The Missing Half of the Marriage Sermon: Submission, Sacrifice, Accountability, and the Scriptures Mark Doesn’t Seem Nearly as Eager to Explain

Mark Anthony Stephens frequently insists that Scripture must be understood in context. Apparently, that context becomes considerably less interesting when the Bible starts explaining what a husband owes his wife.

On October 15, 2026, Mark delivered a religious presentation titled The Manifesto of the Two Gospels — Ezekiel 36:26–30: Unlocking the New Covenant!

Much of his presentation centered on spiritual transformation, humility, and the importance of correctly understanding God’s Word.

Then, approximately 34 minutes into the sermon, Mark shifted from theology to his own marital grievances.

He described his wife as adulterous, accused her of forcing him out of a home he claimed to have substantially paid for, and declared:

“I never cheated or did anything all I did was try to protect her from another woman.”

These are Mark’s allegations, not independently established facts.

But what followed was particularly revealing.

At approximately 34:55, Mark proclaimed:

“Women need to hear this is to submit to your husbands.”

And then:

“If you submit to your husband, you’re submitting to Jesus.”

Mark subsequently acknowledged that submission applies to both partners, but his presentation placed particular emphasis on a wife’s submission immediately after he portrayed himself as the wronged husband.

That sequence raises an important question.

Why does a man who constantly talks about biblical context seem so interested in a wife’s responsibilities and so much less interested in the demanding instructions the Bible gives to husbands?

Because when we examine the complete biblical teaching, rather than isolating the verses that emphasize a wife’s obligations, the picture changes dramatically.

And for Mark, it becomes considerably less comfortable.

Ephesians 5: The Verse Before the Verse Mark Likes

The passage most commonly associated with wives submitting to husbands is Ephesians 5:22–24.

Those verses are there. They shouldn’t be ignored, misquoted, or explained away.

But there is a rather important verse immediately before them.

Ephesians 5:21:

“Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God.” — King James Version

Not merely wives to husbands.

Not merely the supposedly less important person to the supposedly more important person.

The instruction addresses the Christian community and establishes a pattern of humility toward one another.

There is a legitimate scholarly debate over exactly how verse 21 relates grammatically and structurally to verse 22, and how mutual submission operates within marriage.

But verse 21 cannot simply be erased from the chapter.

The discussion of marriage is introduced within a broader passage about living wisely, being filled with the Spirit, and treating other believers in ways consistent with following Christ.

In fact, the original Greek of Ephesians 5:22 in many critical editions relies on the preceding sentence for the verb describing submission. This grammatical connection is one reason biblical scholars consider the relationship between verses 21 and 22 so important.

So let’s apply Mark’s favorite standard.

Context.

If you are going to preach verse 22, why not begin with verse 21?

Why not explain what submission means when the obligation to demonstrate humility is addressed to the larger Christian community?

And why not spend equal time on the verses that follow?

Because those verses establish a rather demanding standard for husbands.

Biblical reference: Ephesians 5:18–33

Ephesians 5:25—Husbands Are Called to Sacrifice, Not Demand Worship

Immediately after describing the wife’s responsibilities, Paul turns directly to husbands.

Ephesians 5:25:

“Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it.”

Read that carefully.

The model for the husband is not a king sitting on a throne demanding obedience.

It is Christ sacrificing himself for the welfare of others.

This is not a minor obligation.

In the Christian understanding of Jesus’ life and death, Christ gives himself for the people he loves.

Paul’s comparison places an extraordinary responsibility on husbands.

Not simply to claim authority.

Not to demand recognition.

Not to insist their wives respect them regardless of how they behave.

But to love in a manner characterized by extraordinary sacrifice.

The passage continues in verses 28–29 by instructing husbands to love their wives as their own bodies and to nourish and cherish them.

Those are not descriptions of ownership.

They are descriptions of care.

A husband cannot reasonably claim to imitate Christ’s sacrificial love while treating his wife as a subordinate whose primary obligation is to meet his demands.

Consider the contrast.

Mark’s personal account emphasizes what he believes his wife did wrong.

The biblical passage emphasizes what a husband must be willing to give.

One narrative is about what a man believes he deserves. The other is about what a man is obligated to provide.

That is a fairly significant difference.

And it is precisely the kind of context Mark routinely insists everybody else should understand.

Submission Does Not Mean a Husband Becomes Jesus

Mark’s statement deserves particular scrutiny:

“If you submit to your husband, you’re submitting to Jesus.”

