IN THE SAME WAY YOU WIVES: Homoios (ai) gunaikes:   (Ge 3:16; Esther 1:16-20; Ro 7:2; 1Co 11:3; 14:34; Ep 5:22, 23, 24,33; Col 3:18; 1Ti 2:11,12; Titus 2:3, 4, 5, 6)

In the same way (3668) (homoios from hómoios = like, resembling) means similarly: likewise, of equal degree or manner and denoting perfect agreement. In context Peter appears to refer to the previous calls to submission - so just as all Christians should submit to the governing authorities (1Pe 2:13-note), as slaves should submit to their masters (1Pe 2:18-note), and as Christ gave us His perfect example of willing and complete submission (1Pe 2:21, 22, 23, 24, 25 -see notes 1 Peter 2:21; 22; 23; 24; 25), Peter says in the same way wives are to submit to their own husbands.

BE (let it be your habit) SUBMISSIVE TO YOUR OWN HUSBANDS: hupotassomenai (PPPFPN) tois idiois andrasin:

Be submissive (5293) (hupotasso= hupo = under + tasso = arrange in an orderly manner) (Click word study of hupotasso) (1Pe 2:13, 18; 3:1, 5, 22; 5:5) in the passive voice (as in this verse) means to submit oneself, to subordinate oneself, to obey, to place oneself under, to put oneself under orders, to align oneself under the authority of another. Hupotasso in this present use has in view the maintenance of God’s willed order, not personal inferiority of any kind. This word may denote either voluntary or forced behavior, but not any sense of inferiority.

Hupotasso was used as military term to describe soldiers submitting to their superior or slaves submitting to their masters. The word has primarily the idea of giving up one’s own right or will. It meant to arrange [as for example troop divisions] in a military fashion under the command of a leader. Submission then is not so much to a person per se as to the position of rank that is established to ensure order rather than chaos.  The buck private in the army may be a "better person" than the five-star general, but he is still a buck private. Slaves in the average Roman household in fact were "better people" in many ways when compared to their masters, yet they still had to be under authority to ensure order in the household. In non-military use hupotasso described "a voluntary attitude of giving in, cooperating, assuming responsibility, and carrying a burden". 

"Hupotasso" is not a spineless submission but, as one writer has eloquently described it, a "voluntary selflessness."

Constable paraphrasing material from the Family Life Conference writes that...

Submission involves at least four things. First, it begins with an attitude of entrusting oneself to God (1Pe 2:23, 24, 25-notes 1Pe 2:23; 24; 25). The focus of our life must be on Jesus Christ. Second, submission requires respectful behavior (1Pe 3:1,2-notes). Nagging is not respectful behavior. Third, submission involves the development of a godly character (1Pe 3:3, 4, 5-see notes 1Pe 3:3; 3:4; 3:5). Fourth, submission includes doing what is right (1Pe 3:6-note). It does not include violating other Scriptural principles. Submission is imperative for oneness in marriage. (Expository Notes)

Keep the historical context in mind reference to pagan husbands should be understood against the social background in which a wife was expected to accept the customs and religious rites of her husband.

Submission for Paul and Peter is a voluntary submission based on one’s own recognition of God’s order. It is the submission which is based on the death of pride on one hand and the desire to serve on the other. Ideally it is the submission not of fear but of perfect love. Christ Himself is the perfect example (see notes 1 Peter 2:21; 22; 23; 24; 25) of a servant Who submitted without reservation to His Father's perfect will (see notes Philippians 2:5; 2:6; 2:7;2:8). Thus there is nothing degrading about submitting to authority and accepting God’s ordained order that alone ensures the proper functioning of the marriage bond between a husband and wife.

The present tense of the verb hupotasso calls for a attitude (make it a continual practice) of willingness to be under the order established by God. For women this does not come naturally (nor does it come naturally for men because of our fallen nature) because of sin entering the perfect environment in Genesis 3.

As a result of Eve's usurpation of Adam's headship, part of the consequence of her sin was that her desire would be for her husband (Genesis 3:16). Genesis 3:16 could be interpreted as a passionate yearning or longing for one's husband but the difficulty with that interpretation is fourfold:

(1) The statement by God is clearly given in the context of judgment for sin.

(2) The root word (shuwq Strong's # 7783) for "desire" (teshuwqah: Strong's #8669) according to Strong's Hebrew lexicon means to "overflow" and (from another source) the Arabic root means "to control", either definition lending itself to the interpretation that Eve's desire would be to rule over Adam.

(3) The Greek translation (Septuagint) for "desire" is the verb apostrepho can mean to turn away from or abandon a former relationship or association which certainly does not picture the woman longing for the man.

(4) The closest contextual use of the same Hebrew word is (Gen 4:7) where God tells Cain that sin's "desire" is to rule over him but that he must master it. Clearly the meaning of desire here conveys a negative meaning of sin desiring to rule over, dominate and control Cain.

The newly published conservative, evangelical Net Bible translates Genesis 3:16 this way

"To the woman he said, "I will greatly increase your labor pains; with pain you will give birth to children. You will want to control your husband, but he will dominate you."

The majority of evangelical, conservative commentaries on Ge 3:16 definitely favor the interpretation that Eve would have latent within her fallen nature, her flesh, the desire to rule over, dominate and be independent of her husband. If one accepts this interpretation of (Gen 4:7) as reasonable, it would certainly explain why even the most devout, godly and "dead to self" wife would still have a tendency to chaff at God's call for her to submit to her husband. In a class I led on "Marriage without Regrets" one meek, mild, godly young woman raised her hand and confessed how during the preceding week's homework on submission she had experienced a feeling of resentment rising up from deep within and how this feeling surprised her. If one understands the "root cause" of this fleshly reaction from a study of (Gen 4:7), it at least helps one be aware of where the resistance might originate from.

Constable notes that the reason Peter calls for wives to be submissive is ...

that God has so ordered the human race that we must all observe His structure of authority so that peace and order may prevail. (Constable's Expository Notes on the Bible)

Own (2398) (idios) means belonging to oneself and not to another, one’s own, peculiar. It denotes "ownership".

