1 Peter – Chapter Three – The Doctor's Office

Earlier in chapter two, the Apostle Peter discussed the importance of pursuing a God-honoring life in four specific areas. Those areas related to…

Our personal lives (2:11-12, 2:16).
Our relationship to the state (2:13-14).
Our relationships with others (2:17).
Our attitudes and behaviors in the workplace (2:18-20).

Our author will now continue his exploration of that theme as we transition into chapter three.

This chapter will introduce two additional areas of emphasis: home and family life, and the qualities that should characterize our interaction with the people of God. Finally, Peter will conclude this portion of his letter with a reference to a historical event that poses a significant interpretive challenge. But first, our divinely inspired author will offer some marital counsel to the wives among the members of his audience…

“Wives, likewise, be submissive to your own husbands, that even if some do not obey the word, they, without a word, may be won by the conduct of their wives, when they observe your chaste conduct accompanied by fear” (1 Peter 3:1-2).

There are some aspects of these verses that are certain to irritate contemporary audiences. First among those irritants is likely to be, “Wives… be submissive to your own husbands.” But before we impose our personal ideologies and opinions upon this reference to “submission,” let’s consider a more advantageous approach. To better understand and apply this portion of Scripture, let’s focus on the word “submissive” in the original language of 1 Peter 3:1.

For instance, one source defines this word in the following manner: “to obey, [or] be subject [to].” It then continues with some additional insight…

“[This word derives from] A Greek military term meaning to arrange [troop divisions] in a military fashion under the command of a leader. In non-military use, it was a voluntary attitude of giving in, cooperating, assuming responsibility, and carrying a burden.” ₍₁₎

Thus, we can start by acknowledging that this reference to “submission” does not imply inferiority of any kind. Furthermore, this passage does not oblige a wife to adopt a servile position within the marriage relationship. Instead, this passage highlights a willingness to embrace a subordinate role. Ideally, that willingness should reflect an attitude of voluntary cooperation that harmonizes with God’s stated intent from Genesis 2:18…

“And the Lord God said, ‘It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him.’”

We’ll continue our review of this passage with a look at some applications from this verse next.

G5293 Hupotasso https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g5293/kjv/tr/0-1/

“Likewise, wives, be subject to your own husbands, so that even if some do not obey the word, they may be won without a word by the conduct of their wives, when they see your respectful and pure conduct” (1 Peter 3:1-2 ESV).

As we seek to interpret and apply this portion of Scripture, it may be helpful to view this passage in terms of responsibility. For instance, 1 Peter 3:1-2 highlights one such area of responsibility in advising wives to defer to their husbands within the marital relationship. Nevertheless, we should view this counsel in parallel with another passage from the Biblical book of Ephesians…

“Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ” (Ephesians 5:21 NIV).

This directive to “submit to one another” implies there may be times when it is proper for a man to submit to a woman within the marriage relationship. For example, let’s consider a hypothetical husband and wife couple. Like most couples, each partner in our hypothetical relationship possesses various strengths and weaknesses.

A wise couple will recognize those strengths and weaknesses and willingly submit to one another in those areas where one partner demonstrates greater skill. In this way, both partners show “reverence for Christ” (the One who has blessed them with their individual gifts, skills, talents, and abilities), as well as respect for one other.

To illustrate this approach in the lives of our hypothetical couple, let’s say that a wife is highly gifted in the area of financial management. However, her husband is only marginally skilled in that area. In this instance, a wise husband will recognize his wife’s financial savvy and defer to her judgment in matters of budget, savings, retirement planning, etc.

While each partner may assume a leadership role in his or area of expertise, those differences do not make them unequal. Nevertheless, some may ask “who ultimately wins?” in an area of marital disagreement. While this may seem to be an appropriate question, it starts with a questionable premise. Since a husband and wife have become “one flesh” (Mark 10:6-9), if one partner “loses,” then both lose.

If there are strong disagreements in a marriage relationship, there are a few steps that couples can take to help find the right answer. Those steps include praying together (Matthew 18:20, James 1:5), as well as seeking guidance from trusted and mature men and women of God (Proverbs 1:5). While a husband must ultimately take responsibility to lead in an area of disagreement, he should do so in recognition of the counsel given to us in Ephesians 5:33:

“… each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband” (NIV).