Ephesians does compare the relationship between husband and wife to the relationship between Christ and the church.

But a comparison is not an identification.

A husband is not Jesus.

He is not infallible.

He is not morally perfect.

He does not possess divine authority.

And he cannot turn his preferences, demands, or treatment of his wife into commands from God simply because he is married to her.

Christ’s role in the passage is the moral model against which a husband’s conduct is measured—not a license for the husband to declare himself beyond criticism.

Some Christian traditions understand the passage as establishing a distinct leadership role for husbands. Others understand it as teaching fundamentally mutual authority.

But a claim that a wife must obey sinful, harmful, or coercive demands because her husband represents Jesus goes far beyond what can responsibly be established from these verses.

Marriage does not give someone permission to disregard the rest of the Bible.

A husband remains subject to its teachings on truthfulness, justice, humility, kindness, self-control, and love.

And, perhaps most inconveniently for anyone who prefers to lecture others, he remains accountable for his own actions.

Colossians 3: The Sentence Immediately After Submission

If Mark wants another passage addressing biblical marriage, Colossians provides one.

Colossians 3:18:

“Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord.”

There is the instruction about wives.

Now let’s read the very next verse.

Colossians 3:19:

“Husbands, love your wives, and be not bitter against them.”

Notice how little searching was required to find the husband’s responsibility.

One verse.

The very next sentence.

Paul prohibits bitterness toward one’s wife, and other major English translations describe the prohibition in terms of harsh treatment.

The two instructions belong together.

One addresses the wife’s conduct.

The other addresses the husband’s.

Neither should be interpreted as canceling the other.

The opening of Colossians 3 also calls Christians to compassion, kindness, humility, patience, forgiveness, and love. Later in the chapter, believers are told that whatever they do should be done in the name of Jesus.

A marriage cannot be examined honestly by isolating submission while ignoring those surrounding obligations.

And that creates an uncomfortable question for any man who repeatedly discusses his wife through accusations and grievances.

Where is the discussion of your own bitterness?

Where is the examination of whether your words have been harsh?

Where is the explanation of how your behavior demonstrates patience, understanding, and compassion?

If the Bible’s instructions to wives are important enough to preach publicly, surely the instructions to husbands are important enough to examine personally.

Biblical reference: Colossians 3

First Peter 3: The Wife Is Also an Heir of God’s Grace

First Peter 3 is another passage frequently cited in discussions of a wife’s submission.

Verses 1–6 address wives, including their conduct toward husbands who do not obey the Christian message.

But verse 7 turns toward husbands.

It commands them to live with their wives understandingly, honor them, and recognize them as fellow heirs of the grace of life.

And then comes the warning.

1 Peter 3:7:

“That your prayers be not hindered.”

Think about that.

The passage does not merely ask husbands to behave nicely.

It connects their treatment of their wives with their spiritual lives.

A husband cannot assume that his religious speech exists independently of how he treats the woman to whom he is married.

He may pray eloquently.

He may quote Scripture.

He may deliver lengthy sermons.

But Peter warns that a husband’s failure to honor his wife has spiritual consequences.

The description of the wife as a co-heir also matters. Whatever differences Christians believe exist in marital roles, both spouses share in God’s gift of grace.

One is not spiritually disposable.

One is not merely an accessory to the other’s religious identity.

And one does not become morally exempt from accountability by claiming to be the head of the marriage.

Mark, you speak at length about understanding the Bible correctly.

How much of your teaching on submission explains the warning that a husband’s treatment of his wife can hinder his own prayers?

That seems like context worth discussing.

Biblical reference: 1 Peter 3:1–7

Jesus Had Something to Say About Men Who Want Authority

The discussion cannot end with Paul’s letters.

Jesus himself taught extensively about power, authority, humility, and service.

In Mark 10:42–45, Jesus contrasts the conduct of rulers who exercise authority over others with the behavior expected of his followers.

His instruction is direct.

Mark 10:43:

“But so shall it not be among you.”

The passage continues by describing greatness through service.

Jesus presents himself as the supreme example: someone who came to serve rather than to be served.

This has profound implications for how Christians should understand leadership.

Even in traditions that recognize husbands as leaders within marriage, leadership modeled after Jesus cannot responsibly be reduced to demanding compliance.

The model is service.

The model is sacrifice.

The model is concern for others.

It is not an entitlement to control.

If a husband wants to appeal to Christ as the basis for his marital role, the obvious follow-up is whether his conduct resembles Christ’s example.