Husbands (435) (aner) means man, an adult male person. Aner is used to speak of men in various relations and circumstances where the context determines the proper meaning, as in this verse clearly referring to husbands.

Peter does not require women to be subordinate to men in general but to their husbands as a function of order within the home. A wife is to accept her place in the family under the leadership of her husband whom God has placed as head in the home.

Plutarch writing in a secular connotation said that wives were to subordinate themselves and the man is to exercise control

"as the soul controls the body, by entering into her feelings and being knit to her through goodwill."

Rienecker in the Linguistic Key to the NT adds that

"submission of wives to their husbands should be viewed in the light of the society of that day especially in the light of the wild activities of women in the worship of Dionysus and Isis". He goes on to add that Plutarch wrote that wives were to subordinate themselves, and the man was to exercise control "as the soul controls the body, by entering into her feelings and being knit to her through goodwill".

In every sphere of ancient civilization, women had no rights at all. Under Jewish law a woman was a thing; she was owned by her husband in exactly the same way as he owned his sheep and his goats; on no account could she leave him, although he could dismiss her at any moment. For a wife to change her religion while her husband did not was unthinkable. In Greek civilization the duty of the woman was "to remain indoors and to be obedient to her husband." It was the sign of a good woman that she must see as little, hear as little and ask as little as possible. She had no kind of independent existence and no kind of mind of her own, and her husband could divorce her almost at caprice, so long as he returned her dowry.

Under Roman law a woman had no rights. In law she remained forever a child. When she was under her father she was under the patria potestas, the father's power, which gave the father the right even of life and death over her; and when she married she passed equally into the power of her husband. She was entirely subject to her husband and completely at his mercy.

The Roman Cato wrote:

"If you were to catch your wife in an act of infidelity, you can kill her with impunity without a trial."

What a contrast with Christianity which commands husbands to love their wives unconditionally!

Roman matrons were prohibited from drinking wine, and Egnatius beat his wife to death when he found her doing so.

Sulpicius Gallus dismissed his wife because she had once appeared in the streets without a veil.

Antistius Vetus divorced his wife because he saw her secretly speaking to a freed woman in public.

Publius Sempronius Sophus divorced his wife because once she went to the public games.

The whole attitude of ancient civilization was that no woman could dare take any decision for herself. What, then, must have been the problems of the wife who became a Christian while her husband remained faithful to the ancestral gods? It is almost impossible for us to realize what life must have been for the wife who was brave enough to become a Christian.

><> ><> ><>

Today in the Word - A magazine for Christian leaders published a cartoon that showed a pastor peering out anxiously from inside a World-War-II-style bunker, which was behind the pulpit. The well-protected pastor announced, “My text for today is 1 Peter 3:1-7.”

Today, it’s very socially and politically incorrect to suggest that marriage is built on a wife’s loving submission and respect and a husband’s loving tenderness and consideration. We shouldn’t be surprised that the world labels this concept outmoded, even dangerous. As the magazine cartoon suggests, Christians often seem just as reluctant to stand by what the Bible teaches. However, Peter lets us know that couples need these qualities for the success of their relationship. Moreover, this issue affects how God relates to us.

Tommy Nelson, puts it on the line for married believers. “If your relationship to God does not show itself in being a tender husband and a responsive and respectful wife, then it is not penetrating the most essential area of your life.”

This requires serious reflection. Our reading indicates how essential the relationship between a wife and husband is. Much of a woman’s sense of self is tied to the way she presents herself, both outwardly and inwardly. The Bible has been accused of trying to shut away women at home in a subservient role, but that distorts Peter’s message. Accepting her husband’s leadership is not a statement of a wife’s inferiority. Both partners are equally valuable before God.

Peter’s caution against a woman investing her wealth and worth in her physical appearance to the detriment of her spirit reflects the same principle Jesus taught on several occasions. That is, believers cannot afford to invest their resources in things on earth to the neglect of eternal issues (Matt. 6:19-21; Luke 12:21).

TODAY ALONG THE WAY -You may recall the blast of media criticism that erupted in 1998 when a major Christian group dared to state that a wife should “lovingly submit” to her husband”  (Copyright Moody Bible Institute. Used by permission. All rights reserved)

><> ><> ><>

SO THAT EVEN IF ANY OF THEM ARE DISOBEDIENT TO THE WORD: hina kai ei tines apeithousin (3PPAI) to logo: (1Peter 1:22; 4:17; Ro 6:17; 10:16; 2Th 1:8; Heb 5:9; 11:8)

The word “if” represents a fulfilled condition. The "if" in this passage introduces a first class conditional clause which assumes the reality of the condition...specifically that the husbands of some of the woman reading the letter were in fact unsaved and disobedient to the word.

Disobedient (544) (apeitheo from "a" = negating what follows, without + peithes = obedient) literally describes one who refuses to be persuaded and who disbelieves willfully and perversely.  They are unpersuaded and express an obstinate rejection to the will of God.

Apeitheo is an attitude (present tense) of unbelief which involves deliberate disobedience and conscious resistance to authority. There were disobedient husbands then just as there are today. The present tense indicates that this is their lifestyle, the way the carry on their life is in continual disobedience against God! To be sure, we all disobey from time to time. That is not what Peter is referring to here. Instead he is describing the individual with an unregenerate heart who habitually, continually disobeys (as a lifestyle) what he or she knows to be the truth.

The word (3056) (lógos from légō = to speak intelligently source of English "logic, logical") (Click for in depth discussion of lógos) means something said and describes a communication whereby the mind finds expression in words.

The Christian wife is exhorted to be in subjection to her unsaved husband, in order that he might won without a word, not "the Word" (the gospel), be won by the behavior of the wife. Keep in mind the social context of Paul's time, in which a wife was expected to accept the customs and religious rites of her husband.

