Troublesome Topic: I Peter 3:17-22

1 Peter 3:17

Translation

If the will of God might will it so, it is better to suffer for doing good than for doing evil,

Paraphrase

If it is the will of God to allow you to suffer, it is better for you to suffer for doing good, than for doing evil,

1 Peter 3:18

Translation

for even CHRIST suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, so that He might lead you to THEOS, having been put to death

in the flesh, but having been made alive in the Spirit,

Paraphrase

for even THE ANOINTED MESSIAH was not exempt from suffering, in fact, he endured one huge hardship of extreme suffering, a righteous one suffering the punishment of unrighteous ones, so that he could lead you to THE CREATOR AND OWNER OF ALL THINGS, by being put to death in the body, and then being made alive again by the Holy Spirit of God.

1 Peter 3:19

Translation

in which

also, he preached, having gone

to the spirits in prison,

Paraphrase

It was in a spirit state, without a body, and through the power of the Holy Spirit of God, that he proclaimed the truth when He went to those whose spirits are now being held in prison,

1 Peter 3:20

Translation

having formerly disobeyed when the long-enduring patience

of God was waiting in the days of Noah, [days] of the construction of the ark, in which a very small number

[of souls], that is eight souls, were saved through water, (See comment below)

Paraphrase

the spirits of those who had disobeyed long ago while the long-enduring patience of God waited during the time required for Noah to build the ark, in which only a tiny number of souls, eight to be exact, were saved by floating on the water.

WHY DID JESUS PREACH TO THEM?

This passage has long been debated because there are at least two things which pull against each other. The primary ones are that 1) the text of 3:19 says Jesus “having gone” in spirit form, to the place where the souls were being held in prison, or possibly to the souls who are now in prison, and 2) Jesus preached, or proclaimed truth to them.

One of these statements needs to be seen in a non-literal way because they cannot both be taken literally.

The statement of Jesus “having gone” to the spirits in prison makes it sound like Jesus did this during the time that His body was dead and in the tomb. That would be a literal and natural reading of that statement.

However, the part about Jesus preaching to them pulls in a different direction. I Peter 4:6 seems to be referring to the same event and refers to it as the preaching of the gospel. The gospel is good news which includes an offer of salvation. If Jesus went to the place where the disobedient souls were being held and proclaimed to them that He was victorious and they were going to be punished, that could hardly be called good news. They would learn soon enough that Jesus was victorious. The part about Him preaching to them, or proclaiming truth to them, fits better if they were living in a human body when He preached to them, but their spirits were in prison after death at the time Peter penned those words. Those that hold this interpretation say that Jesus preached through Noah to those who were being disobedient at that time. That is why the patience of God in the time of Noah is mentioned.

I find it more Biblically acceptable to adjust the timing of Jesus “going” to preach to them, than to say that Jesus preached or proclaimed truth to spirits of dead people who no longer had a chance to repent. The Bible is clear that, while we are alive in this physical body, we have the chance to repent and change direction, but after we die, there is no such opportunity. Therefore, the is no good reason to preach to the spirits of the dead. That is why my paraphrase for verse 19 is rendered, “he proclaimed the truth when He went to those whose spirits are now being held in prison”.

Also, keep in mind that the eight souls that were saved were normal human beings; why should those who were punished be anything different than human beings?

1 Peter 3:21

Translation

which is also an antitype

of baptism which is now saving you, not a putting off of filth but the response to [our] appeal toward THEOS of a good conscience,

through the resurrection of JESUS CHRIST, (see comment below)

Paraphrase

That water is a representation of baptism which itself is representing the salvation currently going on within you. This does not refer to the physical act of getting wet with water which is only capable of washing dirt from your body, but nothing more, rather this refers to receiving from THE CREATOR AND OWNER OF ALL THINGS, a positive response to our request for a clear conscience; we receive that response based on the resurrection of GOD’S SAVIOR WHO IS ALSO THE ANOINTED MESSIAH,

DOES BAPTISM SAVE US?

The entire New Testament is clear that baptism is not what saves us, rather it is a picture of what saves us; it is a representation of it, enacted in a public way for the world to see. This verse also fits that pattern for it speaks of baptism as a representation and it clarifies that the physical act of getting wet with water is not the key issue.

In this passage, water (and the ark that floated on the water) were used by God to save Noah and his family. The use of water in baptism serves as the corollary image for today but in a different way; baptism is not the vehicle through which God saves us; it is an outward representation of an inner working of God. But even though the analogy does not fit perfectly in every way (few analogies do), Peter uses it to tie together the old and the new.

1 Peter 3:22

Translation

who is at the right hand of THEOS,

having gone into heaven, having angels and authorities and powers

been made subject to Him. (See comment below.)