Does he seek to protect and care for his family?

Does he take responsibility when he causes harm?

Does he place their welfare ahead of his pride?

Does he demonstrate humility when challenged?

Or does the word leadership become another way of describing what other people owe him?

A man who constantly demands submission but resists self-examination has missed one of the most important features of Jesus’ teachings about authority.

Biblical reference: Mark 10:42–45

Genesis: Both Man and Woman Are Created in God’s Image

The biblical understanding of marriage does not begin in Ephesians.

It begins in Genesis.

Genesis 1:27 identifies both male and female as created in God’s image.

Genesis 1:28 gives both the blessing and commission associated with human stewardship of creation.

That matters because the biblical account does not introduce the woman as a lesser form of humanity.

The creation narrative in Genesis 2 describes the woman as a suitable counterpart to the man.

The Hebrew expression often translated as helper suitable for him includes the word ezer, which is also used elsewhere in the Old Testament to describe powerful help, including help from God.

That does not settle every debate about marital roles. It does, however, undermine the assumption that the word helper necessarily means an inferior assistant.

The marriage passage culminates in Genesis 2:24, where husband and wife form a one-flesh union.

Ephesians 5 directly returns to that same verse.

The theological connection is significant.

Christian marriage is described as a profound union, not simply a superior person exercising authority over an inferior person.

And Genesis 3:16, which describes a husband’s rule over his wife following humanity’s disobedience, is itself interpreted differently across Christian traditions.

Some readers see it as describing the brokenness of human relationships rather than prescribing domination as God’s ideal.

Others understand the creation account as supporting differentiated roles.

But whatever interpretation is adopted, the creation narrative cannot honestly be reduced to the proposition that women were created to obey men.

The Bible begins by emphasizing shared human dignity. Any theology of marriage has to account for that.

Biblical reference: Genesis 1–3

First Corinthians 7: Paul Describes Reciprocal Marital Obligations

First Corinthians 7:3–5 addresses the responsibilities husbands and wives owe one another within marriage.

Paul describes reciprocal duties and even frames authority over one’s body in reciprocal terms.

The wife has obligations toward the husband, and the husband has corresponding obligations toward the wife.

The passage also stresses mutual agreement regarding temporary abstinence.

This is a striking example of reciprocal language in a New Testament discussion of marriage.

Importantly, the passage must not be used to justify sexual coercion. Marriage does not eliminate consent or confer a right to force intimacy.

Instead, its reciprocal structure reinforces the point that marriage involves obligations running in both directions.

A husband cannot simply collect biblical instructions for his wife and disregard the verses that impose responsibilities on him.

That is not contextual interpretation.

That is selective interpretation.

Biblical reference: 1 Corinthians 7:3–5

Malachi: God Confronts Husbands Over Their Treatment of Their Wives

The Old Testament also contains a particularly relevant passage.

Malachi 2:14 describes a wife as both a partner and the wife of a marriage covenant.

The prophet rebukes men for being unfaithful to their wives and treats marriage as a covenant involving real obligations before God.

Verse 16 is notoriously difficult to translate, and English Bibles render its wording differently.

Some translations emphasize God’s opposition to divorce.

Others particularly emphasize the violence or treachery involved in a husband’s mistreatment of his wife.

The translation debate matters.

But the broader rebuke is clear: men are being confronted for how they have treated their wives.

It is particularly revealing because it reverses the pattern of a husband simply announcing what his wife did wrong.

Here, Scripture confronts the husband.

His conduct.

His faithfulness.

His obligations.

His accountability.

And it does so in the context of covenant marriage.

If Mark wants to speak about covenant marriage, Malachi’s warnings to husbands deserve a place in the sermon too.

Biblical reference: Malachi 2:13–16

What About Proverbs 31?

Proverbs 31 presents a woman of strength, wisdom, initiative, and industry.

She considers property and purchases it.

She conducts business.

She provides for her household.

She speaks with wisdom.

She is portrayed as capable, respected, and active in the affairs of her family and community.

The passage does not describe a woman whose entire identity consists of waiting for instructions from her husband.

Its picture is far more substantial.

The husband trusts her.

Her children recognize her.

Her contributions are valued.

The passage also emphasizes that a woman’s reverence for God is more important than superficial measures of worth.

An interpretation of Christian marriage that diminishes a wife’s judgment, competence, or independent moral responsibility has difficulty accounting for this portrait.