THEY MAY BE WON WITHOUT A WORD BY THE BEHAVIOR OF THEIR WIVES: dia tes ton gunaikon anastrophes aneu logou kerdethesontai, (3PFPI): (1Co 7:16; Col 4:5) (Won: Pr 11:30; 18:19; Mt 18:15; 1Co 9:19, 20, 21, 22; Jas 5:19,20)

Spurgeon writes  -

Could any men be won to Christ without the Word? Yes, it was even so in the apostle’s day. When they refused to attend the little Christian meetings that were being held, and so could not hear what was there said, yet, at home, they saw the change that the gospel of Christ had wrought in their wives, and they said, “She is quite different from what she used to be. Certainly, she is a far better wife than any heathen woman is; there must be something in the religion which can make such a change as that.” In this way, without the Word, many of them were won to Christ by the godly conversation of their wives. (1 Peter 3 Commentary)

Won (2770) (kerdaino from kerdos = gain or profit, interest on money) was originally a term of commerce referring to financial gain or profit and meant to acquire by effort or investment. Kerdaino in the present context is applied figuratively of gaining or winning someone over to one's side, in this case to the side of Christ.

Behavior (391) (anastrophe from anastrepho = to turn up, to move about <> aná = again, back + strépho = turn) literally means "a turning about" and in the NT refers to how one conducts one's life, with a focus on overt daily behavior. It refers to how we live or conduct ourselves.

Note that Peter does not advise the wife to leave her heathen husband (1Cor 7:13, 14, 15, 16). Peter does not tell her to insist that there is no difference between slave and freeman, Gentile and Jew, male and female (Col 3:11), but that all are the same in the presence of the Christ whom she has come to know. Peter wants the Christian women to win their husbands by a life of reverence and purity expressed in a submissive attitude that honors him as the head of the home. It is the character and conduct of the wife that will win the lost husband—not arguments, but such attitudes as submission, understanding, love, kindness, patience. These qualities are not manufactured; they are the fruit of the Spirit that come when we are submitted to Christ .

The New Living Translation has a very nice paraphrase of this verse

In the same way, you wives must accept the authority of your husbands, even those who refuse to accept the Good News. Your godly lives will speak to them better than any words. They will be won over

Without a word does not however mean “without the Word of God”. There is no definite article before the second use of the word word No one has ever been won to the Lord Jesus apart from the Word of God because salvation comes through the Word. Jesus clearly explained one has to hear the "word" before he or she can "believe" the word, declaring

"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life." (Jn 5:24).

There is a play on the word logos. The wives are to remain silent—without a word—so that the husbands disobedient to “the word” may be converted!

What without a word really means is in essence “without talk, without a lot of speaking.” How true it is that Christian wives who preach at their husbands often only drive them farther away from the truth. Peter was not forbidding speaking to unsaved husbands about the Lord or sharing Scripture if the husband would be receptive. His point was that a godly wife’s conduct is going to be more influential than anything she may say.

John MacArthur adds...

So how do you win an unsaved partner? By living an exemplary Christian life. Just that simple, just that simple. Whether you are in the government, seeing yourself as a citizen. On the job as an employee. In the home as a marriage partner. The role is always the same, you submit to God's ordained pattern for that social relationship, and you live it out to the maximum to please God. And God will honor you as a testimony wherever you are. (1 Peter 3:1-7)

Peter is exhorting these wives who have given the gospel to their husbands time after time, to stop talking about it lest they start nagging, and instead, live the gospel before them. If the husband is so obstinate as to refuse to listen to her, well then, the next best thing is to keep quiet and let the gospel speak through a Christ like life. He may refuse to listen to her words, but he cannot but see the Lord Jesus in her life.

An excellent example of such a godly wife (and mother) was Monica, the mother of Augustine. God used Monica’s witness and prayers to win both her son and her husband to Christ, though her husband was not converted until shortly before his death. Augustine wrote in Confessions,

“She served him as her lord; and did her diligence to win him unto Thee... preaching Thee unto him by her conversation [behavior]; by which Thou ornamentest her, making her reverently amiable unto her husband.”

In the context of Peter's exhortation, it is interesting to contrast that of pagan writer Plutarch (AD50-120) who said that “it is becoming for a wife to worship and know only the gods that her husband believes in, and to shut the front door tight upon all queer rituals and outlandish superstitions.”

Spurgeon...

A husband was a very loose, depraved man of the world, but he had a wife who for many years bore with his ridicule and unkindness, praying for him night and day. One night, being at a drunken feast with a number of his companions, he boasted that his wife would do anything he wished; she was as submissive as a lamb. "Now," he said, "she has gone to bed hours ago, but if I take you all to my house at once, she will get up and entertain you and make no com­plaint." The matter ended in a bet, and away they went.

In a few minutes she was up and remarked that she was glad that she had two chickens ready, and if they would wait she would soon have a supper spread for them. The table was spread, and she took her place at it, acting the part of hostess with cheerfulness. One of the company exclaimed, "Madam, I am at a loss to under-stand how it is you receive us so cheerfully, for being a religious person you cannot approve of our conduct."

Her reply was, "I and my husband were both formerly un­converted, but by the grace of God I am now a believer in the Lord Jesus. I have daily prayed for my husband and done all I can to bring him to a better mind. But as I see no change in him, I fear he will be lost forever. And I have made up my mind to make him as happy as I can while he is here."

They went away, and her hus­band said, "Do you really think I shall be unhappy forever?"

AS THEY (closely & intently) OBSERVE: epopteusantes (AAPMPN): (1Pet 3:16; 1:15; 2:12; Php 1:27; 3:20; 1Ti 4:12; 2Pe 3:11) 

Observe (2029) (epoteuo from epoptes = an eyewitness, a supervisor, a beholder, an inspector, an onlooker.

Among the Greeks the word was used of those who had attained to the third grade, the highest, of the Eleusinian mysteries, a religious cult at Eleusis, with its worship, rites, festival and pilgrimages; this brotherhood was open to all Greeks) means to be a spectator, to be an overseer, to view carefully, to watch over a period of time. It means to to observe something, implying both continuity and intent. The unsaved watch the saved very carefully.

