Whatever you fear it means is likely at least part of what it means. The very removal of the word from the text of Ephesians 5:33 where the wife is told to see to it that she “fears” (phobeo) her husband indicates the meaning of this word. The NASB deletes it, substituting “respects.” [7/31 correction: KJV says “reverence”] May I say it?
What pansies modern Bible scholars are.
So should I fear God? What if I don’t want to? What if my god is not a god who needs to be feared? What if he has enough self confidence in his own authority and power that he is sort of noblesse obligey? What if he just wants people to feel safe in his presence and like him?
And obedience? Why would I obey any god I did not fear?
Maybe a better question is whether a husband should fear his wife? And if so, whether this fear entails obeying her, also?
But maybe a husband should just obey his wife—not fear her? I mean it’s so demeaning to men to fear any woman, right? Nevertheless, he sure better obey her.
Deep inside, though, he can know he is only obeying her because God made HIM the head of the home. He’s just playing servant-leader so people will be willing to vote him in as an elder; that’s the real reason he obeys his wife. It’s not because he’s ever been afraid of her even slightly.
Now listen, men, I’m not trying to be snarky here, but to make a point in a painful enough way as to shove our collective nose into the fact of the inseparability of authority and God. We fear and obey God, and thus we fear and obey our masters, we fear and obey the civil magistrate who bears the sword, we fear and obey our fathers, and we fear and obey our husbands. Anyone unwilling to admit the wife is commanded by God to fear her husband, if forced to admit this fact, is then going to deny fear entails anything else. Including particularly obedience.
We must teach our daughters that they are to fear and obey God, and thus to fear and obey their husbands. We must, at the same time, teach them that in the godly, fear and love embrace. Love,