Biblical reference: Proverbs 31:10–31

Two Major Christian Interpretations—Neither Erases the Husband’s Duties

For the sake of actual biblical context, it is important to acknowledge that Christians disagree about the structure of authority within marriage.

Complementarian interpretations generally maintain that husbands and wives possess equal dignity before God but have differentiated responsibilities, often including a distinct leadership role for the husband.

Egalitarian interpretations generally understand marriage as a partnership of equal responsibility and authority, emphasizing mutual submission without a fixed marital hierarchy based on gender.

These positions differ significantly.

But both must grapple with Ephesians 5:25, Colossians 3:19, First Peter 3:7, and Jesus’ instructions about service.

Even someone who believes the husband has a distinct leadership responsibility cannot reasonably treat that responsibility as permission to disregard his wife’s dignity, mistreat her, or evade moral accountability.

And someone who believes in mutual authority certainly cannot treat submission as a one-way demand.

There are real theological debates to be had here.

But there is no credible shortcut that makes the wife’s obligations the whole of biblical marriage.

When a preacher gives the audience one side of the discussion and largely neglects the other, the question is not whether he has found a Bible verse.

The question is whether he has presented the Bible honestly and comprehensively.

The Context Mark Adds: His Wife Allegedly Wronged Him

Now consider the structure of Mark’s October 15 sermon.

First, he describes his wife in deeply negative terms.

He alleges adultery.

He claims she removed him from a home he substantially paid for.

He asserts that he did nothing wrong.

Then he turns toward biblical teachings on a wife’s submission.

That context is revealing—but not necessarily in the way Mark intends.

Rather than offering a detailed examination of both spouses’ biblical obligations, he presents a personal grievance and follows it with a scriptural instruction directed primarily toward wives.

It creates the impression that the Bible is being used to reinforce his version of a marital dispute.

It is worth noting that Mark did go on to say submission applies to both spouses. That acknowledgment should not be omitted from an honest assessment.

But acknowledging reciprocity briefly is not the same as fully explaining the standards of sacrificial love, non-harshness, honor, and service imposed on husbands elsewhere in Scripture.

The imbalance is the issue.

Mark’s wife is portrayed as the person who violated the marriage.

Mark presents himself as the person who was wronged.

And the biblical lesson emphasized at that moment is the wife’s obligation to submit.

How convenient.

The Personal History That Makes This More Than a Theology Debate

Mark’s public teachings do not exist in isolation.

The family history previously discussed on this site includes longstanding marital conflict, protective court orders, disputes over parenting responsibilities, and serious concerns raised by medical professionals regarding Liam’s care.

Those events must be described accurately and supported by their underlying records. They do not establish the truth or falsity of every allegation Mark makes about his marriages.

But they do make his repeated emphasis on other people’s responsibilities especially worthy of scrutiny.

In November 2023, Liam’s treating psychiatrist, Dr. Nikhil Rao, documented concerns about Mark’s understanding of his son’s medical condition and the effects of Mark’s beliefs and conduct on medical decision-making.

That is relevant because Mark’s sermon also emphasizes the importance of accepting correction.

At approximately 30 minutes, he describes an appropriate response to being challenged:

“Maybe I need to work on that. Thank you for coming to me and telling me that’s love.”

An admirable principle.

Yet a serious question remains about how he has responded when concerns have been raised about his own conduct.

What has he acknowledged?

What has he corrected?

What consequences has he accepted?

What measurable actions demonstrate the spiritual transformation he discusses?

These questions should be answered through evidence and behavior, not speculation about his inner beliefs.

The issue is not whether Mark can explain repentance. The issue is whether he can identify where repentance is required of him.

Matthew 7: The Biblical Context of Correcting Everybody Else

Perhaps one of the most relevant passages is not specifically about marriage at all.

It is Matthew 7:3–5.

Jesus warns against focusing on a small fault in another person’s eye while overlooking a much larger problem in one’s own.

The teaching does not prohibit moral judgment altogether.

It demands self-examination before attempting to correct others.

That is the part that matters here.

Mark can criticize his wife.

He can criticize religious teachers.

He can describe what other Christians misunderstand.

He can explain what women supposedly need to hear.

But the entire exercise becomes considerably less persuasive when the accompanying self-examination is missing.

Before publicly lecturing a wife about submission, perhaps a husband should examine whether he has loved sacrificially, acted honorably, avoided harshness, and accepted responsibility for his own behavior.

That isn’t a rejection of biblical context.

It is biblical context.