Peter in the only other NT use of epoteuo exhorted his readers to

Keep your behavior (one’s manner of life) excellent (Gk means lovely, winsome, gracious, noble) among the Gentiles, so that in the thing in which they slander (literally speak against, often involving speaking evil of or with a suggestion of being false and exaggerated) you as evildoers (early Christians were falsely accused of rebellion against the government with such false accusations as: terrorism - burning Rome, atheism - no idols or emperor worship, cannibalism - rumors about the Lord’s Supper, immorality - because of their love for one another, damaging trade and social progress, and leading slaves into insurrection), they may on account of your good deeds (click study on good deeds), as they observe (closely and intently - epoteuo) them (pagans are on the watch for slips in moral conduct by those Who Name Jesus as Lord and Savior), glorify (give a proper opinion of) God in the day of visitation (common phrase in OT warning of God’s “visitation” drawing near in either judgment or blessing and in NT speaks of redemption)." (see note 1 Peter 2:12).

MacArthur explains that

Peter was teaching that when the grace of God visits the heart of an unbeliever, he will respond with saving faith and glorify God because he remembers the testimony of believers he had observed. Those who don’t believe will experience the visitation of His wrath in the final judgment. (MacArthur, J.: The MacArthur Study Bible Nashville: Word or Logos)

Almost inevitably we will be criticized and so we need to remember that unsaved husbands and others not saved are observing our conduct closely and intently.

Application: Applying the truths just discussed, the question is "How would the unbelievers in your office, school, home, etc describe YOUR behavior?"

YOUR CHASTE AND RESPECTFUL BEHAVIOR: ten en phobo hagnen anastrophen humon: (1Pet 3:5,6,15; Ep 5:33; 6:5; Col 3:22)

Chaste (53) (hagnos) means freedom from defilements or impurities. Hagnos describes what is morally undefiled and when used ceremonially describes that which has been so cleansed that it is fit to be brought into the presence of God and used in His service. Although hagnos refers primarily to that which is inwardly pure, this purity also affects a person’s conduct. Here it indicates the irreproachable conduct of the wife.

Hagnos means free from admixture of evil, and is once applied to God, John writing that

everyone who has this hope fixed on Him purifies himself, just as He is pure (hagnos) (1Jn 3:3)

Hagnos is used 8 times in the NT in the NASB and is translated: chaste, 1; free from sin, 1; innocent, 1; pure, 5.

2 Corinthians 7:11 For behold what earnestness this very thing, this godly sorrow, has produced in you: what vindication of yourselves, what indignation, what fear, what longing, what zeal, what avenging of wrong! In everything you demonstrated yourselves to be innocent (hagnos) in the matter.

2 Corinthians 11:2 For I am jealous for you with a godly jealousy; for I betrothed you to one husband, that to Christ I might present you as a pure (chaste) virgin.

Philippians 4:8 (note) Finally, brethren, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is of good repute, if there is any excellence and if anything worthy of praise, let your mind dwell on these things.

1 Timothy 5:22 Do not lay hands upon anyone too hastily and thus share responsibility for the sins of others; keep yourself free from sin (morally and ethically pure)

Titus 2:5 (note) to be sensible, pure (chaste), workers at home, kind, being subject to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be dishonored.

James 3:17 But the wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, reasonable, full of mercy and good fruits, unwavering, without hypocrisy.

1 Peter 3:2 as they observe your chaste and respectful behavior.

1 John 3:3 And everyone who has this hope fixed on Him purifies himself, just as He is pure.

In the Septuagint (LXX) hagnos is found 8 times (Lev. 23:40; Job 40:22; Ps. 12:6; 19:9; Prov. 15:26; 19:13; 20:9; 21:8) and often signifies ceremonial purification and/or moral and ethical purity.

Psalm 12:6 The words of the LORD are pure (Hebrew = tahowr = pure, ceremonially clean as it referred to animals, ethically pure; Lxx = hagnos) words; As silver tried in a furnace on the earth, refined seven times. (See Spurgeon's Comment)

Psalm 19:9 The fear of the LORD is clean (pure) (Hebrew = tahowr = pure, ceremonially clean as it referred to animals, ethically pure; Lxx = hagnos), enduring forever; The judgments of the LORD are true; they are righteous altogether. (See Spurgeon's Comment)

Proverbs 15:26 (KJV) The thoughts of the wicked are an abomination to the LORD: but the words of the pure (Hebrew = tahowr = pure, ceremonially clean as it referred to animals, ethically pure; Lxx = hagnos) are pleasant words.

Hagnos is always with a moral sense but is not limited to sins of the flesh, but covering purity in motives as well as in acts.  In 2Co 11:2, of virgin purity. In James 3:17, as a characteristic of heavenly wisdom.

Barclay (critique) emphasizing the secular origin and use writes that....

"hagnos and its root meaning is pure enough to approach the gods. At first it had only a ceremonial meaning and meant nothing more than that a man had gone through the right ritual cleansings. So, for instance, Euripides can make one of his characters say, “My hands are pure, but my heart is not.” At this stage hagnos describes ritual, but not necessarily moral, purity. But as time went on the word came to describe the moral purity which alone can approach the gods. On the Temple of Aesculapius at Epidaurus there was the inscription at the entrance: “He who would enter the divine temple must be pure (hagnos); and purity is to have a mind which thinks holy thoughts. (Barclay, W: The Daily Study Bible Series. The Westminster Press or Logos)

Chaste is defined by Webster as free from all taint of what is lewd or salacious and implies a refraining from acts or even thoughts or desires that are not virginal or not sanctioned by marriage vows.

Hagnos refers to the irreproachable conduct of a godly wife. The believing wife must live with the conscious awareness and conviction that all life is lived in the presence of Christ. (cp note Ephesians 5:21). Purity of life with reverence for God is what the unsaved husband should observe consistently.

Respectful  (5401) (phobos) literally means fear but in context conveys the meanings of honoring or reverencing her husband. Phobos reflects her attitude toward her husband that parallels her attitude toward God’s will.

