Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Peter 3:3
Whose adorning let it not be that outward [adorning] of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel;
3. that outward adorning of plaiting the hair ] So St Paul lays stress in 1Ti 2:9 on the “braided hair and gold and pearls” which were at the time conspicuous in the toilet of Greek and Roman women. The sculptures of the Empire at this period shew to what extent this “braiding” and “plaiting” was carried, sometimes rising to a height of some inches above the head, sometimes intertwined with twisted chains of gold or strings of pearls. The fineness and fashion of the garments of women had at this time reached an almost unparalleled extravagance. The filmy half-transparent tissue of the Coan loom, the dyed garments of Miletus and Sardis, were especially in demand. Christian women, St Peter teaches, were not to seek their adornment in such things as these, but in “a meek and quiet spirit.” The question may be asked, Are the Apostle’s words prohibitive as well as hortatory? Is it wrong for Christian women now to plait their hair, or to wear gold ornaments or pearls? The answer to that question must be left mainly to the individual conscience. “Let every one be fully persuaded in her own mind.” As some help to a decision, however, it may be noted (1) that the language is not that of formal prohibition, but of a comparative estimate of the value of the two kinds of adornment; (2) that in regard to the third form of ornamentation, seeing that some clothes must be worn, the words cannot have a merely prohibitive force; and (3) that in the possible, if not common, case of the husband giving such ornaments and wishing his wife to wear them, the “meek and quiet spirit” which the Apostle recommends would naturally shew itself in complying with his requests rather than in an obstinate and froward refusal. On the whole then, as a rule bearing upon daily life, we may say that while the words do not condemn the use of jewellery, or attention to the colour and the form of dress, within the limits of simplicity and economy, they tend to minimise that form of personal adornment, and bid women trust not to them, but to moral qualities, as elements of attraction. It would be, perhaps, a safe rule that no woman should spend money for herself on such ornaments.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Whose adorning – Whose ornament. The apostle refers here to a propensity which exists in the heart of woman to seek that which would be esteemed ornamental, or that which will appear well in the sight of others, and commend us to them. The desire of this is laid deep in human nature and therefore, when properly regulated is not wrong. The only question is, what is the true and appropriate ornament? What should be primarily sought as the right kind of adorning? The apostle does not condemn true ornament, nor does he condemn the desire to appear in such a way as to secure the esteem of others. God does not condemn real ornament. The universe is full of it. The colors of the clouds and of the rainbow; the varied hues of flowers; the plumage of birds, and the covering of many of the animals of the forest; the green grass; the variety of hill and dale; the beauty of the human complexion, the ruddy cheek, and the sparkling eye, are all of the nature of ornament. They are something superadded to what would be merely useful, to make them appear well. Few or none of these things are absolutely necessary to the things to which they are attached; for the eye could see without the various tints of beauty that are drawn upon it, and the lips and the cheeks could perform their functions without their beautiful tints, and the vegetable world could exist without the variegated colors that are painted on it; but God meant that this should be a beautiful world; that it should appear well; that there should be something more than mere utility. The true notion of ornament or adorning is that which will make any person or thing appear well, or beautiful, to others; and the apostle does not prohibit that which would have this effect in the wife. The grand thing which she was to seek, was not that which is merely external, but that which is internal, and which God regards as of so great value.
Let it not be that outward adorning – Let not this be the main or principal thing; let not her heart be set on this. The apostle does not say that she should wholly neglect her personal appearance, for she has no more right to be offensive to her husband by neglecting her personal appearance, than by a finical attention to it. Religion promotes neatness, and cleanliness, and a proper attention to our external appearance according to our circumstances in life, as certainly as it does to the internal virtue of the soul. On this whole passage, see the notes at 1Ti 2:9-10.
Of plaiting the hair – See the notes at 1Ti 2:9; Compare the notes at Isa 3:24. Great attention is paid to this in the East, and it is to this that the apostle here refers. The women in the eastern countries, says Dr. Shaw, (Travels, p. 294,) affect to have their hair hang down to the ground, which they collect into one lock, upon the hinder part of the head, binding and plaiting it about with ribbons. Above this, or on the top of their heads, persons of better fashion wear flexible plates of gold or silver, variously cut through, and engraved in imitation of lace. We are not to suppose that a mere braiding or plaiting of the hair is improper, for there may be no more simple or convenient way of disposing of it. But the allusion here is to the excessive care which then prevailed, and especially to their setting the heart on such ornaments rather than on the adorning which is internal. It may not be easy to fix the exact limit of propriety about the method of arranging the hair, or about any other ornament; but those whose hearts are right, generally have little difficulty on the subject. Every ornament of the body, however beautiful, is soon to be laid aside; the adorning of the soul will endure forever.
And of wearing of gold – The gold here particularly referred to is probably that which was interwoven in the hair, and which was a common female ornament in ancient times. Thus, Virgil says, crines nodantur in aurum. And again, crinem implicat auro. See Homer, Iliad, B. 872; Herod. i. 82; and Thucydides i. 6. The wearing of gold in the hair, however, was more common among women of loose morals than among virtuous females – Pollux iv. 153. It cannot be supposed that all wearing of gold about the person is wrong, for there is nothing evil in gold itself, and there may be some articles connected with apparel made of gold that may in no manner draw off the affections from higher things, and may do nothing to endanger piety. The meaning is, that such ornaments should not be sought; that Christians should be in no way distinguished for them; that they should not engross the time and attention; that Christians should so dress as to show that their minds are occupied with nobler objects, and that in their apparel they should be models of neatness, economy, and plainness. If it should be said that this expression teaches that it is wrong to wear gold at all, it may be replied that on the same principle it would follow that the next clause teaches that it is wrong to put on apparel at all. There is really no difficulty in such expressions. We are to dress decently, and in the manner that will attract least attention, and we are to show that our hearts are interested supremely in more important things than in outward adorning.
