SET TEXT #4

 18 For Christ also died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit;

 19 in which he went and preached to the spirits in prison,

 20 who formerly did not obey, when God's patience waited in the days of Noah, during the building of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were saved through water.

 21 Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

 22 who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers subject to him.

18  o[ti kai. Cristo.j a[pax peri. a`martiw/n e;paqen( di,kaioj u`pe.r avdi,kwn( i[na u`ma/j prosaga,gh| tw/| qew/| qanatwqei.j me.n sarki. zw|opoihqei.j de. pneu,mati\

 19  evn w-| kai. toi/j evn fulakh/| pneu,masin poreuqei.j evkh,ruxen(

 20  avpeiqh,sasi,n pote o[te avpexede,ceto h` tou/ qeou/ makroqumi,a evn h`me,raij Nw/e kataskeuazome,nhj kibwtou/ eivj h]n ovli,goi( tou/tV e;stin ovktw. yucai,( diesw,qhsan diV u[datojÅ

 21  o] kai. u`ma/j avnti,tupon nu/n sw,|zei ba,ptisma( ouv sarko.j avpo,qesij r`u,pou avlla. suneidh,sewj avgaqh/j evperw,thma eivj qeo,n( diV avnasta,sewj VIhsou/ Cristou/(

 22  o[j evstin evn dexia/| Îtou/Ð qeou/ poreuqei.j eivj ouvrano,n u`potage,ntwn auvtw/| avgge,lwn kai. evxousiw/n kai. duna,mewnÅ

This passage starts with a favorite verse for use in preaching and personal evangelism. One wonders how many of those who use it in these contexts are conscious of the difficult character of the passage in which it is found! J. Ramsey Michaels notes that there is a tendency to read 3:18-22 in light of 4:6, and thus to find in this passage a descent of Christ into hell. This interpretation has a long history, and should not be discounted, but it is also nonetheless important to recognize that neither ‘descent’ nor ‘hell’ are mentioned here explicitly (1 Peter, p.196).

3:18  The meaning of the present verse is relatively clear, despite two textual uncertainties. J. Ramsey Michaels favors the reading “suffered on account of sins” rather than the longer reading “died on account of sins for us”, since it can explain the other readings and modifications of it. It may be that the concern to emphasize that Jesus not only suffered but died, combined with the traditional character of saying Christ died for us, that resulted in the other reading. The second variant is whether this took place to bring ‘you’ or ‘us’ to God. Again, Michaels argues that the fact that both the majority and the earliest witnesses agree on ‘you’ is a strong argument in favor of that reading. The point is at any rate a minor one, and is easily explicable as a copyist error due to the fact that the Greek words umaV and hmaV are so similar, and came not longer after this period to be pronounced in exactly the same way.

            The words peri amartiwn are probably used here, as elsewhere in the NT, as a translation of OT sacrificial terminology, and may thus be interpreted as meaning ‘as a sin offering’ rather than merely ‘for sins’. Although the phrase ‘the righteous for the unrighteous’ easily fits later theories of the atonement like penal substitution, what is emphasized as being accomplished here is not merely forgiveness and a change of status, but reconciliation with God. The idea of ‘bringing near’ is used in the NT in particular in connection with the coming of Gentiles to faith, since they are those who were far away from God, excluded from the covenant people.

            Jesus is said to have been put to death to/in/by the flesh, but made alive to/in/by the spirit/Spirit. The slashes show the ambiguity here. In both cases datives are used: sarki and pneumati. Since the parallelism suggests the meaning will be similar, ‘by the Spirit’ is unlikely to be the meaning in the second part, since in the first it can hardly mean ‘by the flesh’. And so our main options are ‘with respect to the flesh/with respect to the Spirit’, or ‘physically/spiritually’, or ‘in the realm of the flesh/in the realm of the Spirit’. The latter perhaps assumes too much of Paul’s own technical usage. Perhaps the biggest question is whether the reference is to Jesus being made alive in his spirit or ‘in the Spirit’ – that is, whether the reference is to ‘the Spirit’ with a capital ‘S’. In order to answer this question, we need to consider v19 as well. At any rate, the similarities with Paul suggest that this was traditional language, perhaps a short ‘creedal’ statement.

3:19   This verse starts with the Greek words en hô kai, ‘in/through which also’. In view of the subject matter, Bowyer, Harris, Moffatt and Goodspeed suggest that because of the similar sound the name Enoch has dropped out of the text here (in which case the text would originally have read not ENWKAI but ENWCKAI or ENWKAIENWC); but since there are no manuscripts supporting this, it is dangerous to make so speculative a conjecture, unless other attempts at making sense of the text as it stands prove futile.

