“Drive-by verses”
Download discussion questions: 1 Peter 3:17-4:6
Jump to beginning of 1 Peter Discussion Group Blog
I encourage you to look at the passage in 1 Peter before you read this Blog entry. What do you see in the text yourself? What questions come to your mind? How would you interpret what the writer says? After even a few minutes examining and thinking about the text you will be much better prepared to evaluate the comments in the Blog.
This passage contains a concentration of challenging comments. Peter makes several statements that are puzzling or even concerning. What does he mean? Are these remarks consistent with other parts of Scripture? How have Peter’s words been misunderstood? Why does he include these comments here in his letter? In my journal, when studying this passage, I had noted this section as “red flags in a hermeneutical minefield.” Our group worked on sorting out the puzzles.
First the Fish
Most of our discussion focused on four phrases in Peter’s text.
As intriguing as those phrases are, we took the advice that someone told me when I was first beginning to study the Bible. We took the “bony-fish approach” to inductive study.
When you come to a problem in Bible study, treat it as you would treat bones while eating a fish. Take the bone out and carry on with the fish. After you have finished the fish, come back and collect the bones.[1]
In other words, concentrate on the parts of the passage that are more clear. Then deal with the difficult, “bony” parts. The clearer parts may help us understand the more obscure or confusing portions.
We found a lot in the passage that was clear and familiar and comforting:
-
- Christ died for our sins once for all (3:18a)
- He died to bring us to God (3:18b)
- He was made alive (the resurrection) (3:18)
- God saved Noah and his family from a hostile world (3:20)
- Christ’s resurrection is key to our salvation (3:31b)
- Christ is at God’s right hand, with authority (3:22)
- We are to live for God’s will, not human desires (4:2)
- Unbelievers will be hostile to the faith (4:4)
- God is the judge of all (4:5)
Peter continues the review that he began in 3:8 (“To sum up” NASB1995). He repeats from earlier in his letter about what God has already done and how we should now live as a result.
But Then There are the Bones
That leaves the question, why does Peter include these less-familiar ideas in his recap? How do these statements fit into the letter he is writing to encourage believers during times of trial?
For each of the statements, our discussion generally began with the questions, “How have you heard this explained in the past?” and “What do you think this means?” and “What can we learn from Peter’s immediate context about the point he is making?”
He went and preached to the spirits in prison (3:19)
Several people in our group had heard variations on this verse. The general idea was that Jesus had “gone down” to hell to offer the gospel to the souls there. Usually, this journey was assumed to be during the time between the crucifixion and His resurrection, while His body was in the tomb.
Is this what Peter meant, that those persons in hell were offered the gospel, even a second chance? But the entire context of Peter’s letter makes that interpretation highly unlikely.
It makes no sense contextually for Peter to be teaching that the wicked have a second chance in a letter in which he exhorts the righteous to persevere and to endure suffering. … All motivation to endure would vanish if Peter now offers a second opportunity after death.[2]
Someone asked about the Apostles’ Creed and the line sometimes recited as “He descended to hell.” But the Greek version of the creed[3] (a few hundred years after Peter wrote) used a more general word κατώτερος (katōteros, “lower region,” the same as used in Ephesians 4:9). The “lower region” was the place of all the dead in ancient thinking, “corresponding to the Greek Hades and the Hebrew Sheol. … Jesus really died, and that it was from a genuine death, not a simulated one, that he rose.”[4] The creed affirms that Jesus really died, that He “descended to the dead” (a more common version, and the one we use in our group when saying the creed together).
In verse 19, Peter uses the word “preached” which is the general term κηρύσσω (kēryssō, preach, proclaim). But where he clearly means the proclamation of the gospel (1 Peter 1:12, 1:25, 4:6),[5] he uses the more exact word εὐαγγελίζω (euangelizō, announce good news). What Jesus was proclaiming to the spirits was not necessarily the gospel.
Jesus’ audience was “spirits” (πνεύματα, pneumata) in contrast with the word for humans in v. 20, ψυχαί (psucai, “souls, persons”). And “the place of dead people is not elsewhere in the NT referred to with the word “prison” (φυλακῇ, phylakē).” Furthermore, the word is never used to denote the place of punishment for human beings after death. The term is used in Rev 20:7, however, for Satan’s confinement for one thousand years (cf. Rev 18:2).[6]
The point Peter is making is not a “second-chance” offer of the gospel. Rather, he describes the act of Jesus preaching after His resurrection (v. 18b), during His ascension (v. 22a). He was proclaiming His victory (v. 22b) and judgment to the fallen spirits. In the wider context of Peter’s whole letter, this statement affirms Christ’s victory over a hostile world.