Or of putting on of apparel – That is, this is not to be the ornament which we principally seek, or for which we are distinguished. We are to desire a richer and more permanent adorning – that of the heart.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 3. Whose adorning] . See Clarke on Heb 9:1, where the word , world or ornament, is defined; and also the note on “Ge 2:1“.
Plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold] Plaiting the hair, and variously folding it about the head, was the most ancient and most simple mode of disposing of this chief ornament of the female head. It was practised anciently in every part of the east, and is so to the present day in India, in China, and also in Barbary. It was also prevalent among the Greeks and Romans, as ancient gems, busts, and statues, still remaining, sufficiently declare. We have a remarkable instance of the plaiting of the hair in a statue of Agrippina, wife of Germanicus, an exact representation of which may be seen in a work of Andre Lens, entitled Le Costume de Peuple de I’ Antiquite, pl. 33. Many plates in the same work show the different modes of dressing the hair which obtained among the Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, Persians, and other nations. Thin plates of gold were often mixed with the hair, to make it appear more ornamental by the reflection of light and of the solar rays. Small golden buckles were also used in different parts; and among the Roman ladies, pearls and precious stones of different colours. Pliny assures us, Hist. Nat., l. ix. c. 35, that these latter ornaments were not introduced among the Roman women till the time of Sylla, about 110 years before the Christian era. But it is evident, from many remaining monuments, that in numerous cases the hair differently plaited and curled was the only ornament of the head. Often a simple pin, sometimes of ivory, pointed with gold, seemed to connect the plaits. In monuments of antiquity the heads of the married and single women may be known, the former by the hair being parted from the forehead over the middle of the top of the head, the latter by being quite close, or being plaited and curled all in a general mass.
There is a remarkable passage in Plutarch, Conjugalia Praecept., c. xxvi., very like that in the text: , , , , , ‘ , , Opera a Wyttenb., vol. i., page 390. “An ornament, as Crates said, is that which adorns. The proper ornament of a woman is that which becomes her best. This is neither gold, nor pearls, nor scarlet; but those things which are an evident proof of gravity, regularity, and modesty.” The wife of Phocion, a celebrated Athenian general, receiving a visit from a lady who was elegantly adorned with gold and jewels, and her hair with pearls, took occasion to call the attention of her guest to the elegance and costliness of her dress, remarking at the same time, “My ornament is my husband, now for the twentieth year general of the Athenians.” Plut., in vit. Phoc. How few Christian women act this part! Women are in general at as much pains and cost in their dress, as if by it they were to be recommended both to God and man. It is, however, in every case, the argument either of a shallow mind, or of a vain and corrupted heart.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Let it not be; let it not be chiefly, or not so much the adorning of the outward man as the inward; the negative here is to be taken as a comparative, as Exo 16:8; Luk 14:12. The apostle doth not absolutely condemn all kind of ornaments, or rich attire, which we find used sometimes by the godly themselves in the Scripture, Gen 24:22,30; Es 5:1; compared with Psa 45:9,13, where the spiritual ornaments of Christs spouse are set forth by terms taken from the external ornaments of Solomons wife; and Eze 16:12, these things are spoken of as Gods gifts. But he taxeth all vanity, levity, immoderate sumptuousness or luxury in apparel, and bodily ornaments in women, (or men), whatsoever is above their place and condition in the world, or above their estate and ability; such as proceeds from any lust, (pride, wantonness, &c.), or tends to the provoking or cherishing any, or is accompanied with the neglecting or slighting of inward beauty and spiritual ornaments.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
3. Literally, “To whom letthere belong (namely, as their peculiar ornament) not the outwardadornment (usual in the sex which first, by the fall, brought in theneed of covering, Note, see on 1Pe5:5) of,” &c.
plaitingartificialbraiding, in order to attract admiration.
wearingliterally,”putting round,” namely, the head, as a diademthe arm,as a braceletthe finger, as rings.
apparelshowy andcostly. “Have the blush of modesty on thy face instead of paint,and moral worth and discretion instead of gold and emeralds”[MELISSA].
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Whose adorning, let it not be that outward adorning,…. Or that only and principally; let not that be solely or chiefly attended to, nor anxiously sought after, nor ever in order to allure and ensnare others, or to fill with pride and vanity; nor should it be indecent and luxurious, immodest and immoderate, and unsuitable to the age, character, and station of persons; otherwise clothing is both convenient and necessary; and a decent garb, neat and modest apparel, and what is suitable to the years, rank, and quality of persons, is very commendable: nor are we to suppose that the apostle forbids the use of what follows, but only when used in a luxurious and extravagant manner, and to feed pride and vanity, and encourage, lasciviousness and wantonness:
of plaiting the hair; folding it up in curls, tying it up in knots, and putting it into the form of horns and towers, made by their crisping pins, with their cauls and round tires, like the moon, as was the custom of those times, and still is. There were women among the Jews, whose business it was to plait women’s hair; Mary Magdalene is thought to have her name from thence, and that to be her business. The Jews often speak of one Miriam or Mary, by whom they seem to mean the mother of our Lord, who, they say m was
, “a plaiter of women’s hair”;
[See comments on Mt 27:56].