Paraphrase

who is seated in the position of co-regency with THE CREATOR AND OWNER OF THE UNIVERSE, and to whom all regular angels, all angels with higher levels of authority, such as arch angels, and all angels with additional or specialized powers such as Cherubim and Seraphim, have been made subject.

A REBUTTAL OF MICHAEL HEISER’S INTERPRETATION OF THIS PASSAGE

Here is what Heiser says on pages 336-338 about I Peter 3:14-22. He (Peter) “assumes that the great flood of Genesis 6-8, especially the sons of God event in Genesis 6:1-4, typified or foreshadowed the gospel and the resurrection.” In the next paragraph Heiser assumes that the imprisoned spirits mentioned by Peter are the same in every way as the ones described in 1 Enoch. He also assumes that Peter had something from 1 Enoch on his mind when he penned what is for us, I Peter chapter 3. Heiser also assumes Jesus was the second Enoch (having done what the book of 1 Enoch said Enoch did). He concludes that I Peter 3 has the “supernatural view of Genesis 6:1-4 at its core.”

REBUTTAL

For Michael Heiser, everything has to do with the Nephilim of Genesis 6:1-4. In his mind the flood was not a big enough event to stand on its own, it had to refer to something even bigger – the Nephilim!

It is not necessary to interpret the imprisoned spirits mentioned in this passage as a reference to the Nephilim; seeing it as a reference to the spirits of humans before the flood works fine. Just because something sounds similar to what is found in pagan, extra-biblical literature, does not mean that we need to reshape the Bible to fit the literature of pagan religions. We should never do so if it requires that we compromise things that the Bible has said elsewhere, as is the case here. However, Heiser is trying to force on the Bible a worldview that is not the one the Bible presents, therefore, he must twist every passage to fit his worldview.

Notice that Heiser once again goes to his favorite source to help him interpret this passage, that source is 1 Enoch. Whenever Michael Heiser is forced to choose between the Bible and one of the books of Enoch, He always chooses the books of Enoch. But, if you feel you have to quote from one of the books of Enoch to support your case, you don’t have a case; when you have finished quoting from the books of Enoch, you still don’t have a case.

Footnotes

1

Participles like this one can express a number of meanings. I think this one is intended to show agency – that Jesus is able to lead us to God by means of, or through the means of his death and resurrection.

2: "in the Spirit"

I think the word “spirit” is being used here with only one meaning, but it opens the door for a double meaning to be used in the next verse. Although this point has long been debated, I think the usage here is in reference to the Holy Spirit of God because it was the power of God the Father that raised Jesus from the dead, it was not the power of his own inner spirit, or inner being. Besides that, the spirit of a human never dies, so it would make no sense to say He was brought to life in the realm of His inner spirit.

3: "in which"

Here is where the double meaning of the word “spirit” is noticed. While the first usage of it in verse 19 seems to point to the Holy Spirit, this usage can easily point to both of the primary ideas conveyed by the word “spirit”, i.e. the spirit that God gives each person, which Paul called the “inner man” and God’s Holy Spirit.

4: "having gone"

This is the word for “go, walk, travel, traverse, journey, depart, go forth, go away.” The middle and passive forms, such as the passive participle used here, had already taken on what seems to us like an active meaning, “to go” rather than “to be transported”. So the point is that Jesus, in spirit form, went there.

5

See my comment about the imprisoned spirits after the next verse.

6: "long-enduring patience"

Helps word studies says this word can be seen as the opposite of “short tempered”, if only we had the phrase “long-tempered” in English.

7

“Puny, tiny” are good ways to render this word in English.

8: "through water"

It is a rich irony that Peter says they were saved by or through water. It was the water that killed everyone else, but for those in the ark, the water participated in their salvation because the ark was designed to float on top of the water.

9: "antitype"

In this compound word, “anti” does not mean “against” but “in substitution”. It points to something standing for something else, hence “a representation” of that other thing.

10: "a good conscience"

Thayer says it this way, “which (baptism) now saves us (you) not because in receiving it we (ye) have put away the filth of the flesh, but because we (ye) have earnestly sought a conscience reconciled to God”.

11

There is probably a word omitted from this clause which can easily be assumed to be the word “seated”. “Who is seated at the right hand of God.”

12

Phrases like this one point to all the spiritual entities and their organization according to levels of authority and special assignments, even though we don’t know as much about them as we would like. Because we don’t know everything about them, they are referred by Paul and Peter with the vagueness seen here. However, the entire Bible is in agreement that such entities include only angels and demons (I include Satan among the demons), not other gods or demi-gods. People like Michael Heiser, who interpret this statement to mean other gods, are not doing so by allowing the Bible to interpret itself, but are interpreting the Bible through the lenses of pagan religions and pulling into the Bible the entire worldview of those religions, something which was strictly prohibited by the true God, the Creator of the world.