Baptism that now saves you also (3:21)
From backgrounds in various churches and denominations, several in our group had heard this verse used as a basis for the necessity and/or the efficacy of baptism. They were taught that either baptism is a requirement for salvation (in addition to faith), or baptism is sufficient for salvation (apart from faith), or both. One person described the phrase as a “drive-by” verse, exempt from questions or discussion. Any effort to explore what Peter might have meant was met by accusations of not believing the plain words of Scripture: Baptism saves you!
Several members of our group pointed out parts of the text that relate to Peter’s meaning about baptism. Whatever baptism does, it is not about the outward, mechanical, physical act of “removing dirt from the body” (v. 21b). In discussing this text, John Piper imagined Peter’s thinking about what he had written,
And then immediately, as though he knows he said something almost heretical, because it would so compromise justification by faith, he says, “. . . not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.”[7]
The value of baptism is in the “pledge” (v. 21c), or, as one person suggested, the individual’s personal testimony that usually accompanies baptism. The power of baptism is not in the act, but, according to Peter, “through the resurrection of Jesus Christ” (v. 21d). Baptism is the most visible part of a package: the pledge or testimony of faith in the saving power of the resurrection, demonstrated publicly by a physical act.
It is also important to remember that the word “saved” in the New Testament is not always about eternal salvation. The word σῴζω (sōzō, save) is used frequently in the NT for healing, saving from storms at sea, etc. In fact, several leading resources offer the first definition of “save” (sōzō) as “rescue from natural dangers and afflictions”[8] or “save from death, keep alive; keep a whole skin, escape destruction; to be healed, recover from sickness.”[9]
Noah’s family was saved or delivered from physical destruction. Peter may have been thinking of deliverance from the destructive lifestyle of the hostile world: “debauchery, lust, drunkenness, orgies, carousing and detestable idolatry” (4:3). Note that he even uses the phrase “flood of dissipation” (4:4, emphasis added) to describe the behavior Christians have been delivered from.
We spent a little time discussing why Peter brought up the story of Noah. One person even pointed out that in Noah’s story, water was the means of judgment, destroying the wickedness of the world. But Peter relates the water of baptism to salvation. Another comment suggested that in Noah’s example, water was both: the means of judgment, but also the means of salvation. The water floated the ark, and from that perspective, Noah and his family “were saved through water” (v. 20b). The same preposition (διὰ, dia) is used that can be translated “by” or “through.”[10] As one writer explains, “the two corresponding dia phrases contrast ‘through water’ with ‘through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.’”[11] Peter’s frequent Old Testament references throughout his letter include this reference to Noah to demonstrate to his readers the continuity of God’s purposes. Water is the connecting factor in his illustration.
So how does this discussion of Noah and baptism fit into Peter’s letter to Christians in a hostile world?
The only reference is provided by the immediate context (3:18-22), namely, that Christ leads us to God because of his victory, through his death and resurrection, over the powers of evil (vv. 19, 22). It is probably in such deliverance from those powers that one ought to understand the way in which baptism saves by means of Christ’s resurrection. Because such deliverance from an evil world would also correspond to what water accomplished for Noah by delivering him from an evil world, it is in this direction that we ought to seek to understand what our author means by the saving power of baptism.[12]
Because of Christ’s victory, baptism has become the expression of our deliverance from the hostile world.
He who has suffered in the body is done with sin (4:1)
Once more, various backgrounds provided several examples of distorted doctrines derived from this verse. People had been told that any suffering was the direct result of unconfessed sin, or even that suffering was a sign of a failure to deal with sin. Responding to suffering with honest expressions of struggle or doubt meant the person was not truly saved.
Clearly, Peter is concerned for the holy living of his audience (“put away…” in 2:1, “abstain…” in 2:11) and especially in relationships (3:9). But suffering resulting from sin (the attitude encountered by several people in our group) is absent except for the natural consequences of bad behavior (2:20). Quite the contrary, Peter expects that believers are more likely to suffer for doing good, for following a Christian lifestyle (3:13,14, 17) in a hostile environment (2:12a; 3:16; 4:4).
Then what can he mean by “he who has suffered in the body is done with sin” (NIV 1984) or “he who has suffered in the flesh has ceased from sin” (NASB 1995)? We considered the question of the sequence that Peter has in mind.
-
- Is it that suffering causes us to stop sinning?
OR
-
- Does stopping sin cause us to suffer?