And of wearing of gold; or “golden things”; golden ornaments, as bracelets, chains, and rings, or pieces of gold stuck in the plaitings and folds of the hair. The Jewish women used to wear a crown of gold on their head, in the form of the city of Jerusalem, called a golden city n; and which they wore, after its destruction, in memory of it; but with those they might not go out on a sabbath day. R. Akibah, it is said o, made a golden city for his wife, and the wife of Rabban Gamaliel envied her, for it seems this was reckoned a grand dress. Not that the sense is, that every thing of this kind is forbidden, but when used to excess and extravagance; otherwise the daughters of Abraham and Sarah were decked with ear rings, bracelets, and jewels of gold; see Ge 24:22.
or of putting on of apparel; that is “excellent”, or precious, as the Syriac version adds; or “of great price”, as the Ethiopic; that is beyond a person’s ability or rank; the apostle means such apparel as is unbecoming and unsuitable, for he cannot be thought to forbid the putting on of any apparel; but his sense is, that women should not so much regard, and be so intent upon the outward adorning of their bodies, with any sort of clothing, and especially such as does not become them, as the inward adorning of their minds, next mentioned;
m T. Bab. Sabbat, fol. 104. 2. Chagiga, fol. 4. 2. & Sanhedrin, fol. 67. 1. n Misn. Sabbat, c. 6. sect. 1. o T. Hieros. Sabbat, fol. 7. 4.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Whose adorning ( ). Genitive plural of the relative referring to (wives). has here its old meaning of ornament (cf. our cosmetics), not the common one of world (Joh 17:5) considered as an orderly whole. Mundus in Latin is used in this double sense (ornament, world).
Let it be (). Imperative third singular of . Not the outward adorning of plaiting the hair ( ). The use of here rather than (usual negative with the imperative) because of the sharp contrast in verse 4 (‘). The old adverb (from without) is in the attributive position like an adjective. is a late word (from , to inweave, 2Tim 2:4; 2Pet 2:20) in Strabo, but often in the papyri for struggle as well as plaiting, here only in N.T.
Of wearing (). Late and rare word (Galen, Arrian) from (Mt 27:28), to put around, a placing around. Ornaments of gold were worn round the hair as nets and round the finger, arm, or ankle.
Or of putting on (). Old word from (to put on), here only in N.T. Peter is not forbidding the wearing of clothes and ornaments by women, but the display of finery by contrast. Cf. 1Tim 2:9-13; Isa 3:16.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Of plaiting [] . Only here in New Testament. Compare 1Ti 2:9. The Roman women of the day were addicted to ridiculous extravagance in the adornment of the hair. Juvenal (” Satire, “6) satirizes these customs. He says :” 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 tall as Andromache in front, behind she is shorter. You would think her another person. ” The hair was dyed, and secured with costly pins and with nets of gold thread. False hair and blond wigs were worn.
Putting on [] . Only here in New Testament. Female extravagance in dress in the days of the empire reached an alarming pitch.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “Whose adorning let it not be the outward adorning.” Whose (eksothen) outward show or exterior, let it not be.
2) “0f plaiting the hair.” of hair plaiting attraction.
3) “And of wearing of gold.” Putting on and placing gold decorations about the body for sensual attraction.
4) “0r of putting on of apparel.” Or by dressing up in world appealing garments. Peter admonishes Christian women against the use of display of earth’s passing vanities as a means of influencing and helping their husbands in a godly way. Modesty in dress is becoming to the spiritual influence of Christian women always. 1Ti 2:9-10.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
3 Whose adorning The other part of the exhortation is, that wives are to adorn themselves sparingly and modestly: for we know that they are in this respect much more curious and ambitious than they ought to be. Then Peter does not without cause seek to correct in them this vanity. And though he reproves generally sumptuous or costly adorning, yet he points out some things in particular, — that they were not artificially to curl or wreath their hair, as it was usually done by crisping-pins, or otherwise to form it according to the fashion; nor were they to set gold around their head: for these are the things in which excesses especially appear.