            To what do the words ‘in which’ refer? It can mean a number of things, of which the most promising possibilities are ‘in the aforementioned Spirit’ or ‘in which state’ (i.e. in the state of being made alive in the Spirit’). But the latter option certainly would not fit later interpretations of this passage as referring to a descent into hell during the time Christ was in the tomb, since ‘made alive in the Spirit’ presumably refers to the resurrection. (Another alternative, that this is simply a relative clause meaning ‘for which reason’, seems less likely). And so it makes better sense to say that it was in or by the aforementioned Spirit that Christ also went to preach to the spirits in prison. The action ‘went’ is in the aorist, and the phrase sometimes rendered in English as ‘the spirits who are (currently) in prison’ does not have a verb, and could also mean ‘the spirits who were in prison’. So the next question is when did Christ go to preach to the spirits in prison? Was it prior to the incarnation (so Augustine), or between his death and resurrection, or at his ascension? ‘He went’ does not immediately make one think of the ascension, and so the main options are that

(a)     he went, after his death but prior to his resurrection, through the Spirit who subsequently made him alive, to preach to the spirits in prison

(b)     in earlier times he went to preach to the spirits who have since been put in prison, through the very same Spirit who has now made him alive [For this meaning, if a pluperfect ‘had gone’ rather than aorist ‘went’ had been used it might have been clearer, but this is by no means decisive, since the pluperfect is used fairly rarely in Koine Greek, as in the colloquial form of many languages]

We cannot decide the matter until we have considered what both of these options might mean, and how they relate to the passage as a whole. We shall also have to figure out who ‘the spirits’ are (whether spiritual beings like angels, or the spirits of the dead), but that will also depend on the considerations we have just mentioned.

3:20  Wayne Grudem points out that although the participle that begins this verse is taken by most modern translations as adjectival, this is unjustified from a grammatical standpoint. Were the meaning ‘who disobeyed’, we should expect the article before the participle. And so it is better to translate the participle adverbially, as modifying ‘preached’, so that this verse continues the point made in the preceding verse not by adding ‘the spirits in prison who disobeyed long ago…’ but ‘preached to the spirits in prison, when they disobeyed long ago…’ This being the case, the meaning of the passage (and perhaps also of 4:6 as well) becomes clearer. “Christ was made alive in the Spirit, and through the same Spirit he went to preach to the spirits currently in prison, when they disobeyed long ago…” In other words, the meaning turns out to be (in all probability) not about a descent into hell to preach to those who were dead at that time, but Christ preaching through the Spirit’s activity in and through Noah (and others like him, such as Enoch), who reached out to their contemporaries and preached salvation to them, people who refused to believe and died and whose spirits are now in prison.

            It is sometimes suggested that it would have been much simpler for the author to say ‘Christ preached through Noah’. But if other godly individuals like Enoch or Able were felt to also have been alive until roughly ‘in the days of Noah’ (see e.g. Jubilees 4, then we can easily understand why Peter would not have said ‘preached through Enoch, Noah, et.al.’! And so, in view of the grammatical considerations regarding the participle, it is best to take this verse as a temporal clause.

            Grudem (pp.160-161) sets forth the parallels that would have been observed between Noah’s time and the situation of Peter’s readers:

(a)    Noah and his family were a minority surrounded by hostile unbelievers; so are Peter’s readers (1 Peter 3:13-14; 4:4,12-13). Jewish tradition elaborates the fact that Noah was mocked for his preaching and for building the ark.

(b)   Noah was righteous in the midst of a wicked world. Peter exhorts his readers to be  righteous in the midst of wicked unbelievers (1 Peter 3:13-14,16-17; 4:3-4).

(c)    Noah witnessed boldly to those around him. Peter encourages his readers to be good witnesses to unbelievers around them (1 Peter 3:14,16-17), being willing to suffer if necessary to bring others to God, just as Christ suffered to bring us to God (3:18).

(d)   Noah realized that judgment was soon to come upon the world. Peter reminds his readers that God’s judgment is certainly coming, perhaps soon (1 Peter 4:5,7).

(e)    In the unseen ‘spiritual’ realm, Christ preached through Noah to unbelievers around him. By saying this Peter can remind his readers of the reality of Christ’s work in the unseen spiritual realm and the fact that Christ is also active in them, empowering their witness and making it spiritually effective (cf. 1 Peter 1:8,11-12,25; 2:4). Therefore they should not fear (3:14), but in their hearts should ‘always be prepared’ to tell of the hope that is in them (3:15).