The first option is certainly possible, and we saw in our study of Hebrews that God can use difficult circumstances as part of His training program for our growth. Even our natural (guilt-induced?) reaction is to try to clean up our life when we face suffering.
However, our group noted that the context suggests the second option. How could stopping sin cause suffering? Again, Peter points to the hostile environment of his readers.
They think it strange that you do not plunge with them into the same flood of dissipation, and they heap abuse on you. (v. 4)
Several members have had the experience of ridicule or disrespect because of choices to follow Christian standards. In today’s culture, there are increasing scenarios where relationships or careers can suffer over social or political views out of sync with the mainstream.
The point is not that believers who suffer have attained sinless perfection, as if they do not sin at all after suffering. What Peter emphasizes is that those who commit themselves to suffer, those who willingly endure scorn and mockery for their faith, show that they have triumphed over sin. They have broken with sin because they have ceased to participate in the lawless activities of unbelievers and now endure the criticisms that have come from such a decision. The commitment to suffer reveals an intention to live a new life, a life that is not yet perfect but remarkably different from the lives of unbelievers in the Greco-Roman world.[13]
We talked about the “suffering” encountered in most of our lives. Like the hostility faced by Peter’s audience, there may not be physical persecution. Intimidation (3:14 in NASB), slander (3:16), insults (4:14), being maligned (4:4) and reviled (3:16) are much more likely. Someone shared about the range of verbal abuse, from subtle comments disguised as humor and escalating to shouting and swearing. Rejection or passive-aggressive interactions damage relationships and cause emotional distress. We continue to remind each other of Peter’s message, that the “imperishable, undefiled, and unfading inheritance” (1:4), the “joy set before us” (Hebrews 12:2) far outweigh those painfully real experiences. And that
those who suffer unjustly because of their faith in Christ have demonstrated that they are willing to be through with, or done with, sin by choosing obedience, even if it means suffering.[14]
The reality and probability of suffering has been one of the earliest themes in Peter’s letter (1:6). His repeated exhortation is for perseverance and endurance through suffering. He reverses our natural perspective on sin and suffering. We tend to think that suffering indicates sin. Peter reassures his readers that suffering in a hostile world can be encouraging evidence of our progress against sin.
The gospel was preached to those who are dead (4:6)
This statement could sound like another description of a “second chance” to accept the gospel. That misinterpretation is even more likely from translations[15] that, like the Greek original, do not include the word “now.” Peter simply says that the gospel was preached “even to those who are dead” (ESV, KJV, LEB, NASB, NKJV). Perhaps the most literal of translations (Young’s Literal Translation, YLT) is even more direct, “for this also to dead men was good news proclaimed….”
The word “now” is inserted into some translations (CSB, NET, NIV, NLT, etc.) as an interpretive addition to avoid the “second-chance” error. Are those translators justified in the extra word?
As discussed above (regarding preaching to spirits, 3:19), any idea of a “second-chance” from another offer of the gospel after death is contrary to the rest of Peter’s letter.
Even in this paragraph he presents that argument, urging them to persevere because God will judge sinners (v. 5). It would make no sense if he were to shift gears suddenly and promise a second chance to those who have rejected the gospel during this life.[16]
So why does Peter bring this up? Probably for the same reason that the apostle Paul addressed a similar concern in 1 Thessalonians 4:13: “that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope.”
Think of the scenario. You and several friends have become Christians. As a result, you have endured significant abuse from family, friends, neighbors, workmates, etc. But you have persevered because of the hope that Peter describes.
And then your friend dies. How do you reconcile this new belief with that reality? Has it all been a mistake, has all the suffering been unnecessary? What do the family, friends, and the others say to you now?
Some unbelievers probably argued that the death of believers demonstrated that there was no advantage in becoming a Christian since both Christians and unbelievers die. Peter indicates, however, that unbelievers do not understand the whole picture.[17]
Peter is not describing a second-chance. Instead, he is emphasizing the value of perseverance. Those who heard and responded to the gospel while alive may have died. God’s promised inheritance is still “imperishable, undefiled, and unfading, kept in heaven” (1:4).
The point rather is the encouragement of embattled Christians, to assure them that their faith, despite their rejection by human beings and the death that has overtaken some of their fellow believers, has not been in vain.[18]
As he has highlighted throughout his letter, this statement further confirms that Christians have an eternal hope during our “temporary residence” (1:17) in a hostile world.
One additional note. The phrase about preaching the gospel to those who are dead continues with the purpose of that gospel preaching while they were alive, “so that they might be judged according to men in regard to the body, but live according to God in regard to the spirit” (4:6b, emphasis added).
