We talked about the amazing picture of the Gospel that was foretold with Adam and Eve, this promise goes though a man named Abraham!

In 1 Peter 3:1–6, the Apostle Peter commands wives to be submissive to their husbands and grounds this command in the example of Sarah and the holy women of the past:

The verb Peter uses for Sarah—ὑπήκουσεν (hypakouō)—is the standard Greek term for obedience. When commanding the Christian wives, Peter uses the participle ὑποτασσόμεναι (hupotassomenai). Peter deliberately connects these two concepts: a wife's submission is actively demonstrated through her respectful obedience to her husband's leadership.

The Definition of "Submit" in Greek

In the New Testament, the Greek word most frequently translated as "submit" or "be subject" is hupotassó (ὑποτάσσω). This word is the center of a fierce scholarly debate today, and to be intellectually honest, we must look at how the top Greek lexicons define it:

• Thayer's Greek Lexicon: Defines the active verb as "to arrange under, to subordinate; to subject, put in subjection". It is originally a Greek military term meaning "to arrange [troop divisions] in a military fashion under the command of a leader". When used in the grammatical "middle voice" (as it often is in commands to wives), it contains a reflexive force meaning "to subject oneself, to obey; to submit to one's control; to yield to one's admonition or advice".
• BDAG (Bauer, Danker, Arndt, and Gingrich): The standard lexicon for New Testament Greek defines the word as "to cause to be in a submissive relationship, to subject, to subordinate". BDAG explicitly categorizes this as "submission involving recognition of an ordered structure"
  • It places wives submitting "toward a husband" (citing 1 Peter 3:1 and Titus 2:5) directly in this "ordered structure" category.
    However, it also notes that early Christians uniquely adapted the word for believers interacting with each other as equals, creating a sub-definition: "Of submission in the sense of voluntary yielding in love"
  • Crucially, the lexicon categorizes Ephesians 5:21 ("submit to one another") and 1 Corinthians 16:16 directly under this specific definition

Throughout the New Testament, hupotassó is consistently used to describe the recognition of an ordered structure. It describes citizens submitting to the government, demons submitting to the disciples, the universe submitting to Christ, and servants submitting to masters.

So, which definition is the Apostle Peter using? Peter gives us the answer in the text itself:

The "Likewise" Command

But Peter’s context is not about submitting to a perfect leader. Notice that Peter starts with, “Wives, in the same way, be submissive” (1 Peter 3:1). The natural question is, "in the same way to what?" This word grammatically forces the reader to look at the preceding chapter to see what the wives are acting "likewise" to.

Some critics try to claim Peter is just borrowing from oppressive Roman household codes, or worse, that he views wives in the exact same category as slaves. (since Peter addresses servants in 1 Peter 2:18).

But that completely misses Peter's flow of thought. It may be better to think of the phrase like "continuing in the same area of discussion". So if we look at the preceding chapter, Peter has just established a chain of submission "for the Lord's sake" in chapter 2. He commands submission to secular governments (2:13) and commands household servants to submit to their masters—not only to the good and gentle ones, but also to the harsh and unreasonable ones (2:18). Most importantly, Peter points to Christ, who modeled ultimate submission by silently enduring unjust suffering and entrusting Himself to God (2:21-23). When Peter tells wives to "likewise" submit, he is specifically addressing women married to harsh, unbelieving, or disobedient husbands ("even if some do not obey the word"). He is calling them to mirror Christ's submission to an imperfect, earthly authority, trusting God with the results.

Second, Peter to define his Greek, he points us directly back to the Old Testament to show us what hupotassó looks like for a wife. He tells women to submit to their husbands just as Sarah obeyed (hypakouō) Abraham. By directly connecting the command to "submit" (hupotassó) with Sarah's active "obedience" (hypakouō), Peter leaves no grammatical room for redefining submission as merely "being thoughtful" or "yielding to an equal"; he is talking about honoring a God-given authority.

So, does this mean wives must obey in every situation? No—but that does not remove the command. The structure of submission is parallel, but not the nature of it. A wife must never follow her husband into sin. Her ultimate allegiance is to Christ, meaning her submission is rendered "as to the Lord". The wording makes it clear that submissive conduct toward one’s husband is an expected duty of a believing wife, and how the ultimate example of that will be Sarah in the Old Testament.

Grammatically, the word "Similarly" does not carry the verb ("submit") over to the next group. Instead, it simply introduces a corresponding duty. It means: Just as the wife has a strict, God-given duty in her role, similarly the husband has a strict, God-given duty in his role. To wives, he commands ὑποτασσόμεναι (hupotassomenai), which literally translates to "be submissive", and to husbands he commands συνοικοῦντες (sunoikountes), "live together", and to grant her honor.