It may be now asked, whether the Apostle wholly condemns the use of gold in adorning the body. Were any one to urge these words, it may be said, that he prohibits precious garments no less than gold; for he immediately adds, the putting on of apparel, or, of clothes. But it would be an immoderate strictness wholly to forbid neatness and elegance in clothing. If the material is said to be too sumptuous, the Lord has created it; and we know that skill in art has proceeded from him. Then Peter did not intend to condemn every sort of ornament, but the evil of vanity, to which women are subject. Two things are to be regarded in clothing, usefulness and decency; and what decency requires is moderation and modesty. Were, then, a woman to go forth with her hair wantonly curled and decked, and make an extravagant display, her vanity could not be excused. They who object and say, that to clothe one’s-self in this or that manner is an indifferent thing, in which all are free to do as they please, may be easily confuted; for excessive elegance and superfluous display, in short, all excesses, arise from a corrupted mind. Besides, ambition, pride, affectation of display, and all things of this kind, are not indifferent things. Therefore they whose minds are purified from all vanity, will duly order all things, so as not to exceed moderation.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(3) Whose adorning let it not be . . . .The passage shows that the Asiatic Christians were not all of the poorer classes. Many of the wealthy Jewesses had joined them. The wealth of the Ephesian Christians about this time may be gathered from 1Ti. 2:9, and of the Laodiceans from Rev. 3:17. Two things are to be noted about the advice here given. (1) It is not intended directly as a corrective of vanity. St. Peter is not bidding them beware of love of dress, although (as Bengel points out) the three words of plaiting, wearing (literally, putting round oneself), and putting on, are intended to convey the notion of elaborate processes in which time is wasted. But the main thought is, How are the husbands to be attracted? Not, says St. Peter, by any external prettiness of adornment, but by inward graces. (2) The Apostle is not forbidding the use of gold, &c. Leighton (himself something of a precisian) says, All regard of comeliness and ornament in apparel is not unlawful, nor doth the Apostles expression here, rightly considered, fasten that upon the adorning he here speaks of. He doth no more universally condemn the use of gold for ornament than he doth any other comely raiment, which here he means by that general word of putting on of apparel, for his not is comparative; not this adorning, but the ornament of a meek spirit, that rather, and as much more comely and precious; as that known expression (Hos. 6:6), I will have mercy, and not sacrifice? At the same time he is, of course, speaking of these things with studied contempt: and we may be sure he would have spoken with abhorrence of any adorning which partook of the nature of lying. Even in one of Xenophons works there is a charming passage where an Athenian gentleman expostulates with his wife on the folly of hoping to attract him by wearing high-heeled shoes and painting her face with rouge and white.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
3. Whose adorning The same principle is now extended to the ornamentation of the person; and though wives are directly addressed, the precept has a general application. Three specifications of the outward are mentioned, in which the real adorning should not be sought, and that not in forbidding, except as instruments of vanity, and as things in which they prided themselves. It is not said that gold should not be worn; but that the true adornment does not consist in that, but in something higher and better.
Plaiting the hair Braiding and wearing it in knots, and variously intertwining it. Ancient medals and sculptures exhibit excesses of this kind, and other ancient writers than Christian describe them.
Wearing of gold Golden ornaments, particularly such as are put round the head, neck, arm, leg, or finger.
Putting on of apparel For the gratification of pride and vanity.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘Whose adorning let it not be the outward adorning of braiding the hair, and of wearing jewels of gold, or of putting on apparel, but let it be the hidden man of the heart, in the incorruptible apparel of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price.’
Thus Christian women are not to waste their time and effort on dressing in a way that will draw attention to themselves or will attract men to themselves (compare Rev 17:4), or will even attract the gods who are subject to such vanities (many women would make great efforts to make themselves presentable to the gods), but are rather to give time to revealing what is now in their hearts, expressed in terms of a meek and gentle spirit, something which is in God’s sight of huge value. Then they will win God’s approval. For while man looks at the outward appearance, God looks at the heart. Thus they must woo their husbands as those who are chaste, do good works and are godly (1Ti 2:10) and as a result at the same time greatly please God, by what they have become. And what they thus ‘wear’ will be incorruptible and everlasting. We have seen that Peter constantly draws attention to the need to seek what is incorruptible (1Pe 1:4; 1Pe 1:7; 1Pe 1:18; 1Pe 1:23). He had taken to heart Jesus’ teaching in passages like Mat 6:19-21.
We can compare here 1Ti 2:9-10 which speaks of the responsibility of Christian women to ‘adorn themselves in seemly clothing, with modesty and sobriety, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly raiment, but, as becomes women professing godliness, with good works’ (compare Rev 19:8). Ideas like these were no doubt well established in the ‘tradition’ of the worldwide church, but have been shaped here by Peter to fit this context. Eph 5:22-24 and Col 3:18 both contain instructions to wives, but without going into a similar depth, although in Ephesians it becomes an example of the relationship between Christ and His church and is based on the fact that the ‘husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church’. Both these relationships are founded in God’s purposes.
The total lack of sexual discrimination in his thinking is found in the fact that Peter can speak of ‘the inner man’ (masculine) of her heart. It is doubtful if a Rabbi could have spoken like that. He would have found some female equivalent. But to Peter, as to Paul, there was neither male nor female, all were one in Christ Jesus. His point is that in her inner being and heart she would be revealing that she was ‘equally as good as a man’ in a time of male domination.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
1Pe 3:3-4. Whose adorning, let it not be, &c. That nothing may be wanting to the qualifying of a Christian wife, she is taught how to dress herself; supposing a general desire, but especially in that sex, of ornament and comeliness; the sex, which began first our engagement to the necessity of clothing, having still a peculiar propension to be curious in that, and to improve the necessity to an advantage.
The direction here given corrects the misplacing of this diligence, and addresses it right, that is, Let it not be of the outward man, in plaiting, &c.
Our perverse crooked hearts turn all that we use into disorder. Those two necessities of our life, food and raiment, how few know the right measure and bounds of them? Unless poverty be our carver, and cut us short, who, almost, is there that is not bent to something excessive! Far more are beholden to the lowliness of their estate, than to the lowliness of their mind, for sobriety in these things; and yet some will not be so bounded neither, but will profusely lavish out upon trifles, to the sensible prejudice of their estate.
The apostle expressly, on purpose, checks and forbids vanity and excess in apparel, and excessive delight even in lawful decorum; but his prime end is to recommend this other ornament of the soul, The hidden man of the heart.