Our discussion included some concern about the word “might.” Did Peter mean that the intended result (spiritual life in God) might or might not happen? We very briefly talked about the grammar of the passage, but later I wrote another (and I hope at least a little clearer) explanation about how “may” and “might” are translated into English from New Testament Greek. That attempt at clarification is at “’May’ and ‘Might’ in Scripture.”[19]
One Command
One of the suggestions on the handout (in the “Observation” section) was to circle all the commands in the passage. During our discussion, one person hesitantly mentioned they could only find one, “arm yourselves” in 4:1.
And, indeed, that is the only command, the only imperative verb that Peter uses in this passage. Someone else noted that the single command is the application of the “therefore” that begins the sentence. Based on all he has said, especially about the suffering and the perseverance of Christ, Peter expects his audience to adopt the same attitude (NIV) or way of thinking (ESV) or purpose (NASB). Jesus persevered because of His single-minded attitude, “My food is to do the will of him who sent me and accomplish his work” (John 4:34). He “endured the cross for the joy set before Him,” the joy of returning to be with the Father at His right hand (Hebrews 12:2). That is the attitude Peter describes with “arm yourselves.”
Intermingled with the familiar encouragements about Christ’s sacrifice and resurrection are the “red flag” reminders. Those statements provide the “ammunition” for arming ourselves with an attitude consistent with what Christ’s has done.
-
- “He went and preached to the spirits in prison”
After His resurrection and during His ascension, Jesus proclaimed His victory and authority over the fallen spirits.
In this, Peter confirms:
Christ has been victorious over a hostile world. - “Baptism now saves you”
Like Noah’s deliverance from a hostile world through water, baptism with our pledge of faith displays our salvation through Christ’s resurrection.
In this, Peter confirms:
We have deliverance from the lifestyle of the hostile world. - “He who has suffered in the body is done with sin”
The changed behavior growing out of our new life brings rejection and suffering from the unbelieving world.
In this, Peter confirms:
Our progress against sin is shown by suffering endured from a hostile world. - “The gospel was preached to those who are dead”
The faith may be ridiculed because some believers have died, but spiritual life in God continues after physical death for those who accepted the gospel while living.
In this, Peter confirms:
We have eternal hope during our “temporary residence” in a hostile world.
- “He went and preached to the spirits in prison”
Those “red flags” turn out not to be warnings in a minefield. They are helpful markers along the narrow road that leads to eternal life.
[1] Dr. Oswald Smith, quoted in James F. Nyquist, Leading Bible Discussions (Chicago: Inter-Varsity Press, 1968), 29.
[2] Thomas R. Schreiner, 1 & 2 Peter and Jude, Christian Standard Commentary (Nashville: Holman, 2020), 213.
[3] https://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/creeds2.iv.i.i.i.html
[4] J. I. Packer, Affirming the Apostles’ Creed (Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway Books2008), 86-87.
[5] Greg W. Forbes, 1 Peter, Exegetical Guide to the Greek New Testament (Nashville: B&H Publishing Group, 2014), 125.
[6] Thomas R. Schreiner, 1 & 2 Peter and Jude, Christian Standard Commentary (Nashville: Holman, 2020), 212.
[7] https://www.desiringgod.org/interviews/why-does-the-bible-say-baptism-saves-us
[8] W. Bauer, F.W. Danker, W.F. Arndt, and F.W. Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 982
[9] Henry George Liddell and Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon (London: Oxford University Press, 1961), 1748 (1803 in PDF).
[10] https://www.billmounce.com/greek-dictionary/dia
[11] Karen H. Jobes, 1 Peter, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2011), 252.
[12] Paul J. Achtemeier, 1 Peter, Hermeneia – A Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996), 268.
[13] Thomas R. Schreiner, 1 & 2 Peter and Jude, Christian Standard Commentary (Nashville: Holman, 2020), 229.
[14] Karen H. Jobes, 1 Peter, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2011), 262.
[15] https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/1%20Peter%204%3A6
[16] Thomas R. Schreiner, 1 & 2 Peter and Jude, Christian Standard Commentary (Nashville: Holman, 2020), 236.
[17] Thomas R. Schreiner, 1 & 2 Peter and Jude, Christian Standard Commentary (Nashville: Holman, 2020), 237.
[18] Paul J. Achtemeier, 1 Peter, Hermeneia – A Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996), 291.
[19] http://www.goodnotsafe.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/May-and-Might-in-Scripture.pdf
For additional details,
https://www.goodnotsafe.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Subjunctive-Mood-%E2%80%93-A-Summary.pdf