The Amplified Version describes the wife's reverence for her husband as follows...

"...you are to feel for him all that reverence includes: to respect, defer to, revere him—to honor, esteem, appreciate, prize, and, in the human sense, to adore him, that is, to admire, praise, be devoted to, deeply love, and enjoy your husband."

George Müller told of a wealthy German whose wife was a devout believer. This man was a heavy drinker, spending late nights in the tavern. She would send the servants to bed, stay up till he returned, receive him kindly, and never scold him or complain. At times she would even have to undress him and put him to bed. One night in the tavern he said to his cronies,

“I bet if we go to my house, my wife will be sitting up, waiting for me. She’ll come to the door, give us a royal welcome, and even make supper for us, if I ask her.”

They were skeptical at first, but decided to go along and see. Sure enough, she came to the door, received them courteously, and willingly agreed to make supper for them without the slightest trace of resentment. After serving them, she went off to her room. As soon as she had left, one of the men began to condemn the husband. “

What kind of a man are you to treat such a good woman so miserably?”

The accuser got up without finishing his supper and left the house. Another did the same and another till they had all departed without eating the meal.  Within a half hour, the husband became deeply convicted of his wickedness, and especially of his heartless treatment of his wife. He went to his wife’s room, asked her to pray for him, repented of his sins, and surrendered to Christ. From that time on, he became a devoted disciple of the Lord Jesus. Won without a word!

George Müller advised: Dearly beloved, don’t be discouraged if you have to suffer from unconverted relatives. Perhaps very shortly the Lord may give you the desire of your heart, and answer your prayer for them. But in the meantime, seek to commend the truth, not by reproaching them on account of their behavior toward you, but by manifesting toward them the meekness, gentleness and kindness of the Lord Jesus Christ.

AND LET NOT YOUR ADORNMENT BE MERELY EXTERNAL: on esto (3SPAM) ouch o exothen:  (1Ti 2:9,10; Titus 2:3-15; Ro 12:2)

Adornment (2889) (kosmos) (see study verb form kosmeo) means literally “an ordered system” and speaks of that which is congruous, fitting. The idea is that the wife's clothing on the outside of the body should be an expression of what is in the heart. 

External (1855) (exothen from éxo= out + suffix –then = from or at a place) means from without, outwardly.

Must not be - Not is absolute negation = no exceptions.

Be (2077) (eimi = to be) is present imperative.

As the Christian wife thus seeks to live before her husband, the apostle commands (present imperative = continuous or habitual action called for) her not to depend upon outward adornment to win her husband to the Lord. Her adornment must come from within, from a heart permeated with the beauty and fragrance of Christ for it the presence of the Lord Jesus in the life of the wife that will attract the disobedient husband and not the adornment she puts on.

BRAIDING THE HAIR: emplokes trichon: 

Braiding (1708) (emploke from empléko =  to interweave, braid in, entangle <> from en = in + pléko = connect, tie, twine/braid) refers to a braiding, an intertwining or a plaiting as of the hair in ornamentation.

Hair (2359) (thrix) the hairs of the head.

She is not to depend upon the plaiting of the hair in her effort to win her husband to the Lord. Reference is made here to the extravagant and costly excesses to which women of the first century went in hair ornament. The braiding of hair along with bright clothes was important in the cult of Artemis (Diana) and Isis.

Vincent quotes an ancient writing that gives additional insight into why Peter's instruction is so specific:

"The attendants will vote on the dressing of the hair as if a question of reputation or of life were at stake, so great is the trouble she takes in quest of beauty; with so many tiers does she load, with so many continuous stories does she build up on high her head. She is as tall as Andromache in front, behind she is shorter. You would think her another person”.

Thus, extravagant excesses and intricate artificiality of hair dress are forbidden the Christian woman as adornment. Ornaments of gold were worn round the hair as nets and round the finger, arm, or ankle. (Things have not changed much have they?)

AND WEARING GOLD JEWELRY: kai peritheseos chrusion: (Ge 24:22, 47, 53; Ex 3:22; 32:2; 33:4; 35:22; 38:8; 2Ki 9:30; Esther 5:1; Ps 45:9; Is 3:18-24; 52:1; 61:10; Je 2:32; 4:30; Ezekiel 16:7-13; 23:40)

Wearing (4025) (perithesis from peri = around + tithemi = place) means literally “to place around or hang around,” as one hangs ornaments around a Christmas tree.

The wearing of jewelry is not forbidden here, but it is clearly not to be a gaudy, conspicuous, extravagant display. This would hardly serve to win a disobedient husband to Christ.

OR PUTTING ON DRESSES: e enduseos himation kosmos: 

Putting on (1745) (endusis from enduo [Click in depth word study on enduo] = put on in turn from en = in + duo = sink, go in or under, to put on) means the putting on or wearing of clothes. In one secular writing it is used to describe "a beloved spouse who attired herself unobtrusively 'ornatus non conspiciendi'")

So here Peter says that dependence upon apparel is forbidden. The purpose of clothing is for the protection of the body and what Peter is forbidding is the donning of apparel for the purpose of making ourselves pleasing in the eyes of the unsaved so that we may win them to a saving faith in the Lord Jesus.

Wuest has an instructive question asking...

