:
For you know what instructions we gave you by the authority of the Lord Jesus.
The sentence instructions we gave you by the authority of the Lord Jesus means the instructions that came from Jesus Christ. Thus, the apostle was concerned that the Thessalonians lived in accordance with the instructions from Jesus Christ that he passed on to them. Also, in writing to Timothy, the apostle referenced teaching or instruction from Jesus Christ in 1 Timothy 6:3:
If anyone teaches false doctrines and does not agree to the sound instruction of our Lord Jesus Christ and to godly teaching,
The sound instruction is said to be of the Lord Jesus Christ. The Greek construction allows us to understand this phrase as a reference to the sound instruction or teaching from the Lord Jesus Christ. Hence, we are correct to indicate that it is instruction that was in the mind of the apostle when he used the Greek word that could mean “instruction” or “warning.”
Our interpretation that the phrase of Ephesians 6:4 instruction of the Lord in the NIV should be fully unpacked as the “instruction about and from the Lord” has an important implication with respect to the responsibility of parents in training their children. Christian parents carry out their responsibilities when they teach their children about Jesus Christ. The contents of what they teach about Jesus Christ should be who He is, the God man, His birth, death, and resurrection. In short, Christian parents should present the gospel to their children as part of bringing them up. They should use every opportunity the Lord presents to them to speak about Jesus Christ and about God in general with respect to His character, pointing to various aspects of the character of God such as His goodness and faithfulness similar to what the faithful Israelites taught their children with regard to the Lord as He was then revealed to them, as we read, for example, in Isaiah 38:19:
The living, the living—they praise you, as I am doing today; fathers tell their children
about your faithfulness.
In addition to teaching about the character of God, Christian parents should teach their children the truths found in the Scripture that should govern their conduct. If they did this, then they will be fulfilling the responsibility of instructing them in accordance with the instructions from the Lord Jesus Christ. We, of course, did not go into detail about rearing children here because we have had an extensive treatment of the topic in our study of Genesis. If you are interested, you can get the details in Genesis, Lessons #287-292 on line from our website.
Be that as it may, we had indicated that a parent’s training of the child is one that can be said not to end. We say this because, even when children leave home, it is expected of parents to admonish them as often as necessary. In effect, parents should still warn their children if they are going in the wrong direction and if they could affect them they should do so. This, of course, could not involve the kind of punishment they used when the child was living at home. However, they can inflict pain by cutting of any kind of financial support they provide to such a child. We say this because, it may not be sufficient to simply warn your adult child without inflicting some form of pain on that child that will help him or her to adhere to your warning about going in the wrong direction of life as determined by the Scripture and not by your personal prejudice or preference. That it is not sufficient to warn an adult is exemplified in the relationship of Eli and his sons. Eli rebuked or warned his children of their wrong conduct, according to 1 Samuel 2:24–25:
24 No, my sons; it is not a good report that I hear spreading among the Lord’s people. 25 If a man sins against another man, God may mediate for him; but if a man sins against the Lord, who will intercede for him?” His sons, however, did not listen to their father’s rebuke, for it was the Lord’s will to put them to death.
This rebuke was not enough as indicated in 1 Samuel 3:13:
For I told him that I would judge his family forever because of the sin he knew about; his sons made themselves contemptible, and he failed to restrain them.
The fact that Eli was charged of failing to restrain his adult children implies that parents who warn their adult children should use means that will inflict pain on them with the hope that they will turn from their evil ways. In any event, as we end this study, we should remind parents that they have the primary responsibility of training their children in such a way that they become equipped to deal with life both spiritually and physically.