Does the Greek used in 1 Peter 3:7 properly translate as “weaker” and in what way might that be applied?

Question

Authorised Version: Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel…

New International Version: Husbands, in the same way be considerate as you live with your wives, and treat them with respect as the weaker partner…

Other Translations: “someone weaker” (NASB), or “weaker than you are” (NLT).

Some interpreters suggest that 1 Peter 3:7 is referring to physical weakness since most husbands are significantly physically stronger than their wives. Other interpreters suggest that women are weaker than men because they are less in control of their emotions than men. Others point to the idea that women are more easily deceived (based on 1 Timothy 2:14).

Does the Greek used in 1 Peter 3:7 properly translate as “weaker” and in what way might that be applied?

Answer 1

In 1 Peter 3:7, the Greek term used to describe the woman as "weaker" is ἀσθενέστερῳ (asthenesterō), a form of ἀσθενής (asthenēs), meaning "weak" or "weaker." This term is similar to the one used to describe Leah’s eyes (astheneis) in Genesis 29:17 in the Septuagint, where it conveys the idea of "delicate," "less robust," or "more vulnerable." This can be interpreted both literally, as physical weakness, or figuratively, as emotional or social vulnerability.

In the context of 1 Peter 3:7, Peter advises husbands to treat their wives with honor as "the weaker vessel." The idea here seems less about weakness as a negative trait and more about a difference that requires care and respect. Just as in the account of Leah and Rachel, where Leah’s “weakness” (astheneis) of her eyes highlights a distinction between the sisters, the feminine weakness described by Peter does not imply moral or intellectual inferiority but a distinction that calls for understanding and consideration.

Those interpreters who see this "weakness" as physical emphasize the difference in physical strength, which fits the context of an era when physical labor was common. Here, Peter’s urging of husbands to be considerate could be a call to avoid misusing any physical advantage. Others, who interpret it as emotional or social vulnerability, understand Peter’s point as highlighting the need for care, given women’s relatively more exposed or dependent position in society at the time.

The reference to 1 Timothy 2:14, where Paul mentions that Eve was deceived, is often associated with this "weakness," but this should be approached carefully. While Eve was the first to be deceived, the text does not imply that women are always or inherently more susceptible to deception. Instead, Eve’s vulnerability in that particular instance does not establish a permanent or essential quality of all women.

Thus, in 1 Peter 3:7, the expression "weaker vessel" can be understood broadly, applying to the husband’s responsibility to treat his wife with honor and respect, acknowledging both physical differences and the social and emotional vulnerabilities of the time.

Answer 2

Here is my overly literal translation of 1 Peter 3:7

Husbands: similarly dwelling according to knowledge as with a weaker vessel, the wife; rendering honor as joint heirs of grace of life, so as not to be hindered the prayers of you.

The operative adjective here ἀσθενής (asthenés) means literally "not strong", ie "weaker" but sometimes means "sick" or "ill".

The "weaker" meaning can be either morally (eg, Rom 5:6, 1 Cor 8:7, 9), or physically (eg, Acts 4:9, 5:15, Matt 25:43, Luke 9:2, 10:9).

Inasmuch as "weak" as applied to wives cannot mean "sick", it must mean either moral or physical weakness compered to men - and that is the point - the adjective is a comparison with men generally.

Therefore, I conclude that Peter is referring to women/wives being physically weaker than men. There is no evidence that women are morally weaker than men at all.

Answer 3

ἀσθενής, ές means weak. ἀσθενεστέρῳ has the comparative ending which makes it mean weaker. We shouldn't get caught up in the stereotyping of the culture of that day, but rather consider the principle of who the stronger should treat the weaker. Consider the following that covers both types of weaknesses you mention.

Thus says the LORD: “Let not the wise man boast in his wisdom, let not the mighty man boast in his might, let not the rich man boast in his riches, 24 but let him who boasts boast in this, that he understands and knows me, that I am the LORD who practices steadfast love, justice, and righteousness in the earth. For in these things I delight, declares the LORD.” (Jer. 9:23–24, ESV2016)

But take care that this right of yours does not somehow become a stumbling block to the weak.  For if anyone sees you who have knowledge eating in an idol’s temple, will he not be encouraged, if his conscience is weak, to eat food offered to idols?  And so by your knowledge this weak person is destroyed, the brother for whom Christ died.  Thus, sinning against your brothers and wounding their conscience when it is weak, you sin against Christ.  Therefore, if food makes my brother stumble, I will never eat meat, lest I make my brother stumble. (1 Cor. 8:9–13, ESV2016)

And he sat down and called the twelve. And he said to them, “If anyone would be first, he must be last of all and servant of all.” (Mark 9:35, ESV2016)

Answer 4

I'm offering a completely different explanation, though one that I think is more consistent with the immediate literary context. The word, ἀσθενής, does not, in this context, refer to physical weakness. Nor do the other OP offered choices apply.

