Likewise, Wives
Likewise, wives, be subject to your own husbands, so that even if some do not obey the word, they may be won without a word by the conduct of their wives, when they see your respectful and pure conduct. Do not let your adorning be external—the braiding of hair and the putting on of gold jewelry, or the clothing you wear—but let your adorning be the hidden person of the heart with the imperishable beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which in God’s sight is very precious. For this is how the holy women who hoped in God used to adorn themselves, by submitting to their own husbands, as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord. And you are her children, if you do good and do not fear anything that is frightening.
1 Peter 3:1-6
This week it is “Likewise, wives” and next week, “Likewise, husbands.” Likewise what? Wayne Grudem allows that there may be three possible interpretations here: first, that the “likewise” is likened to Christ’s submission, given the immediately preceding verses (2:21-25); second, that the word may be rendered “Also.” Yet he takes the position we favor, that, “the reader would naturally make the connection with 2:18, the last time Peter used the verb ‘be submissive’ (hupostasso).”1 Recall how Peter began this section: “Be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor …” (2:13); and “Servants, be subject to your masters” (2:18). Two institutions had already been covered: civil government and the field of labor. Now he moves on to the home.
Doctrine. Wives are designed by God in an institution and for a purpose greater than their passing excellencies and anxieties.
(i.) The imperative to godly wives
(ii.) The influence of godly wives
(iii.) The character of godly wives
(iv.) The hope of godly wives
The Imperative to Godly Wives
First, ‘be subject to your own husbands’ (v. 1a). There is no mystery now as to what this word means, as we have already seen it commanded of all Christian citizens and all Christian workers. In one very important sense, submission in this institution works like submission in the others. It covers the whole of the institution. So Paul says, “wives should submit in everything to their husbands” (Eph. 5:24).
This submission is not based upon an inequality of dignity or IQ, but neither is it a product of the fall. Even when Paul was explaining to Timothy proper order in the church, partly by the role Eve played in the fall, the words that come before it are: “For Adam was formed first, then Eve” (1 Tim. 2:13). So it is a creational reality.
The example of Sarah at the end of the passage puts flesh on this submission: ‘as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord’ (v. 6a). The strongest word is used here: κύριος. This reminds us of the qualified sense of obedience in the prior cases of the civil magistrate and the master at work: “in the Lord” or “as unto the Lord.” Paul says in that same Ephesians passage: “Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord” (Eph. 5:22). This has a double sense, guarding us from those familiar opposite ditches. One is to not take it without seriousness (i.e., lip service); the other is to take it without qualification.
Grudem offers what may seem to be obvious examples of when a wife must disobey, but for many they are instructive:
“If he should say, ‘Stop being a Christian, be like me,’ she will have to humbly say, ‘I cannot. My conscience must answer to a higher authority.’ If he should tell her to steal, or lie, or do something else contrary to the clear moral teachings of Scripture, she must refuse, thereby following Peter’s command to maintain good conduct among the Gentiles (1 Peter 2:12). Moreover, the word hagnos, ‘chaste’ (RSV, NASB; the NIV has ‘purity’) means ‘pure, free from moral defilement,’ and serves as another reminder that the submission Peter commands must never go so far as to include obedience to demands that do something that is morally wrong.”2
At any rate, steering between these, this submission means coming up under him in rank in all areas of life, and he under Christ.
The Influence of Godly Wives
Although there is a more ultimate end in view in this whole section, here Peter motivates, at least partly, with a pragmatic appeal: ‘so that even if some do not obey the word, they may be won without a word by the conduct of their wives, when they see your respectful and pure conduct.’ (vv. 1b-2). Note that this speaks directly to those with husbands who DO NOT OBEY THE WORD, which most commentaries agree is shorthand for an unbelieving husband. While this does not amount to an alternative means of someone coming to Christ—as if the godly wife could do the work of the Holy Spirit—on the other hand, the Spirit has many secondary instruments that work in concert with the Word. These words are not meant for us to set the woman’s action and the word of truth in opposition—or even the woman not using any words versus using words—but rather the woman’s proper disposition and improper disposition are opposed.