"Why does not dependence upon outward adornment help us to win souls to the Lord Jesus? First, it is because the Holy Spirit does not use the styles of the world in winning a soul to the Lord, as He seeks to work through the believer. Second, it is because such an elaborate display satisfies the lust or desire of the eyes of the unsaved one whom we are seeking to win. When a Christian worker thus appeals to the fallen nature of the sinner, she cannot at the same time appeal to him to trust in the Lord Jesus. Third, it is because such a display destroys the personal testimony of the soul winner. We may be fundamental in our doctrine, and yet defeat the power of the Word we give out by the modernism of our appearance. The unsaved person will say, “What you appear to be on the outside speaks so loudly I cannot hear what you are saying.” For these reasons, no dependence must be placed upon outward adornment as we seek to win the lost. Instead of this, we are to depend upon the hidden person of the heart. (see v4) The expression refers to the inner heart life of the Christian in which the Lord Jesus reigns supreme. When we depend upon that (Him) for our adornment, then the Lord Jesus is seen in the life, His beauty, His sweetness, His simplicity. (cf note Romans 13:14) This the Holy Spirit uses as He gently woos a soul to the Savior. The more of the Lord Jesus which the sinner sees in the believer’s life, the more powerful is the latter’s testimony, the more usable her words, usable to the Holy Spirit (cf Jn 3:30). Alas, as someone has said, “What cheap perfume we sometimes use” This brings us to certain principles regarding adornment. If a personality is to be seen at its best, it must be seen alone, not merged with another personality. Either the Lord Jesus is seen in all His beauty, or the personality of the believer is seen and her adornment. The Holy Spirit attracts sinners to the Lord Jesus, not by displaying the latest styles in dress, but by exhibiting the Lord Jesus. If the sinner is attracted by the modernism of the believer’s adornment, the fundamentalism of the believer’s doctrine will be neutralized. When a Christian woman depends upon the Lord Jesus for her adornment, the manner of wearing the hair, the kind and amount of ornament she wears, and the kind of clothing she puts on, will all be in keeping with the purity, simplicity, and beauty of the Lord Jesus. All will be attractive without attracting from the Lord Jesus. All will be beautiful without detracting from Him. All will have character without attracting one to the person herself. Then the sinner will see the Lord Jesus in the heart and life of the believer, and in her adornment as well. Then will the Holy Spirit be able to work through the soul winner, attracting sinners to the Savior. (Wuest, K. S. Wuest's Word Studies from the Greek New Testament: Eerdmans or Logos)

Beautiful People - Our society idolizes the so-called "beautiful people" -popular entertainers and models whose youthful faces dominate the pages of the magazines at the supermarket checkout. But such attractiveness has nothing to do with the kind of beauty that delights the heart of God.

We tend to think of beauty in terms of something lovely that evokes a feeling of pleasure within us. But God wants us to place more value on what's in a person's heart than we do on superficial things (1 Pet. 3:3-4).

As William Dyrness explains, something is lovely by God's standards "if it displays the integrity that characterizes creation and that in turn reflects God's own righteousness." In other words, a truly beautiful person is one who serves God's purposes.

Regardless of our outward appearance, then, all of us can be beautiful. By God's transforming grace, we can have the beauty of holiness and integrity  that mirrors the character of His Son. As we devote ourselves wholeheartedly to the fulfillment of the Lord's purposes in our lives, we will  develop the kind of God-honoring beauty that does  not fade (Prov. 31:30). That's the only way to become one of the truly beautiful people.-- VC Grounds (Our Daily Bread, Copyright RBC Ministries, Grand Rapids, MI. Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved)

Let the beauty of Jesus be seen in me,
All His wonderful passion and purity;
O Thou Spirit divine, all my nature refine,
Till the beauty of Jesus be seen in me.

BUT LET IT BE THE HIDDEN PERSON OF THE HEART: all o kruptos tes kardias anthropos: (Ps 45:13; 51:6; Mt 23:26; Lk 11:40; Ro 2:29; 6:6; 7:22; 2Co 4:16; Ep 4:22-24; Col 3:3,9,10)

Spurgeon writes  -

There is no ornament like that. No taste can ever conceive anything so lovely as a holy character. No expensive materials, and no ingenious fashioning of them, can ever produce such true beauty as “a meek and quiet spirit.” You must have known some godly matrons, venerable Christian women, whose gentle piety has blessed the whole household of which they formed a part. They attained supreme authority over all simply by yielding; they gained a queenly position in the house by gentleness and quietness. Nobody dared to offend them; — not because they would have been in a passion, but because they were themselves so inoffensive, so kind, so gentle. (1 Peter 3 Commentary)

Hidden (2927) (krupto, English - cryptic) secret, concealed.

The idea of hidden person of the heart is that...

the personality of the Christian woman is made beautiful by the ministry of the Holy Spirit in glorifying the Lord Jesus and manifesting Him in and through her life....The adornment must be spiritual, not physical. Personality is after all far more important than either physical beauty or the adornment which mere clothing affords. A person ought to be bigger than any consideration of outward decoration. One can dress up a fence post. If one finds it necessary to depend upon either physical beauty or clothing in order to make a favorable impression upon others, that fact shows that that person realizes his lack of those personal and spiritual qualities that make a virile Christian character." (Wuest, K. S. Wuest's Word Studies from the Greek New Testament: Eerdmans or Logos)

The hidden person of the heart is the best sermon the wife could preach to win her husband for Christ. There are few passages where the value of a lovely Christian life is so vividly stressed.

WITH THE IMPERISHABLE QUALITY OF A GENTLE: en to aphtharto tou praeos: (1Peter 3:15; Ps 25:9; 147:6; 149:4; Is 11:4; 29:19; 57:15; 61:1; Mt 5:5; 11:29; Mt 21:5; 2Co 10:1; Gal 5:23; Ep 4:2; Col 3:12; 2Ti 2:25; Titus 3:2; Jas 1:21; 3:13, 14, 15, 16, 17)

Imperishable (862) (aphthartos from a = negates what follows + phtheiro = to corrupt)  means nothing can corrupt or ruin, not liable to pass away, not subject to corruption, decay or dissolution and so imperishable. Absolutely nothing can ruin your eternal inheritance beloved. In secular Greek aphthartos described something that had not been ravaged by an invading army.

Note that the gentle or meek spirit here is in fact a word of power, not of weakness as many think.

Gentle (4239) (praus) (Click for in depth study of the related noun translated "gentleness' =  prautes) refers to one who is not overly impressed by a sense of one’s self-importance and is gentle, humble, considerate, meek and unassuming.