(f)     At the time of Noah, God was patiently awaiting repentance from unbelievers, before he brought judgment. So it is in the situation of Peter’s readers: God is patiently awaiting repentance from unbelievers before bringing judgment on the world.

(g)    Noah was finally saved, with ‘a few’ others. Peter thus encourages his readers that, although perhaps few, they too will finally be saved, for Christ has triumphed and has all things subject to him, just as God was still in control of the situation in Noah’s time and saved him and his family (cf. 1 Peter 3:22; 4:13,19; 5:10).

They were saved (or escaped, another common meaning of the verb) ‘through water’, which will allow the author to draw yet another parallel with his readers in the following verse. Although technically Noah and his family were saved from water, the author is here interested in the parallel that can be drawn with Christian baptism, and hence he speaks of salvation ‘through water’. But perhaps noting this point will help us to resist over-interpreting the passage, since many have taken the author’s statement as a clear statement of the salvific efficacy of the ritual of baptism in and of itself. To press his language in this way, in view of the looseness of the metaphors and comparisons being used, clearly has the potential to lead one well beyond what is explicitly stated and/or implied in the text itself.

Before preceding, we may note explicitly what we have already hinted regarding the greatest strength of the interpretation we are advocating here: it enables the reader to see the relevance of the ideas presented to the argument of the letter as a whole and to what we know of the situation of its readers.

3:21  Here (in contrast with the start of v20) we do indeed have a relative pronoun, and thus the statement here that the ‘antitype’ or correspondent for us to the water whereby Noah and his family were saved is baptism. Although not explicitly stated, the author may assume the association between baptism and the imagery of death and resurrection that is explicitly mentioned in Paul’s letters. It is through that which might otherwise be judgment that one is saved – through the waters of the flood, through death. The removal of the filth of the flesh may in fact mean more than simply ‘external bodily dirt’, but may refer to the ‘putting off of the flesh’ that Paul mentions (see also James 1:21). But even taking the phrase to refer to mundane filth, it is clear that the author considers that baptism does not in itself effect outward cleansing and thereby wash us literally of some stain. Rather, it represents an appeal to God out of a good conscience (not ‘for’ a good conscience, as some have apparently suggested).

3:22  The author rounds off this tricky and perplexing but also fascinating passage by returning to some more traditional imagery and motifs within early Christianity, in particular that of Jesus seated at the right hand of God. This position of authority held by Jesus emphasizes that the one who represents Christians (and who suffered to bring others to God and preached righteousness in the Spirit all throughout the ages) is above all who might oppose us. The one who in the past went and appealed to the wicked to repent, whether in Noah’s time or more recently, and to whom few responded while most mocked and persecuted and even killed him, has been vindicated by God: he went and preached, and now he has gone to the ultimate position a human figure could ever occupy, at the right hand of God.

The author’s point about Jesus being above angels, principalities, and powers does not require what preceded to be about angelic beings, and thereby discount the interpretation we have advocated. The language of Jesus being above all powers was traditional and widespread in early Christianity, and it no more requires a reference to ‘the sons of God’ from Genesis 6 than do any other occurrences of this stereotypical language in the New Testament epistles (see especially Ephesians 1:20-2:6).

The interpretation suggested above fits well with the ‘baptismal sermon’ emphases of this section of the letter. Even if adapted to a new context, Noah’s ark was a potent image of salvation through water. In both its original homiletic context and in its present context in the letter, the image of Noah as one of a small minority who obeyed God in the midst of a hostile world, and so was saved, would have been deeply meaningful to Peter’s hearers and readers. The time will soon come when his readers will, like Noah, look back, knowing that although through them Christ’s Spirit reached out to the disobedient, their attempts to preach to them met with scoffing and rejection. They will join the ‘spirits in prison’, because they followed the ancient paradigm of refusing to associate themselves with those whom God saved ‘through water’. This imagery, if it takes a bit of work for us to make sense of it and unravel it, would have been strikingly relevant and meaningful in its original context.

N.B. On this whole passage see the commentary (and in particular the appendix, pp.203-239) of Wayne Grudem, 1 Peter, in the Tyndale NT Commentary series.

Soft Difference: Theological Reflections on the Relation Between Church and Culture in 1 Peter Article by Mirslav Volf in Ex Auditu

Greg Herrick, The Apostle Peter on Civil Obedience: An Exegesis of 1 Peter 2:13-17

" 'The Household of God:' The Pastorals & 1-2 Peter," Pauline Theology vs the Post-Pauline Traditions, by Dr. Sheila E. McGinn, John Carroll University.