From this, four implications for wives logically follow:
(i.) Peter’s words are directed to wives as women, not merely as subordinates.
(ii.) From this it follows that this is the influence of a distinctly feminine disposition.
(iii.) From those first two truths, it follows that a feminine disposition works in a way that an unfeminine disposition does not.
(iv.) The fact that Peter needs to say this suggests a temptation against believing that this feminine disposition works.
The same God who designed the male psyche instructs wives that this is what works—no matter how long it does take, or even if it never does—the point is that nothing else does work. What might seem to work is a cheap imitation. A man can be nagged to move from point A to point B, but the one standing at point B will be less like a man, and the wife will have only exacerbated his passivity and resentment for a short-term gain.
Calvin adds to this the flip side of the coin:
But if wives ought to obey ungodly husbands, with much more promptness ought they to obey, who have believing husbands.3
The same is implied of Christian princes and Christian bosses. We ought to all the more desire to see the success of Christian visions for society and economy.
The Character of Godly Wives
Peter uses a word here that is going to stand for character, but in a way that is fitting for women. He will twice use the word “adorning,” which interestingly is the same word for “world” (κόσμος), and he will do it by way of contrast. In other words, there is a battle between two competing adornments:
Do not let your adorning be external—the braiding of hair and the putting on of gold jewelry, or the clothing you wear—but let your adorning be the hidden person of the heart with the imperishable beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which in God’s sight is very precious (vv. 3-4).
When I say these two adornments are “competing,” I do need to remove a distraction that combines biblicism and legalism. No—Peter is not condemning jewelry or braided hair. If he was, in order to be consistent, you would have to move on to the third item on that list as well, namely, the wearing of clothes. The point is obviously that this outward appearance, as the adornment that seems to matter, is not in fact the adornment that matters.
The Greek καρδίας ἄνθρωπος is an emphatic sense of “inner man,” even though it is about a woman, it is used generically. Peter is really unpacking more of what this submission means. And it is the following Greek word that really brings out the jewel, perhaps almost literally. It is an adjective with no noun being modified. The word is ἄφθαρτος and he had already used it in 1:4 to describe the inheritance being kept in heaven for us—namely, ‘imperishable.’ This is not abnormal in the Greek text, and since it is feminine and since it is being contrasted to that outward beauty, we can see why that same word here is fitting.
This is a beauty that lasts—the kind that doesn’t just turns heads, but turns hearts. And that’s the whole point that Peter is making.
As always, God’s estimation is what matters—πολυτελής is easy to dissect: poly (many or much) and telos (end, goal, motive). Here it means it of “great worth” to God. God has a great design in a wife. The world has a cheap way to influence a man. But God has a way that works for a far greater end. We can summarize: God greatly values the distinctly feminine character, and God makes it effective in the men-shaping that matters.
The Hope of Godly Wives
Peter gives Christian wives a motive here the same way he gave Christian citizens and Christian workers their motive. What is it? ‘For this is how the holy women who hoped in God used to adorn themselves’ (v. 5). How does this function as a motive for the wife? Peter brings you up into an institution that is bigger than you, by bringing you back into a story that is bigger than you. And he uses the specific Old Testament example of Sarah, but clearly Sarah is one example of a line that Peter addresses in the plural as holy women—women who are both wives and saints, since that is what holy ones means.
Just as Peter had used imagery of the temple and priesthood to put all Gentile believers in the same line as Old Testament believers in that one nation of Israel, so he places godly wives here in Sarah’s line with these words: ‘And you are her children’ (v. 6b).
Peter ends this address to wives with an enemy of hope. He uses conditional language. Yes—you belong to that long line of Sarah and her spiritual daughters ‘if you do good and do not fear anything that is frightening’ (v. 6c). I said in the Big Idea that Wives are designed by God in an institution and for a purpose greater than their passing excellencies—and physical beauty was the excellency in view. But there were also passing anxieties. This ANYTHING THAT IS FRIGHTENING may seem unfairly comprehensive. “So, do not fear anything? Any fear whatsoever is sinful?” Certainly not. There are natural fears, and the mere experience of them is not sinful.