Other answers do a good job of addressing the lexical meaning of the comparative adjective ἀσθενής. I simply highlight BDG's:

2. pert. to experiencing some incapacity or limitation

I think of ἀσθενής as 'describing someone or something with a lowered capacity to perform a productive activity'.

For σκεῦος ('utensil', 'implement', 'gear' or 'stores') notice that it refers to a tool used to accomplish a productive activity. It can be a container, but it's a productive container.

Note that both ἀσθενής and σκεῦος have connotations of 'productivity'.

So, the phrase, ἀσθενεστέρῳ σκεύει, refers to something which has a comparatively lowered capacity to accomplish a productive result. This might suggest a physical incapacity, but I think there's a better, more contextually sensitive, explanation. No one expected the wife to toss around 30-kilo (65 lb) sacks of feed like loaves of flat bread.

Notice that the text tells us what the productive result is. The end of verse 7, "so that your prayers will not be hindered." I think, today, in the modern era, we tend to think of prayers as religiously oriented, even in many cases, a hoping for a miracle. With those in the 1st CE, it was more, "give us this day our daily bread". So, hindered prayers refer to the very practical, day-to-day production of life's necessities.

And, this productive activity is carried out in the context of 'dwelling together' (συνοικέω). This word means more than just occupying the same space. The idea is one of "running the household activities". Activities that generally were not just related to getting food on the table, but to making sure income flowed into the home. Proverbs 31 comes to mind. It's closer to "making a living", but one needs to keep it in the 1st CE context of a household-centered livelihood.

So, what verse 7 tells us is that the husband needs to understand the details of running a household so that he and his wife can work together as a team. Their roles are intertwined.

In that regard, note: "as a fellow heir of the grace of life". Life has given, seemingly unmerited, resources the couple is to use, and the husband and wife are "fellow heirs" of this mutual life. If the husband is to be a leader of this team, he needs to understand how the household activities fit into and fit with his income-producing efforts. Otherwise, their prayers will be thwarted by his leadership failures. Not to mention that his leadership failures put her in a very awkward position.

Now, one more contextual item, which relates directly to that awkward position. The wife is told in verses 3:1-6, in summary, that she is in a supportive, follow-his-leadership, role. And, to do this, she is to take a 'respectful' (φόβος), 'gentle and quiet' (πραέως καὶ ἡσυχίου) posture. Peter even goes so far as to present Sarah as the example, using the phrase, κύριον αὐτὸν καλοῦσα, ("calling him lord"), referring to Abraham. This is not a position of power.

In other words, the wife is "in the weaker position" in the context of fulfilling the productive activities of running the household. She is an instrument for success; but, she is the weaker instrument. The primary responsibility for success rests on the husband.

The husband needs to have a clear grasp of what that means in the household. This understanding will greatly inform his tone and manner of leadership. The text clearly implies he needs her help. Otherwise, he breaks the nature of being a "joint heir" and failure is inevitable.

So, I think this text (and the overall text) presents a very practical, down-to-earth, direction on how to live as a couple. And, ἀσθενής describes the role in which the wife functions within the household. She's in a "weaker position". The husband needs to know that and shoulder household responsibility in a way that honors her (ἀπονέμοντες τιμήν).

Answer 5

The Greek used in 1 Peter 3:7 is athenesteros, which means "with less strength' (Young's Analytical Concordance). In context, that means with less strength than the husband's "vessel".

Vessel comes from the Greek skeuos, which means "a vessel, utensil, instrument.

Put together, consider that a vessel made from iron is stronger than a vessel made from clay. But please don't anybody think I'm suggesting women are made of clay while men are made of iron! That's not the point. It very simply means to me that an iron pot can withstand being placed over a fire longer than would a clay pot; that an iron pot can withstand being dropped on to hard ground better than a clay pot.

As for historical interpretation, I went to this commentary, circa 1714, which details the husband's duties towards his wife, and then the reasons:

"(1.) ...Forbids unnecessary separation, and implies a mutual communication of goods and persons one to another, with delight and concord. (2.) Dwelling with the wife according to knowledge, not according to lust, as brutes; not according to passion, as devils; but according to knowledge, as wise and sober men, who know the word of God and their own duty; (3.) Giving due honour to the wife - giving due respect to her, and maintaining her authority, protecting her person, supporting her credit, delighting in her conversation, affording her a handsome maintenance, and placing a due trust and confidence in her.