Some scholars attempt to argue that Peter's instructions were merely a temporary accommodation to the external Greco-Roman culture of his day. Furthermore, because the book of Genesis does not explicitly use the word "obey" to describe Sarah's actions, these scholars claim Peter could not have been drawing his lesson from the actual Old Testament text. Instead, they argue that Peter was relying on extra-biblical, contemporary Hellenistic Jewish literature—such as the Testament of Abraham—which culturally portrayed Sarah as an ideal, subservient Greco-Roman wife.

While studying the external culture of the first century certainly gives us valuable historical insight, it is a flawed methodology to elevate these cultural concepts over the biblical text. It was entirely normal for Peter to use the Old Testament to construct his theology, as the Old Testament was the inspired Scripture familiar to all Jews in every church to which he was writing. The Old Testament and the New Testament epistles were inspired by the exact same Author—the Holy Spirit—meaning Peter's use of Sarah is a divinely inspired commentary on her actual, historical life, not an uncritical borrowing of a pagan myth.

To get to Peter’s point, we do not need to pretend Sarah was a flawless, perfectly compliant wife, nor do we need to pretend Abraham was a flawless, heroic leader. In fact, it is precisely because of Abraham's profound failures that Peter’s command becomes so powerfully relevant for Christian wives. We need to slow down and examine Sarah’s example carefully.

However, the Genesis narrative actually never once mentions Sarah obeying Abraham. The only place Sarah calls Abraham “lord” (kurios; ’adonai) is Genesis 18:12—and notably, she says it internally, not publicly:

The fact that Sarah calls Abraham "lord" ($kyrios$; ’adonai) exclusively in the privacy of her own thoughts (Genesis 18:12) actually strengthens the argument for her submission.

• She wasn't using a title to impress a crowd or to appease a demanding husband in public.
• Because this language was used "within herself," it suggests that regarding Abraham as her head was a deeply ingrained habit of the heart.
• This "offhanded" internal remark reveals a settled posture of respect that existed even when she was frustrated or disbelieving.
• We see this pattern when Sarah follows Abraham when he leaves his homeland into uncertainty (Gen 11:31; 12:1, 5; 13:1).

The Bible teaches that just as the woman is under the headship of the man, the man is under the headship of Christ (1 Corinthians 11:3). We see this with Abraham in the same chapter. Instead, Abraham bows low, calls himself a servant, brings God food, and stands back while they eat. Abraham essentially adopts the role of a household slave to God as He should.

Peter’s point is not a single spoken word, but a consistent inner disposition of respect toward her husband’s headship. The fact that she says it “within herself” shows this is not mere outward compliance, but a settled attitude of the heart—even in moments of doubt. Since Genesis 18:12 does not explicitly show her obeying in that moment, Peter must be summarizing her pattern of life, not isolating one event.

This is significant because Abraham is repeatedly shown as a flawed head, much like Adam. Abraham commits the same fundamental error as Adam in Genesis 16:2. Just as Adam listened to his wife over God's command, Abraham listened to his wife over trusting God's promise:

In Genesis 16:6, Abraham does not obey Sarah but is clearly the family authority who (wrongfully) gives in to Sarah’s recriminations and allows her to mistreat Hagar and Ishmael.

Like Adam, Abraham fails in his headship by ‘listening to the voice’ of his wife rather than trusting God, resulting in disorder. Abraham and Sarah repeat the same cycle of Adam and Eve by taking matters into their own hands.

The Bible often has failed Adam-like figures; Noah was one example, but Abraham makes it worse. Just as Adam let Eve be influenced by a foreign evil, Abraham gave his wife away twice to foreign leaders in Genesis 12 and 20. He placed his "Bride" in extreme danger to save himself, the exact opposite of what Peter commands husbands to do in the next verse:

Unlike Abraham's cowardly self-preservation in Egypt, Peter commands the Christian husband to use his leadership to protect, understand, and honor his wife.

Peter explicitly warns husbands against repeating the failures of the Old Testament patriarchs. A husband's authority is not a license to be harsh, domineering, or to view his wife as a lesser being. Instead, because she is physically the "weaker vessel," the husband is commanded to exercise his headship by serving her and shielding her from harm. Failure to do this will have God but off his prayers

And again, Abraham bears the greater responsibility just like Adam did with Eve. The primary responsibility to lead, instruct, and uphold righteousness in the household is explicitly placed on Abraham. Finally, back in Genesis 18, when God prepares to judge Sodom, He speaks directly to Abraham

Sarah is included in the household, but Abraham is accountable for its direction. Abraham was to model the exact kind of self-sacrificial service that Peter later commands all husbands to show toward their wives. Paul even uses the example of being Abraham's children and includes women in it just like Peter did with Sarah:

This is how Christ command us to be

Because husbands and wives are "joint heirs," both sexes are "100% necessary" and "equally important". Peter's command to the husband is to exercise his headship with understanding, gentleness, and honor.