However, as anxiety is the enemy of hope, so anxiety is an excuse from submission. How so? There are many ways to explain this. Reading Jesus’s words in Matthew 6 is one way: “do not be anxious” (6:25), and He tells us why—about the Father’s care for us and about our divided hearts, that we cannot serve two masters.
Anxiety is really the tension that pulls us from our true Master to idols. But think of it this way: When Jesus calls a man to do hard things, do those hard things typically pay the bills and win lots of applause from friends and neighbors? No.
Tangible things that the man is supposed to provide for become “good reasons” to bind the man from providing for the more crucial intangible things—the things that make up the fabric of spiritual leadership, and physical leadership. So do not let your natural fears become an excuse to undermine God’s efficient means of masculine leadership and feminine influence.
Practical Use of the Doctrine
Use 1. Instruction. We saw that the expression ‘some [who] do not obey the word’ referenced unbelieving husbands, one might ask: Does the principle given by Peter work the same way with those who are believing husbands? And the answer is Yes. This is clearly a universal truth about human relations, and especially about the way in which a husband will respond (or not respond well) to his wife. Here too we must avoid two clear ditches. One sees the universal principle as a one-size-fits-all magic bullet: “Oh good, I’ll butter him up, and his hardened heart or stubbornness or insensitivity will melt and mold and so forth!” But the other ditch says, “Yes, well, I have been doing the soft answer turns away wrath thing, and my gentle spirit is only enabling him.” Again, the suspicion is that it does not work. This is not only mistrust of God. It also happens to be bad logic. If I discover that cars only run on gas, there is no strength to the argument to begin pouring lemonade in the gas tank when the same gas that caused by neighbor’s car to run did not do the same to mine. There may be something else wrong. Results may vary. But the gas tank is for gas all the same. So in the same way, femininty is what breaks the man’s heart in this way. Might some still disobey the word? Indeed. And yet no amount of nagging or manipulating or belittling or undermining will work on his heart.
Use 2. Correction. It is often thought that submission requires that the wife not counsel her husband. We have already seen that part of Peter’s aim here is that the wife does influence her husband. The main influence will be by her overall character and therefore her true feminine disposition; but this does not mean the absence of verbal counsel anymore than a civil magistrate or business owner is without his counselors. I think we would all agree that a civil magistrate and a business owner who could not hear genuine counsel from others is an insecure man, and no leader. In the same way, a husband who does not value his wife’s counsel is not properly leading: “The heart of her husband trusts in her” (Prov. 31:11).
What it does mean, however, is that there is a time for deliberation and a time for decision. When decision time has come, deliberation must cease. It is at that point where the husband is called to make that decision and bear the responsibility for its fallout. And that means that the wife has a corresponding duty to liberate that decision so that it is genuine, so that the man doesn’t have at least one hand tied behind his back.
Use 3. Consolation. To be a daughter of Sarah in the way Peter means it here is to be a daughter of hope. Later on Peter will admonish us all to be ready to give an answer for the hope that is in us. Do you exude a hope that would even get that question? If you don’t feel that you do, specifically because of your home life, the Word is not given to you this morning to bury you, but to raise hope in you. Because it is in there, you too may not see that inner beauty at first. But that is the thing Peter said about the imperishable seed of the word. It is not as though this is some arbitrary second track of salvation. It is the way that a Christian wife shows contentment in Christ. This is really the meaning of Paul’s words where he says,
Yet she will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control (1 Tim. 2:15).
In other words, do not hope in the world’s anti-gospels of egalitarianism or feminism. Hope in God, through the exact way that He has made you.
______________________________________________
1. Wayne Grudem, Recovering Biblical Manhood & Womanhood: A Response to Evangelical Feminism (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 1991), 200.
2. Grudem, Recovering Biblical Manhood & Womanhood, 195.
3. Calvin, Commentaries, XXII.2.95.