It is the thing which the best philosophy aimed at, as some of their greatest men express it, to reduce men, as much as may be, from their body to their soul: but this is the thing which true religion alone does effectually and thoroughly; from the pampering and feeding of a morsel for the worms, to the nourishing of that immortal beinginfusedinto it; which, therefore, it directs to the proper nourishment of souls, the bread that came down from heaven, Joh 6:27; Joh 6:32-33.
So here the apostle pulls off from Christian women their vain outside ornaments: but is not this a wrong, to spoil all their dressing and fineness? No, he does this, only to send them a better wardrobe; and there is much profit in the change.
All the gold, and other riches of the temple, figured the excellent graces of Christians, of Christ indeed first, as having all fulness in himself, and furnishing them; but secondarily of Christians, as the living temples of God. So the church is all glorious, but it is within, Psa 45:13. And the embroidery, the variety of graces, the lively colours of other graces, shine best on the dark ground of humility. Christ delights to give much ornament to his church, commends what she has, and adds more
The particular grace which the apostle recommends, is singularly suitable to his subject in hand, the conjugal duty of wives; nothing so much adorning their whole carriage as this meekness and quietness of spirit. But it is, withal, the comeliness of every Christian, in every estate; it is not a woman’s garment or ornament, improper for men. There is somewhat (as I may say,) of a particular cut or fashion of it for wives toward their husbands, and in their domestic affairs; but men, all men, ought to wear of the same stuff; yea, if I may so speak, of the same piece; for it is, in all, one and the same spirit, and fits the stoutest and greatest commanders. Moses was a great general, and yet not less great in this virtue, the meekest man on earth.
Nothing is more uncomely in a wife than an uncomposed turbulent spirit, which is put out of frame with every trifle, and inventive of false causes of disquietness and fretting to itself. And so in a husband, and in all, an unquiet passionate mind lays itself naked, and discovers its own deformity to all. The greater number of things that vex us, do so, not from their own nature or weight, but from the unsettledness of our minds. How comely is it to see a composed firm mind and carriage, which is not lightly moved!
I urge not a stoical stupidity; but that, in things which deserve sharp reproof, the mind keep in its own station and seat still, not shaken out of itself, as the most are; that the tongue utter not unseemly rash words, nor the hand act any thing which discovers that the mind has lost its command for the time. But, truly, the most know so ill how to use just anger, upon just cause, that it is easier, and the safer extreme, not to be angry, but still, calm, and serene, as the upper region; not the place of continual tempest and storms, as the most are: let it pass for a kind of sheepishness to be meek, it is a likeness to him that was as a sheep before the shearers, not opening his mouth, Isa 53:7.; it is a portion of his Spirit.
The apostle commends his exchange of ornaments from two things: 1. This is incorruptible, and therefore fits an incorruptible soul. Your varieties of jewels and rich apparel are perishing things; you shall one day see a heap made of all, and that all on a flame; and, in reference to you, they perish sooner; when death strips you of your nearest garment, your flesh,all the other, which were but loose upper garments above it, must off too. It gets indeed a covering for the grave, but the soul is left stark naked, if no other clothing be provided for it. But spiritual ornaments, and this of humility and meekness, here, among the rest, remain, and are incorruptible; they neither wear out, nor out of fashion, but are still the better for the wearing, and shall last eternity, and shine there in full lustre.
And, 2. Because the opinion of others is much regarded in matter of apparel, and it is mostly in respect to this that we use ornament in it, he tells us of the account of this. Men think it poor and mean, nothing more exposed to contempt than the spirit of meekness; it is mere folly with men, but that is no matter; this overweighs all their dis-esteem, it is with God of great price, and things are indeed as he values them, and no otherwise. Though it be not the country fashion, yet it is the fashion at court, yea, it is the King’s own fashion, Mat 11:29. Learn of me, for I am meek and lowly, &c. Care not what the world say of this; you are not to stay long with them.
Desire to have both fashions and stuff from court, from heaven, this spirit of meekness, and it shall be sent you. It is never right in any thing with us till we attain to this, to tread on the opinion of men, and eye nothing but God’s approbation.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
1Pe 3:3 . ] The genitive does not depend on a to be supplied from the predicate (de Wette, Wiesinger, Schott, Hofmann); such a construction, arbitrary in itself, is here entirely inadmissible on account of the remoteness of the predicate, from which the idea wanting is to be taken. The genitive is rather ruled by . expresses, as usual, the relation of belonging to; the sense is therefore: “ whose business let it be ,” i.e. who have to occupy themselves with. [169]
. . .] As often in our epistle, the negative preceding the positive.
is closely joined together with . The genitives which stand between, and are dependent on , serve to determine the idea more precisely; their position immediately after is explained from the intention of the writer to lay special emphasis on them, since it belongs to women to take pleasure in adorning themselves in this wise. The whole expression is to be interpreted thus: “ outward adornment wrought by the plaiting of hair, the wearing of gold, or the putting on of apparel .”
, . . (in the passage specially to be compared with this, 1Ti 2:9 , is used), not: “the plaits,” but “the plaiting;” it is an active idea, like and ; “these verbalia describe the vain occupation of worldly women” (Wies.); are golden ornaments generally.
The last two members of the clause, united by , are connected with the first by , because they have reference to things which are put on the body.