Praus describes the man or woman whose temper is always under complete control. He or she knows when to be angry and when not to be angry. He or she patiently bears wrongs to himself or herself but is ever chivalrously ready to spring to the help of others who are wronged.

Praus is used 4 times in the NT  in the NASB (Mt 3x; 1Pet) (see uses in Matthew below) and is always translated "gentle" but could be translated as “meek” or “tender.”

Praus and prautes convey the idea of tenderness and graciousness, and can be accurately translated “meekness” and “meek” respectively. But unlike those English words, the Greek terms do not connote weakness but rather power under control. The adjective praus was often used of a wild horse that was broken and made useful to its owner. For believers, to be gentle is to be willingly under the sovereign control of God. Numbers 12:3 describes Moses as

“very meek, above all the men which were upon the face of the earth.”

Yet that same Moses could act decisively, and flared up in anger when provoked.

Praus is often used of a gentle voice, a gentle breeze, or a gentle animal. As noted above the Greeks characterized meekness as power under control and in the case of the Spirit filled believer this means that he or she is under the control of God's Spirit. From a practical standpoint, the individual who is "praus" exhibits a freedom from malice, bitterness, or any desire for revenge. The only way to truly define meekness is in the context of relationships because it refers to how we treat others. A gentle spirit should characterize our relationship with both man and God.

How would you describe your attitude, beloved? Are you meek, humble, gentle, and mild, or do you tend to display an arrogant, selfish attitude toward others? Test yourself with the following questions: Are you harsh? If you are mean in your treatment of others, if there is an absence of gentleness in your treatment of others, take heed. Are you continually grasping? If you make sure you always get yours first, if numero uno is the subtle driving force in your life, if you care little about how your actions affect others, beware. Are you vengeful?  If you are known as someone never to cross, if you always get your "pound of flesh," be on your guard. Are your emotions uncontrolled? If rage fills your soul so that life is a series of explosions occasioned by the "fools" in your life, watch out. None of these traits emanates from a meek, gentle spirit.

Gentleness is a God-honored character trait, one the nine fold aspects of the fruit of the Spirit (Gal 5:23) and is never bitter, malicious, self-seeking, self-promoting, arrogant, or vengeful.

The person who is "gentle" or "meek" sees everything as coming from God and accepting it without murmuring and without disputing. Meekness and weakness are not synonymous.

The "gentle, meek" person (empowered by the indwelling Spirit, gentleness being one aspect of the Spirit's fruit, Gal 5:23) is enabled to say

"God, in this situation (whatever it might be), You are in control. You are sovereign and You rule over all. You have a purpose and that one aspect of Your purpose is to make me more like Christ."

Gentleness or meekness is to characterize everyone in the kingdom of God. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus said,

Blessed are the gentle (praus), for they shall inherit the earth (see note Matthew 5:5).

Our Lord used praus of Himself in His famous invitation to all who are weary and heavy laden to

Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle (praus) and humble in heart (Mt 11:29).

In fulfillment of Zechariah's prophecy (Zech 9:9), as Jesus prepares for His triumphal entry in His last week in Jerusalem, Matthew records

BEHOLD YOUR KING IS COMING TO YOU, GENTLE (praus), AND MOUNTED ON A DONKEY, EVEN ON A COLT, THE FOAL OF A BEAST OF BURDEN.' (Mt 21:5)

Robert Johnstone (in his excellent nineteenth-century commentary on James) has some insightful comments on meek or gentle writing...

I do not know that at any point the opposition between the spirit of the world and the Spirit of Christ is more marked, more obviously diametrical, than with regard to this feature of character. That “the meek” should “inherit the earth”—they who bear wrongs, and exemplify that love which “seeketh not her own," (see note 1Corinthians 13:5)—to a world which believes in high-handedness and self-assertion, and pushing the weakest to the wall, a statement like this of the Lord from heaven cannot but appear an utter paradox. The man of the world desires to be counted anything but “meek” or “poor in spirit,” and would deem such a description of him equivalent to a charge of unmanliness. Ah, brethren, this is because we have taken in Satan’s conception of manliness instead of God’s. One Man has been shown us by God, in Whom His ideal of man was embodied; and He, “when He was reviled, reviled not again; when He suffered, threatened not, but committed Himself to Him that judgeth righteously” (1Peter 2:21-23); He for those who nailed Him to the tree prayed, “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.” (Lu 23:34, cf Acts 7:60) The world’s spirit of wrath, then, must be folly; whilst than a spirit of meekness like His, in the midst of controversy, oppositions, trials of whatever kind, there can be no surer evidence that “Jesus is made of God to His people wisdom. (Johnstone, Robert : A Commentary on James. Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 1977, p261–62)

Strong's note on praus states that

"Meekness toward God is that disposition of spirit in which we accept His dealings with us as good, and therefore without disputing or resisting.

In the OT, the meek are those wholly relying on God rather than their own strength to defend them against injustice. Thus, meekness toward evil people means knowing God is permitting the injuries they inflict, that He is using them to purify His elect, and that He will deliver His elect in His time." (cf Isaiah 41:17)

William Barclay (critique) has a lengthy discussion of praus (and the related word prautes) writing that praus has two main lines of meanings...

(a) Aristotle, the great Greek thinker and teacher, has much to say about praotēs (related to praus). It was his custom to define every virtue as the mean between two extremes. On one side there was excess of some quality, on the other defect; and in between there was exactly its right proportion. Aristotle defines praotēs (related to praus) as the mean between being too angry and never being angry at all. The man who is praus is the man who is always angry at the right time and never angry at the wrong time. To put that in another way, the man who is praus is the man who is kindled by indignation at the wrongs and the sufferings of others, but is never moved to anger by the wrongs and the insults he himself has to bear. So, then, the man who is (as in the Authorized Version), meek is the man who is always angry at the right time but never angry at the wrong time.