Biblical reference: Matthew 7:1–5

You Cannot Demand the Benefits of a Covenant While Ignoring Its Obligations

A marriage covenant is not a contract under which the wife owes obedience and the husband receives immunity from criticism.

Scripture describes obligations for both spouses.

The husband is called to extraordinary love.

The wife is called to respect and faithfulness.

Both are expected to behave in ways consistent with the wider Christian teachings on honesty, humility, patience, compassion, and self-control.

Both remain morally accountable.

And neither should use religious language to justify abuse, coercion, or mistreatment.

The husband who invokes biblical authority must also accept biblical scrutiny.

If he wants to talk about being the head, he must talk about being a servant.

If he wants to talk about submission, he must talk about sacrifice.

If he wants to talk about the wife’s faithfulness, he must examine his own.

If he wants to talk about the marriage covenant, he must discuss what that covenant requires of him.

And if he wants to insist that everybody else understand the context, then he needs to stop treating the context surrounding the husband’s responsibilities as optional.

Mark, Here Are the Questions Your Sermon Didn’t Answer

You have publicly emphasized the importance of a wife’s submission to her husband.

So let’s apply your own standard and examine the rest of the teaching.

Ephesians 5:25: How have you demonstrated the kind of sacrificial love the passage requires of a husband?

Colossians 3:19: Have you examined your own bitterness and harshness toward your wife?

First Peter 3:7: Have you consistently treated your wife with understanding and honor as a fellow heir of God’s grace?

Mark 10:42–45: Have you exercised whatever authority you believe you possess through service rather than demands?

Malachi 2: Have you acknowledged your own responsibilities under the marriage covenant?

Matthew 7: Before criticizing your wife’s shortcomings, what have you recognized and corrected in yourself?

And finally:

Can you identify one specific mistake you made in the marriage, accept responsibility for it without immediately blaming someone else, and explain what you did to repair the harm?

These aren’t questions invented to undermine Christianity.

They’re questions arising from the very Scriptures you invoke.

You don’t have to answer them publicly.

But anyone teaching publicly about the obligations of husbands and wives should be prepared to explain both.

Final Thoughts: Context Is Not a Buffet

Mark Anthony Stephens frequently presents himself as someone defending the proper understanding of Scripture.

That makes the omissions in his marriage discussion particularly striking.

The Bible does speak about wives submitting to their husbands.

But it also speaks about mutual humility, sacrificial love, non-harshness, honor, shared dignity, reciprocal obligations, and servant leadership.

Those are not obscure footnotes.

They are central parts of the biblical teaching.

And when a man introduces his personal marital grievances before emphasizing his wife’s obligation to submit, it is reasonable to ask whether the passage is being explained for the audience’s benefit—or selectively presented in a way that supports his personal narrative.

You cannot demand biblical context from everybody else while treating the verses directed at you as optional reading.

Mark, if you want to teach Ephesians 5, teach all of it.

If you want to teach Colossians 3, read the very next sentence.

If you want to teach First Peter 3, don’t stop before verse 7.

If you want to invoke Jesus as the model for marriage, explain the service and sacrifice Jesus actually demonstrated.

And if you want to preach about repentance and humility, demonstrate what those principles look like when the person being corrected is you.

The Bible does not merely tell wives what they owe husbands. It demands that husbands become the kind of men who take their own obligations seriously.

That is the context.

That is the part worth preaching.

And that is the part Mark’s audience deserves to hear.

---

Editorial note: Quotations attributed to Mark are based on the October 15, 2026 sermon transcript. Claims concerning his marriages are presented as his allegations. Commentary regarding his family history should be evaluated alongside the underlying court and medical documents. Scriptural interpretations reflect passages discussed in the article and acknowledge genuine differences among Christian traditions.

Supporting biblical research

The central passages and interpretations above were checked against the biblical text and published Christian discussions of marriage theology:

• Ephesians 5:21–33 — mutual submission, the husband-wife analogy, sacrificial love, and the one-flesh relationship. Bible Gateway
• Colossians 3:18–19 — the connected instructions to wives and husbands. Bible Gateway
• 1 Peter 3:1–7 — submission, honor, co-heirs, and the warning about hindered prayers. Bible Gateway
• Mark 10:42–45 — Jesus’ contrast between domination and servant leadership. Bible Gateway
• Bridging the Ephesians 5 Divide and Much Ado About Gender Roles — differing Christian interpretations of marital authority, submission, and the relationship between verses 21 and 22.