“What’s in my heart when life is hard?”
Download discussion questions: 1 Peter 3:1-7
Jump to beginning of 1 Peter Discussion Group Blog
Listen to 1 Peter 1-2
I encourage you to look at the passage in 1 Peter before you read this Blog entry. What do you see in the text yourself? What questions come to your mind? How would you interpret what the writer says? After even a few minutes examining and thinking about the text you will be much better prepared to evaluate the comments in the Blog.
Our last discussion on 1 Peter was four weeks ago. Various circumstances (sickness, travel, and time spent in soul-care conversations) affected our Sunday morning routine (always very flexible). In order to remind ourselves of Peter’s writing, we listened to an audio recording of the text from the beginning of the letter (1 Peter 1-2).
The text emphasizes the many things that God has already done for us, and the glorious future He has for us. The history of what He has done, and the eternity awaiting us are the motivation Peter provides for believers’ perseverance. Listening to (or re-reading) that beginning provides a foundation for the culturally challenging instructions in this week’s section. That would be a good refresher before you read this blog (see the link above).
An Orderly Society
Someone pointed out the organization of Peter’s instructions. He begins with the very general “Dear friends” (LEB) or “Beloved” (1 Peter 2:11) addressed to all Christians. Then he quickly moves to more and more specific groups: “domestic slaves” or “servants” (2:18-25), “wives” (3:1-6), and “husbands” (3:7).
Under his general heading of “maintaining your good conduct” (2:12), Peter’s applications concentrate on submission (ὑποτάσσω, hypotassō; “to arrange under,”[1] “submission involving recognition of an ordered structure,[2] a word used six times in 1 Peter[3]). One member of our group commented that some people reading the early instruction, “Subject yourselves to every human authority…” (v. 13), might stop reading right there. Everyone has examples of “human authority” (government, employers, family members) whose attitudes and actions are unreasonable. Submission seems unrealistic, unfair, unjust.
Examples of Submission
Our discussion brought up the two examples that Peter offers to make his point: Jesus and Sarah.
The dramatic description of the submission of Jesus (clearly the most unfair and unjust treatment ever) is in the middle of instructions to domestic slaves, those having no rights and those subject to arbitrary masters. Those literal servants certainly could identify with the Suffering Servant and be drawn to His example.
The subtle use of Sarah as an example of a submissive wife led to a bit more discussion. One person wondered if a wife could think of Abraham, the Patriarch of the faith, compared to her own unbelieving husband (3:1). It must have been easier for Sarah to submit to such an exemplary husband. “If my husband was as good as Abraham….”
But a little thought brought up some pretty un-exemplary episodes in the life of Abraham and Sarah. Things like lying and asking her to lie about their relationship, fearing for his own life. “Please say that you are my sister so that it may go well with me because of you, and that I may live on account of you” (Genesis 12:13). Later he made the same reprehensible request in similar circumstances. “Abraham said of Sarah his wife, ‘She is my sister’” (Genesis 20:2). Twice he put his own safety above his wife’s feelings and above her virtue. In fact, his behavior affected his son, Isaac, who followed the same sinful pattern with his wife (Genesis 26:7). Clearly the Patriarch was an imperfect husband. As one member commented, “He did not cherish her. He prized his own life.”
Those are the circumstances in which Sarah is held as a model of what submission should look like. Peter’s specific comment is that she respectfully called Abraham “lord.” Did Peter intend that as a general reference to her attitude, or as a specific scriptural occasion? The only place I am aware of where Sarah called Abraham “lord” is Genesis 18:12. When Sarah hears the prophecy that she and Abraham will have a son, “Sarah laughed to herself, saying, ‘After I have become old, shall I have pleasure, my lord being old also?’” (emphasis added). (The whole issue of her laughter and later denial in v. 15 will have to wait for a future discussion.)
The one instance of Sarah calling Abraham lord, a key point in Peter’s instruction, happened when Sarah recognized the weakness and inability of her husband. Even in an impossible situation where her husband was powerless, she recognized and affirmed her submission to him. As a group member observed, “Her submission was not conditional.” That familiar Old Testament story could encourage a wife to submit even to a husband who was unbelieving (ἀπειθέω, apeitheō, lit. ‘unpersuadable’[4]).
Manipulation vs. Modesty
In his instructions to wives, why does Peter bring up fashion advice? Are “braiding of hair and the putting on of gold jewelry, or the clothing you wear” (v. 3) inherently sinful? Should those prohibitions govern the style of Christian women today?
Someone in our group offered an interesting suggestion. Suppose some wives were attempting to manipulate their unpersuadable husbands by their appearance. Nice clothing and a new hairstyle might get him to listen to her. Men often do respond to such appeals. But salvation by seduction is not what Peter has in mind. Character and Christ-like behavior have the potential to have an even more powerful and lasting effect on others, specifically on a husband, “when they see your respectful and pure conduct (ἀναστροφή, anastrophe; “way of life” or “lifestyle,”[5] another favorite word of Peter’s, used eight times in his two letters[6]). Lifestyle, not words (and certainly not external appearance), was a wife’s most persuasive method of convincing an unpersuadable husband. Ultimately, her hope had to be in God, trusting Him and taking comfort in the truth that her conduct was “highly valuable in the sight of God” (v. 4) regardless of the husband’s response.