[169] When Hofmann would advance against this construction that the affirmative subject (ver. 4) is not suitable to it, “since it may be said of the hidden man of the heart, that it should be the woman’s adornment, but not that it should be her business, for she herself is that hidden man,” it must be observed in reply that it is not in itself, but . . ., which is to he taken as that which should be characteristic of women; as Hofmann also in his expositions says, the adornment of women is not indicated by the simple, but by the compound expression.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
3 Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel;
Ver. 3. Whose adorning ] Mundus muliebris. A woman’s world. See Isa 3:18 . Where the prophet as punctually inveighs against this noble vanity, as if he had viewed the ladies’ wardrobes in Jerusalem.
Let it not be that outward ] Vestium curiositas, deformitatis mentium et morum indicium est, saith Bernard. Excessive neatness is a sign of inward nastiness. It was a true saying of wise Cato, Cultus magna cura, magna est virtutis iniuria, They are never good that strive to be overly fine. Superfluous apparel, saith Cyprian, is worse than whoredom. Lysander would not suffer his daughters to wear gorgeous attire; saying it would not make them so comely as common.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
3 .] Of whom (the wives; you, who are addressed) let ( the adornment ) be (much better so, supplying the word from expressed below, than either, 1. as E. V. al. taking the word expressed below as the subject, and supplying it after , which however comes to the same in sense, or, 2. as Huther, taking as complete in itself, “let whose business be;” which is against not only probable construction, but the analogy of 1Ti 5:9 , which see) not the outward adornment ( belong together, the intermediate words merely serving to define the as that most usually adopted by women) of braiding of hair (cf. 1Ti 2:9 , , and Ellicott’s note there) and putting round (the head, as diadems, or the arm, as bracelets, or the leg, as anklets, or the finger, as rings, or generally, hanging the body round with) of golden ornaments ( , see ch. 1Pe 1:7 ; 1Pe 1:18 , and note at the latter place) or of putting on of dresses (“the sex which began first our engagement to the necessity of clothing, having still a peculiar propensity to be curious in that, to improve the necessity to an advantage.” Leighton. The three verbal substantives, as Bengel, “innuunt operam comendi multa tempora absumentem”):
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
1Pe 3:3 . The description of the external ornaments proper to heathen society seems to be based on Isa 3:17-23 . where the destruction of the hair, jewels and raiment of the daughters of Zion is foretold. , braiding of hair . 1Ti 2:9 , refers to the golden combs and nets used for the purpose; cf. , Isa 3:18 , for . Juvenal describes the elaborate coiffures which Roman fashion prescribed for the Park and attendance at the Mysteries of Adonis: tot premit ordinibus tot adhuc compagibus altum aedificat caput (Sat. vi. 492 504). Clement of Alexandria quotes 1Pe 3:1-4 , in his discussion of the whole subject ( Paed. , III. xi.); and in regard to this particular point says , because of which they do not even touch their own head for fear of disturbing their hair nay more sleep comes to them with terror lest they should unawares; spoil (p. 290. P). , i.e. , rings bracelets, etc., enumerated in Isa. l.c. . Stress might be laid on , or the crowning prohibition regarded as an exaggeration intended to counteract an ingrained bias. In either case the expression points to a remarkable precedent for this teaching in Plato’s Republic IV., iii. ff. “Plato’s assignment of common duties and common training to the two sexes is part of a well-reasoned and deliberate attempt by the Socratic school to improve the position of women in Greece Socrates’ teaching inaugurated an era of protest against the old Hellenic view of things. In later times the Stoics constituted themselves champions of similar views” (Adam, ad loc. ). Accordingly gymnastics must be practised by women as by men: .
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
adorning. Greek. kosmos. Elsewhere translated “world”. See App-129.
that, &c. = the outward one.
plaiting. Greek. emploke. Only here.
wearing = putting around. Greek. perithesis. Only here. Referring to putting coronets, bracelets, &c, round the head, arms, &c.
gold = gold (ornaments).
putting on. Greek. endusis. Only here.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
3.] Of whom (the wives; you, who are addressed) let (the adornment) be (much better so, supplying the word from expressed below, than either, 1. as E. V. al. taking the word expressed below as the subject, and supplying it after , which however comes to the same in sense, or, 2. as Huther, taking as complete in itself, let whose business be; which is against not only probable construction, but the analogy of 1Ti 5:9, which see) not the outward adornment ( belong together, the intermediate words merely serving to define the as that most usually adopted by women) of braiding of hair (cf. 1Ti 2:9, , and Ellicotts note there) and putting round (the head, as diadems, or the arm, as bracelets, or the leg, as anklets, or the finger, as rings, or generally, hanging the body round with) of golden ornaments (, see ch. 1Pe 1:7; 1Pe 1:18, and note at the latter place) or of putting on of dresses (the sex which began first our engagement to the necessity of clothing, having still a peculiar propensity to be curious in that, to improve the necessity to an advantage. Leighton. The three verbal substantives, as Bengel, innuunt operam comendi multa tempora absumentem):
Fuente: The Greek Testament
1Pe 3:3. , whose let it be) A graphic painting of the inward character by the outward gestures.[24] Women themselves are thus to resolve: we claim for ourselves, we regard as our own, not outward ornament, but the inner man, etc.- -, not-adorning) Although they use such adorning, as the occasion permits, yet they do not consider it as adorning.- , of plaiting; of wearing; of putting on) The verbals imply the labour bestowed on dress, which consumes much time.