The reasons are, Because she is the weaker vessel by nature and constitution, and so ought to be defended: but then the wife is, in other and higher respects, equal to her husband; they are heirs together of the grace of life, of all the blessings of this life and another, and therefore should live peaceably and quietly one with another, and if they do not, their prayers one with another and one for another will be hindered...

The weakness of the female sex is no just reason either for separation or contempt, but on the contrary it is a reason for honour and respect: Giving honour to the wife as unto the weaker vessel." Matthew Henry's Commentary on the whole Bible (complete and unabridged), page 1950 middle column, Hendrickson, 4th edition 2014.

Answer 6

Short Answer: Yes, it would be considered a proper translation.

The Greek word used for “weaker” is ἀσθενεστέρῳ (asthenesterō). This word is derived from the root ἀσθενής, ές (asthenés), which the Strong's defines as:

• Definition: without strength, weak
• Usage: (lit: not strong), (a) weak (physically, or morally), (b) infirm, sick.

ἀσθενεστέρῳ is the comparative form.

The BDG defines ἀσθενής, ές as:

1. pert. to suffering from a debilitating illness, sick, ill
2. pert. to experiencing some incapacity or limitation, weak -
   • a. of physical weakness (1 Peter 3:7 is listed here)
   • b. of relative ineffectiveness, wheather external or inward weak, feeble, ineffectual
   • c. of inner life. helpless in a moral sense. Of weakness in faith

Ellicott has this to say:

The weakness here ascribed to the female sex is primarily that of the body, as we shall see when we consider the word “vessel,” though it may, perhaps, indicate frailty in other respects as well.

“weaker” likely primarily refers to physical weakness, as indicated by the word “vessel.” The Greek word σκεύει (skeuei), which means “vessel” or “container,” is used metaphorically to refer to the wife. The metaphor would therefore point to the physical aspect of weakness, as vessels can be fragile, and they require care.

Barnes also notes:

The reason here assigned for the honor that was to be shown to the wife is, that she is "the weaker vessel." By this it is not necessarily meant that she is of feebler capacity, or inferior mental endowments, but that she is more tender and delicate; more subject to infirmities and weaknesses; less capable of enduring fatigue and toil; less adapted to the rough and stormy scenes of life. As such, she should be regarded and treated with special kindness and attention. This is a reason, the force of which all can see and appreciate. So we feel toward a sister; so we feel toward a beloved child, if he is of feeble frame and delicate constitution; and so every man should feel in relation to his wife. She may have mental endowments equal to his own; she may have moral qualities in every way superior to his; but the God of nature has made her with a more delicate frame, a more fragile structure, and with a body subject to many infirmities to which the more hardy frame of man is a stranger.

So, it's not impossible that the term “weaker” may encompass other forms of frailty, such as emotional sensitivity or social vulnerability. This might make sense considering the cultural context of the passage, women often had less social and legal power than men, which might make them more vulnerable.

That being said, it is makes the most sense to be physical weakness.

Answer 7

A better question - or at least a prior one - is the one that arises within the text itself: what does a weak vessel signify?

ἀσθενεστέρῳ σκεύει

This is a jar or a container, not a wrestler or Homeric hero. So that's marked language that must be accounted for. And accounting for Peter's words is the first step, before situating them in his theology, or trying to fit them into a wider history-of-ideas.

A σκεῦος is a jar, pot or container. In the NT it becomes a key word because of Christ's kenosis being a 'pouring-out'.

So the weakness conveyed by this ἀσθενεστέρῳ might refer to something like how resilient the sides of the pot are, or to the strength-or-dilution of the contents.

And if so, this might not just be saying women are weaker in the wrestling and opening stubborn jars stakes: they might also be fragile and the souls inside them might be all watery and insipid.

Which ends up with what looks like a simple word needing a word study. And probably quite a long one since σθένος is a 'basic' concept word with loads of cognates. Just ἀσθενής has 26 examples in the NT, and the LXX will have more.

Starting with big Liddell & Scott (1897), for ἀσθενής, in the hopes it can quickly narrow down the scope and save doing a full survey. The lexicographer thinks it has these senses:-

Without strength...

1. in body: feeble / sickly / weakly

2. in mind

3. in power

4. in property

5. insignificant

Straight away, weak is us glossing for "without strength." That's to be remembered since strength might be a moral quality and therefore its absence a 'privatio boni'.

And so far it's not looking great for Saint Peter in the diversity-equity stakes. But that just means the study must proceed carefully and respectfully.

What's next is to look for the examples that have been applied to objects and not animals or people - or abstract things like arguments and tactics.