Not Fearing Nothing Alarming
Good Greek can be bad English. Peter uses a double negative for emphasis to encourage wives in their complete trust in God. The verb form of “alarming” is used when the disciples thought they were seeing a ghost in Luke 24:37. Even when something is that alarming or startling (v.6b), trusting in God is key.
We discussed the question of what Peter meant about “anything alarming.” Much of his previous language in the first two chapters seems to imply persecution from outside of the Christian community. Living in a culture that is growing increasingly hostile to the faith presents alarming events (in the first century or the twenty-first). Peter wants women, especially vulnerable in that ancient culture, to grow in trusting God.
But the immediate context of wives with unbelieving husbands could also indicate distressing conditions in the home, “where the specific focus would be on believing wives not fearing the intimidation of unbelieving husbands.”[7]
Two commentators are worth quoting a length here.
What submission looks like in a marriage, I think looks different in each marriage. We are all different, marriages go through different stages, they mature, they have different challenges. But broadly speaking, a wife expresses her submission by respecting her husband and welcoming and accepting and honoring his distinctive responsibility to lead and care for her and for the family.[8]
A woman who is active outside the home or a married woman appearing in public without the escort of her husband or other male relative does not scandalize our society as it did in the first century. Peter wisely did not spell out in specific terms what it means for a Christian wife to submit to her husband or for a Christian husband to live considerately with his wife. The apostle laid down the principles and then left the details to be worked out between the spouses. The church today is right to uphold a biblical order within marriage that mirrors the relationship of Christ and his church, but it should also follow Peter’s wisdom and refrain from trying to specify what that must look like in every case.[9]
As pointed out in the second quotation, Peter (here and throughout his letter) provides principles to guide behavior, not a list of legalistic rules to follow. One of our members noted that passages such as these are too often taken out of context and used to justify unbiblical standards of behavior. Many modern churches would do well to follow Peter’s wisdom here, “and refrain from trying to specify what that must look like in every case.” Another person commented that the goal is not to make life work better for either the wife or the husband, but to “keep your conduct among the Gentiles honorable, so that when they speak against you as evildoers, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day of visitation” (2:12) and “that by doing good you should put to silence the ignorance of foolish people” (2:15).
What About Husbands?
Another person pointed out the obvious, that Peter’s instruction for husbands is the shortest. There is no exhortation to submit to authority other than the opening general submission addressed to all believers (2:13). The instructions to domestic servants (2:18), wives (3:1), and believers in general (2:13-14,17) guide them in how to relate to those in authority over them. The husband’s duties are focused in the opposite direction, how to relate to the wife who is subject to his authority. Again, considering the context of a hostile environment, husbands would be under stress to conform to cultural standards. As a person in our discussion commented, “Under pressure, it’s the people closest to us that we treat badly.” These instructions may be directed specifically to the counter-cultural behavior of Christian men.
Peter makes two comments expanding on the general call for husbands to be “understanding” (ESV, NASB), or “knowledgeable” (LEB), or “considerate” (NIV).[10]
First, as should be generally obvious to any man, she is the “weaker vessel.” The same word is used (as one member pointed out) in 2 Corinthians 4:7: “We have this treasure in clay pots…” indicating our physical body. Women generally do not have the physical strength of men, and Peter is concerned that a husband apply this “knowledge” when considering how to relate to his wife. A wife, like her husband, is experiencing discrimination or even maltreatment for her faith. She may be less able to resist the emotional and physical effects. That knowledge should inform a husband’s support of his wife if she is more affected by outsiders’ slander and intimidation (1 Peter 3:13,16).
Even apart from persecution, a husband (then or now) may need to adjust his expectations and his own contributions to the work around the home, the care for children, etc. Relaxing after a hard day at work may not be the most “understanding” way to relate to the weaker vessel. One person observed that too often as this verse is read, “weaker” is mistaken for “less than,” a distortion immediately corrected by Peter in his description of wives as “fellow heirs.”
Peter’s second clarification of living in an understanding way may have been more startling to first-century culture. Wives who had few rights under civil law are now to be honored as “fellow heirs” of God’s grace. Peter began his letter with the promise of “an inheritance imperishable and undefiled and unfading, reserved in heaven for you” (1 Peter 1:4). If there was any doubt, that plural “you” in chapter 1 includes believing women. Co-heirs get the same treatment, the same benefits, the same share in God’s grace. For most first-century men (and not a few in the twenty-first) that is a life-changing and a marriage-changing idea.
Peter links that reality to the prayer life of a husband. Failure to recognize and honor a joint heir as an equal beneficiary of God’s grace can only be the result of ignorance or pride. Peter has just eliminated the excuse of ignorance. A man too proud to honor and esteem his wife as a recipient of God’s grace is too proud to pray sincerely. A person observed, “The hubris toward his spouse will be a barrier to communion with God.”
And What About Masters?