[24] See Append. on ETHOPOEIA.-E.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
adorning let: 1Ti 2:9, 1Ti 2:10, Tit 2:3-15, Rom 12:2
that: Gen 24:22, Gen 24:47, Gen 24:53, Exo 3:22, Exo 32:2, Exo 33:4, Exo 35:22, Exo 38:8, 2Ki 9:30, Est 5:1, Psa 45:9, Isa 3:18-24, Isa 52:1, Isa 61:10, Jer 2:32, Jer 4:30, Eze 16:7-13, Eze 23:40
Reciprocal: Exo 28:40 – glory Jdg 8:24 – give me 2Sa 1:24 – General Psa 45:13 – all glorious Psa 144:12 – the similitude Pro 1:9 – they Pro 11:22 – a jewel Pro 31:22 – clothing Isa 3:21 – nose jewels Eze 16:10 – broidered Eze 23:26 – fair jewels Luk 7:25 – A man 1Pe 5:5 – be clothed Rev 9:8 – hair
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
1Pe 3:3. One definition of adorning is “decoration,” and means the general appearance of one that is arranged for the observation of another. One of the items that Peter forbids is putting on of apparel. He does not specify any certain kind of dress (as Paul does in 1Ti 2:9). However, we know the wife is not forbidden the putting on of clothing, hence the unavoidable conclusion is that she must not depend on the display of articles mentioned in this verse to interest her husband. Instead of a gaudy display of jewelry or showy garments, she will restrict herself within reasonable and modest bounds in her use of such feminine dainties, and rely on the better attractions named in the preceding verses and some others to follow. (See the comments on this subject at 1Ti 2:9-10.)
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
1Pe 3:3. whose adorning let it be not the outward adorning of plaiting of the hair and of wearing of ornaments of gold, or of putting on of apparel. The sentence opens with the relative whose without any noun. It admits, therefore, of being construed in more than one way. The whose may be taken in the possessive sense, and so = whose be not the outward adorning, etc.; or = whose distinction let it be not, etc.; or = whose business let it be not, etc. (Huther, etc.). Or the relative may have supplied to it the subsequent noun, and so = whose adorning let it be not, etc. (so both A. V. and R. V. with Wiesinger, Schott, Hofmann, etc.). As the adorning means properly not the act of adorning but the adornment or ornament itself, the latter construction is preferable. The statement, then, is that the adornment which wives are to value is not that which is effected by the particular acts of plaiting or braiding the hair, wearing of gold (i.e, as the form of the noun implies, pieces or ornaments of gold; see on 1Pe 1:7; 1Pe 1:18), putting on of apparel (literally, dresses). The terms expressing these acts, plaiting, wearing (literally, putting round one), and putting on, occur nowhere else in the New Testament. They denote two distinct kinds of female adornment, namely, what the person itself presents, and what is put upon it. Hence we have first the plaiting of the natural ornament of the hair, and then other two modes which are given as branches (so the or indicates) of one species of artificial ornamentation. The arts themselves had gone to unheard of excess, as we learn from literature, coins, and sculpture, among the heathen ladies of the Empire Pliny the elder speaks of having seen Neros mother dressed in a robe of gold tissue, and Lollia Paulina in apparel covered with pearls and emeralds costing fifty millions of sesterces, which would be something like 432,000 (Hist. Nat. xxxiii. 19, ix. 35, 36). From other writers, such as Ovid (de Art. Am. iii. 136), Juvenal (Satir. vi. 502), and Suetonius (Claud. 40), we learn what extravagance of time, pains, and expense was lavished upon the dressing of the hair, how great ladies had slaves carefully instructed for that one service and specially assigned to it, how by rows of false curls, curious braidings, and strings of jewels, the hair was built up high above the head. (See Smiths Diet, of Antiq. under Coma, and Farrars Early Years of Christianity, 5.) How much reason Peter had to dread the infection of Christian women with the same disease of luxury, we may gather from what appears later in the writings of such leaders of the Church as Cyprian, Jerome, and Clement of Alexandria. The last named, in his Padagogue or Instructor, devotes much space to the detailed discussion of what is permissible and the censure of what is wrong in regard to dress, ear-rings, finger-rings, the binding of the hair, etc. It may be inferred, perhaps, from Peters statement (and the inference is borne out by what we know from other sources) not only that many of the first Christian converts were women, but that not a few were women of means and position. He does not, however, speak of ornaments and tasteful attire as things unfit for a Christian woman, but condemns excess of attention to such things as if they made the wifes real attractions. In this, as in other things, the Gospel is a law of liberty, which declines to be bound to one rigid line of application in all circumstances. Compare the important parallel in 1Ti 2:9-10.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Our apostle’s next advice, here given to wives, is concerning their attire; this is laid down, first, negatively, what it should not be, not an outward adorning, attended with great curiousity and exactness in dressing the body with plaited hair, gold chains, gay and gaudy apparel, and such like.
Where note, That plaited hair, gold chains, and costly attire, were then the attire of lewd women; whores only or chiefly were so decked and adorned, and therefore were absolutely forbidden to the Christian women by our apostles: but when such attire ceases to be a mark of such distinction, it may be worn by Christian women, provided it be done without pride, and without too great expense both of time and treasure: always remembering that gravity in apparel, and wearing such a dress as is soon put on, is most honourable and best becoming Christian women. “I had rather, says one, go like the wild Indians, than have those thousands of hours to answer for, which some have spent between the glass and the comb.”