Probably those are going to be in L&S sense 4. And it's interesting how L&S treat that one - because it might end up meaning cheap and nasty or ricketty when applied to something like a pot or jar or container. Beware Peter the Maenads are sharpening their knitting needles!

Perseus Project have about 1500 extant examples in the corpus: so we're in with a chance, but this could take a while or need a team. https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=a%29sqenh%2Fs&la=greek&can=a%29sqenh%2Fs0&prior=a)sqene/w

---

There's this in Plutarch's faces of the moon:-

" ἣλιος ὀξυβελὴς ἠδ᾽ ἱλάειρα σελήνη;

τὸ ἐπαγωγὸν αὐτῆς καὶ ἱλαρὸν καὶ ἄλυπον οὕτω προσαγορεύσας: ἔπειτα λόγον ἀποδιδούς, καθ᾽ ὃν αἱ ἀμυδραὶ καὶ ἀσθενεῖς ὄψεις οὐδεμίαν διαφορὰν ἐν τῇ σελήνῃ μορφῆς ἐνορῶσιν"

The sharp-rayed sun, and gently shining moon.

For thus does he call her alluring, favorable, and harmless light. No less absurd appears the reason he afterwards gives why dull and weak eyes discern no difference of form in the moon

Athenaeus' The Deipnosophists has it of weak wine:-

ὁ δὲ λευκὸς οἶνος ἀσθενὴς καὶ λεπτός, ὁ δὲ κιρρὸς πέττει ῥᾷον ξηραντικὸς ὤν.

But white wine is weak and thin; but yellow wine is very digestible, being of a more drying nature.

Plutarch's contradictions of the Stoics has some weak vines:-

καίτοι γ᾽ ὁ μὲν ἀμπελουργὸς ἔτι μικρῶν ὄντων καὶ ἀσθενῶν τοῦτο ποιεῖ τῶν κλημάτων, καὶ ἡμεῖς νεογνῶν καὶ τυφλῶν ὄντων τῶν σκυλακίων ὑφαιροῦμεν τὰ πολλὰ φειδόμενοι τῆς κυνός.

And yet the vine-dresser does this, the sprigs being slender and weak; and we, to favor a bitch, take from her many of her new born puppies, whilst they are yet blind

---

As a straw poll, that's enough for us to read ἀσθενεστέρῳ σκεύει as "the weak container" in the sense of the container of poor sort. The deficient container. It is a container that isn't up to much. If its function was seeing, it would see dimly, if its function was to taste sweet, it wouldn't be palatable, if its function was to grow grapes, it wouldn't grow many.

Anything about the relative physical strength of men and women is barking up the wrong tree. If it was about that, or about sickliness then the jar metaphor wouldn't be needed. The jar comes in to qualify the type of weakness Paul wants to warn about.

But unlike the three lexical examples found above this is a nurturing context not a critical one. This is the jar that you have to handle carefully because it's delicate.

ἀπονέμοντες is then to treat the pot "from the rule" i.e. with due care. Which gets me to a reading (ESV with my edits):-

Likewise, husbands, live with your wives in an understanding way, treating the woman with due care like a delicate vase, since they are heirs with you of the grace of life, so that your prayers may not be hindered.

[humour] there you go Pete bruv - that should get you off the hook [/humour]

(Vase because I'm an affluent industrialized modern who can't identify with an ancient economic necessity of needing to be careful with crockery)

Answer 8

As to physicality: that women - even modern women - are weaker than men is evident, so much so, that as Serena Williams, arguably the GOAT of women tennis said, had she competed with Andy Murray, Andy would have given her bagels (6:0, 6:0) in 10-12 minutes time, and that female tennis and male tennis are almost two distinct sports. Thus, females generally are physically weaker than males - contra factum non datur argumentum.

Now, psychologically also: imagine, 1st century AD, males have to travel, fight, carry weapons, physically protect their families etc. it is never only physical, but if you fight and stand in front of death, it means that you must be psychologically strong as well.

Of course, there were cases, very rare, when women eclipsed men psychologically and morally, like in case of Antigone (whose psychological fortitude sprouts from her moral uprightness, and moral uprightness from - love, for morality without love is a Kantian monstrosity) described by Sophocles in his drama of the same name, but those cases were exceptional. Thus, also psychologically women were considered as weaker than men, because of their status in society. Was not Peter a man of his time not to know all these? Of course he knew all those things and addresses the audience which also is aware of those things.

Thus, Paul must mean both physical and psychological frailty of women of his time in comparison with men, in fact those two things, physical and psychological are so closely related to each other.