One of the observations raised in our discussion is the absence of any exhortation to “masters” (i.e., slave owners) in Peter’s letter. Paul sometimes balanced his instructions to slaves with instructions to masters (Ephesians 6:5,9; Colossians 3:22,4:1)[11], and the brief but impassioned letter to Philemon is about treatment of a returning runaway slave.
So why does Peter not include any instruction to masters? After addressing believers in general (2:11-15), domestic slaves (2:18-28), wives (3:1-6), and husbands (3:7) he concludes with a general call to harmony, “Finally, all of you, have unity of mind, ….” (1 Peter 3:8).
Remarkable in 1 Peter is the absence of any advice to slave owners, particularly when that was a feature of non-Christian household codes, and is included in other NT codes (Eph 6:9; Col 4:1). That this absence is due to the fact that there were no, or relatively few, slave owners in the communities addressed is unlikely, since letters addressed to the same area (Ephesians, Colossians) include such advice.[12]
Our group speculated briefly on this absence of advice to masters. Perhaps Peter’s intention was not to address every angle of authority and submission. Someone pointed out that other relationships, such as parents and children, that are included by Paul are omitted by Peter. As frequently happens, remembering the overall context of a Scriptural text is a key element in good inductive study. Peter was writing to encourage perseverance among “foreigners and temporary residents” (LEB) or “sojourners and exiles” (ESV) living in an environment growing more and more hostile to their faith. He was addressing those most likely to experience that hostility, climaxing in his instructions to slaves as a model for others following the example of Jesus.
Peter concentrates in the household code on those who have less power in relationships, on those prone to suffer. For instance, masters are not addressed, and wives receive an exhortation of six verses, whereas husbands are addressed in one verse. The “weaker” member of the pair is probably addressed because their vulnerable stance is representative of the church as a whole.[13]
Slave-owning masters were not necessarily Peter’s target audience, since they had the most power in the relationships that Peter addresses. Slaves “lacked the essential qualifications of humanity”[14] and were considered property under the absolute rule of a master. If Peter was addressing the most powerless members of the church, the omission of masters is understandable.
When Life is Hard
Peter’s discussion of servants with harsh masters and wives with unbelieving husbands made one person ask, “What is in my heart when life is hard?” Usually, we want to make life work, perhaps like a wife who believed that her clothes and adornment would make marriage better or a servant who just wishes for a kind master.
Peter makes it clear that our focus is not our circumstances but is on a lifestyle that responds to those circumstances in ways that glorify God (2:12) and silence those who slander the faith out of ignorance (2:15). The people in the best position to demonstrate that lifestyle are those in the worst circumstances, the ones who can follow Jesus’ example. What enabled His perseverance? What was in His heart when life was hard? What sustained His example we are to follow?
fixing our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of faith, who for the joy set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.
Hebrews 12:2
Like Jesus, our endurance is enabled by our anticipation of the eternal joy of fellowship with Him and with the Father. Peter grounded his counter-cultural commands on what God has done in providing “an inheritance that is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading, kept in heaven for you.”
By God’s grace, may that be what is in our heart when life is hard.
[1] https://www.billmounce.com/greek-dictionary/hypotasso
[2] W. Bauer, F.W. Danker, W.F. Arndt, and F.W. Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 1042.
[3] 1 Peter 2:13, 1 Peter 2:18, 1 Peter 3:1, 1 Peter 3:5, 1 Peter 3:22, 1 Peter 5:5.
[4] John Owen, Exposition on Hebrews; The AGES Digital Library PDF (Rio, Wisconsin: AGES Software, 2004), 328;
also, John Owen, Hebrews: The Epistle of Warning (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Kregel Publications, 1953), 60.
Matthew D. Jensen, Some Unpersuasive Glosses: The Meaning of ἀπείθεια, ἀπειθέω, and ἀπειθής in the New Testament.” Journal of Biblical Literature 138, no. 2 (2019).
[5] https://www.billmounce.com/greek-dictionary/anastrophe
[6] 1 Peter 1:15; 1 Peter 1:18; 1 Peter 2:12; 1 Peter 3:1; 1 Peter 3:2; 1 Peter 3:16; 2 Peter 2:7; 2 Peter 3:11
[7] Greg W. Forbes, 1 Peter, Exegetical Guide to the Greek New Testament (Nashville: B&H Publishing Group, 2014), 103.
[8] Quoted in Thomas R. Schreiner, 1 & 2 Peter and Jude, Christian Standard Commentary (Nashville: Holman, 2020), 179, fn. 131; from
https://www.booksataglance.com/author-interviews/interview-with-claire-smith-author-of-gods-good-design-what-the-bible-really-ways-about-men-and-women .
[9] Karen H. Jobes, 1 Peter, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2011), 213, emphasis added.
[10] https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/1%20Peter%203%3A7
[11] However, not always in Paul’s letters (cf. 1 Timothy 6:1-2; Titus 2:9).
[12] Paul J. Achtemeier, 1 Peter, Hermeneia – A Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996), 192.
[13] Thomas R. Schreiner, 1 & 2 Peter and Jude, Christian Standard Commentary (Nashville: Holman, 2020), 164.
[14] Paul J. Achtemeier, 1 Peter, Hermeneia – A Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996), 190.