Observe here, That this text doth not absolutely forbid the wearing of ornaments or costly apparel by such persons whose quality will answer it, but only forbids pride and vanity, affectation and ostentation, in the wearing of them; it is not only lawful to cover the body, but to adorn the body; Abraham had never sent ear-rings and bracelets to Rebekah, had they been sinful in their use: to wear such things beyond our purse and place, and to make ourselves or others poor by making ourselves fine, is very sinful, but otherwise, lawful.
Observe next, Our apostle’s affirmative precept for the woman’s adorning, with the reasons of it, 1Pe 3:4. But let it be the hidden man of the heart, &c.
Where note, 1. What must be apparelled and adorned, the hidden man of the heart; that is, the soul, which wants both covering and adorning as well as the body, sin having made both naked to their shame.
Note, 2. With what the hidden man of the heart must be apparelled; not with fine clothes, they will not cover a naked soul, but with the sanctifying graces of the Spirit of God, with humility and meekness, with piety and prudence, which ornaments will never wax old, nor grow out of fashion, as others do, and are also of precious esteem with God himself, they are in the sight of God of great price; these virtues are in themselves, and render the possessors of them truly valuable in the sight and esteem of God.
Upon the whole, then, it evidently appears, that the negation here is not absolute, but comparative; as if the apostle had said, “God will have the hidden man of your heart adorned with grace, and delights more to see that, than your bodies adorned with precious jewels and costly apparel; and accordingly, if women affect finery, and would appear beautiful, let them choose the best ornaments, those of the mind and heart, which will attract the eye of God towards them, rather than those external ones, which serve only to draw man’s eye to an admiration of them.”
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
1Pe 3:3-4. Whose adorning, &c, See note on 1Ti 2:9; Tit 2:3. Three things are here expressly forbidden: curling the hair, wearing gold, (by way of ornament,) and putting on costly or gay apparel. These, therefore, ought never to be allowed, much less defended, by Christians. Wesley. But let it be the hidden man of the heart An inward, gracious disposition, or complete inward holiness, namely, that which is not corruptible Which will not wear out and decay, as the external ornaments of dress will; even a meek and quiet spirit Essential to true holiness. A meek spirit consists in bearing provocation patiently; a quiet spirit in abstaining from giving provocation, especially by bitter language, and from causing unnecessary trouble to any; in the sight of God Who looks at the heart. All superfluity of dress contributes more to pride and anger than is generally supposed. The apostle seems to have an eye to this, by substituting meekness and quietness in the room of the ornaments he forbids. I do not regard these things, is often said by those whose hearts are wrapped up in them. But offer to take them away, and you touch the very idol of their souls. Some, indeed, only dress elegantly that they may be looked on; that is, they squander away their Lords talent to gain applause; thus making sin to beget sin, and then plead one in excuse of the other. Wesley. The sentiments contained in this verse are illustrated by Blackwall (Sacred Classics: vol. 1. p. 164,) as follows: How must all the short-lived beauties, the shapes, features, and most elegant and rich ornaments of the mortal body, which attract the eyes and admiration of vain mortals, fade away, and lose their charms and lustre, when compared with the heavenly graces of a pious and regular temper, the incorruptible ornaments and beauties of the soul, which are ever amiable, and of high value in the eye of God, the Sovereign Judge of what is good and beautiful! Nearly resembling this is a passage of Crates, a heathen philosopher, quoted by Plutarch: Neither gold, nor emeralds, nor pearls grace and ornament a woman; but all those things which clearly express and set off her gravity, regularity, and modesty.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
3. Whose beauty let it not be the outward adornment of plaiting the hairs and wearing of gold or the putting on of garments. This verse negatively describes that wonderful and paradoxical wife who has power to save her husband, even though he be an infidel. We see that she does not prodigalize her time nor feed her vanity by curling her hair. Neither does she wear gold nor any kind of jewelry. This description is obligatory on all, having the full force of a divine commandment, as God commands us all to be holy. Neither does this woman put on extra garments for mere show, but she is simple and neat in her personal apparel, free from the disgusting and expensive gaieties, vanities and follies of needless station.
Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament
Verse 3
The meaning is, not that proper attention to the personal appearance is wrong, but that the wife should not value herself upon her external decorations. She should seek to make herself alluring by menial and spiritual charms. They who consider all decoration as in itself wrong, evidently differ from him who daily creates the humming-bird, the tulip, and the rose.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
3:3 {3} Whose adorning let it not be that outward [adorning] of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel;
(3) He condemns the unrestrained indulgences and excesses of women, and sets forth their true apparel, such as is precious before God, that is, the inward and incorruptible, which consists in a meek and quiet spirit.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Peter was not telling wives to refrain from giving attention to their physical appearances (specifically, coiffure, jewelry, and dress), as the NASB makes clear. His point was that this should not be their total or primary concern. He urged the cultivation of the inner person as well. Beauty is more than skin deep. He contrasted what human society values and what God values. A gentle disposition and a tranquil spirit can make even a plain woman very attractive not only to God but to men (cf. 1Sa 16:7; 1Ti 2:9-10). The Greek word for "adornment" (kosmos) is the one from which we get our word "cosmetics."