(b) There is another fact which will illumine the meaning of this word. Praus is the Greek for an animal which has been trained and domesticated until it is completely under control. Therefore the man who is praus is the man who has every instinct and every passion under perfect control. It would not be right to say that such a man is entirely self-controlled, for such self-control is beyond human power; but it would be right to say that such a man is God-controlled. (Barclay, W: The Daily Study Bible Series. The Westminster Press or Logos)

Praus conveys the idea of "controlled strength" and is that humble and gentle attitude that expresses itself in a patient submissiveness.

Think about it...if gentleness or meekness governs the circumstances we encounter rather than the circumstances governing us, it has to be powerful.

Meekness is the opposite of self-assertiveness and self-interest.

Meekness is an equanimity of spirit that is neither elated nor cast down because it is not occupied with self at all.

The perfect example of praus is our Lord Jesus Christ and how He walked and responded even to those who mistreated and falsely accused Him (see notes 1 Peter 2:18; 19; 20; 21; 22; 23; 24; 25). He did not operate with deceit, did not return derogatory remarks and did not threaten even though He had more right to do so as Creator than anyone ever created. He kept His mouth closed & prayed. He continually entrusted Himself to God, knowing that God knew his unjust treatment & that He would judge righteously. Jesus' purpose was not to judge (at least not as a Man) but to win over the sinner. Jesus then is the wife's (and all believer's) Example, Role model and most importantly our Enabler (through the Spirit of Christ Who indwells all believers) to supernaturally exhibit this gentle spirit. (see note 1Thessalonians 5:24).

So in Peter's message to the wife is to do all you can to win your husband with your meekness & with a quiet spirit, with that tranquility that arises from within and remains unshaken by circumstances. This is not an easy command, especially in our modern liberated feminist era where women are taught independence & self-assertion. Yet God speaks there truths for He knows & understands the hearts of all mankind and He knows what is best. That is why He tells us not to lean on our own understanding but to acknowledge Him in all our ways and He is responsible to make our paths straight. His thoughts & ways are much higher than ours. Peter says to the wife to take the high road that she might live in the highest plane.

Here is the KEY to this dynamic -- it is in a sense letting go of trying to "work" on one's husband, giving up on one's own (self) efforts and trusting God to work on him. All the while the wife by God's grace exercises the godly discipline of a gentle and quiet spirit. Now we begin to see why it is characterized as "precious". It is not the wife's job to make the husband holy. It is God's job and only within His power.

AND QUIET SPIRIT (disposition): kai hesuchiou pneumatos: (Ps 131:2; Jer 51:59; 1Th 4:11; 2Th 3:12; 1Ti 2:2)

Quiet (2272) (hesuchios) means quiet, tranquil (free from agitation of mind or spirit and suggesting a suggests a very deep quietude or composure), without turmoil, well ordered or undisturbed from without and exhibiting a peaceful attitude. It does not mean she should be silent at all times and never express an opinion. Compare the  description of a "virtuous woman" (Pr 31:10-31).

Spirit - In this context refers to one's general disposition.

WHICH IS PRECIOUS IN THE SIGHT OF GOD: o estin (3SPAI) enopion tou theou poluteles:(1Sa 16:7; Ps 147:10,11; 149:4; Lk 16:15)

Precious (4185) (poluteles is from polus = much or great + telos = expense or cost) means very expensive, costly or sumptuous and in the present context means "very precious".

In the sight of God - The Greek word enopion (from en = in + ops = face or eye) is literally in the face of, in the presence of and thus before. This picture makes her manifestation of a gentle and quiet spirit virtually a sacrificial act of worship!

Cultural context: Christianity came into a world of luxury and decadence combined. Purple was the favourite colour for clothes. One pound weight of the best Tyrian purple wool, strained twice through, cost 1,000 denarii, 43.50 pounds. A tyrian cloak of the best purple cost well over 100 pounds. In one year silks, pearls, scents and jewelry were imported from India to the value of 1,000,000 pounds. Similar imports of luxury came from Arabia. Diamonds, emeralds, topazes, opals and the sardonyx were favourite stones. Struma Nonius had a ring valued at 21,250 pounds. Pearls were loved most of all. Julius Caesar bought for Servilia a pearl which cost him 65,250 pounds. Earrings were made of pearls and Seneca spoke of women with two or three fortunes in their ears. Slippers were encrusted with them; Nero even had a room whose walls were covered with them. Pliny saw Lollia Paulina, wife of Caligula, wearing a dress so covered with pearls and emeralds that it had cost 450,000 pounds.

The Birthmark - Charles William Eliot (1834-1926), former president of Harvard University, had a birthmark on his face that bothered him greatly. As a young man, he was told that surgeons could do nothing to remove it. Someone described that moment as “the dark hour of his soul.” Eliot’s mother gave him this helpful advice: “My son, it is not possible for you to get rid of that hardship. But it is possible for you, with God’s help, to grow a mind and soul so big that people will forget to look at your face.” 

PRECIOUS
(Source unknown)

”Of great price, costly, valuable, very dear, highly esteemed, expensive.” People and things are said to be precious to us; yet, how much more precious to us should things of a spiritual nature be. Peter loved to use the word, “precious” in his epistles. Note Peter’s precious treasures.

1. Precious Trials—”That the trial of your faith, being much more precious than of gold that perisheth” (see note 1 Peter 1:7).

2. Precious Blood—”Redeemed with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot” (see notes 1 Peter 1:18; 1:19).

3. Precious Corner Stone—”To whom coming, as unto a living stone, chosen of God, and precious, a chief corner stone, elect, precious” (see notes 1 Peter 2:4; 2:6).

4. Precious Lord—”Unto you therefore which believe He is precious” (see note 1 Peter 2:7).

5. Precious Faith—”To them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ” (see note 2 Peter 1:1).

6. Precious Promises—”Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust” (see note 2 Peter 1:1).

7. Precious Death—”Precious in the sight of the LORD is the death of His saints” (Psalm 116:15; See Spurgeon's Note)

This last verse is not from Peter, but should be included in the list of God’s precious things, serving, as it does, as the final evaluation of the things of this life. It is a precious, comforting thought to know that to

be absent from the body (is) to be present with the Lord (2 Corinthians 5:8).