III

“In the same way, wives, be subject to your own husbands. Then, even if some are disobedient to the word, they will be won over without a word by the way you live, when they see your pure and reverent conduct” (1 Peter 3:1-2 NET).

As we close our look at this passage, we should note that this verse applies to women and their “own husbands.” Thus, our text does not impose a universal obligation upon women to submit to men, with the exception of their husbands.

These verses also recognize the general truth behind the adage, “actions speak louder than words.” For example, consider the following translation of this passage: “Some husbands may not obey God’s word. Their wives could win these men for Christ by the way they live without saying anything” (GW). In making this statement, 1 Peter 3:1-2 offers a strategy that God-honoring wives might employ for the benefit of their non-Christian husbands.

While our words are undoubtedly important, our character and God-honoring behaviors often exert a greater influence upon others than anything we might say. One Biblical commentator summarizes this idea in light of the cultural framework that underscored this passage…

“In ancient Roman culture, the wife was expected to adopt the religion of her husband, and some of the Christian women in the Asian churches apparently had unbelieving spouses. Peter urges these Christian wives to avoid insubordinate behavior even as they remained believers in the Savior. Rather, their gentle responsiveness will commend the gospel to their unbelieving spouses. The enduring principle involved in this statement is not strict verbal silence (v. 15), but a submissive demeanor and sensitivity to the concerns of the unbelieving husband (see v. 2) so that the gospel may be presented in the best light.” ₍₁₎

Finally, we have this seemingly unusual reference to “chaste conduct accompanied by fear” (NKJV). As mentioned in our earlier look at 1 Peter 1:17, the word “fear” often communicates an attitude of respect when used in a Biblical context. Thus, a wife who adopts an attitude of reverence for God’s Word in this matter may prompt a reciprocal attitude of respect from her husband.

However, we might approach this verse from another perspective. For instance, this passage may address wives who are fearful of what their husbands might demand if they were to put this verse into practice. In such instances, it may be helpful to recall another old adage: “If we fear God, we need fear nothing else.”

(1) R. C. Sproul, ed., The Reformation Study Bible: English Standard Version (2015 Edition) (Orlando, FL: Reformation Trust, 2015), 2246.

“Do not let your adornment be merely outward–arranging the hair, wearing gold, or putting on fine apparel–rather let it be the hidden person of the heart, with the incorruptible beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is very precious in the sight of God” (1 Peter 3:3-4).

Our text from 1 Peter 3:3-4 now leads into a discussion regarding the comparative worth of internal and external beauty. Since a physically attractive person may still be an ugly individual, this passage reminds us that genuine beauty starts from the inside out. The Old Testament book of Proverbs draws our attention to this reality when it tells us, “Charm is deceitful and beauty is passing, But a woman who fears the Lord, she shall be praised” (Proverbs 31:30).

Despite this, many societies and cultures tend to prioritize external beauty above all else. For example, “looking good” is always a fashionable quality, while “being good” is much less so. Nevertheless, this does not mean it’s wrong to try to look our best. As one author observes, “Peter was not here condemning all outward adornment. His condemnation is for incessant preoccupation with the outward to the disregard of one’s character (v. 4; cf. 1Ti 2:9, 10).” ₍₁₎

Our passage from 1 Peter 3:3-4 emphasizes this point, as does the Biblical letter of 1 Timothy…

“And I want the women to make themselves attractive in the right way. Their clothes should be sensible and appropriate. They should not draw attention to themselves with fancy hairstyles or gold jewelry or pearls or expensive clothes. But they should make themselves attractive by the good things they do. That is more appropriate for women who say they are devoted to God” (1 Timothy 2:9-10 ERV).

Finally, it’s interesting to note that the word translated “adornment” is “kosmos” in the original language of this passage. This is the word from which we derive our modern-day word “cosmetics.” As one commentator explains…

“The word ‘adornment’ is the translation of the Greek word Kosmos which was used in classical Greek to refer to the adornment or the ornaments worn by women. The word in itself refers to an ordered system, namely, a system where order prevails…

Here the word refers to the adornment of the woman, and the genius of the word speaks of the fact that that adornment should be that which is fitting, congruous, not diverse from one’s character. That is, the adornment of the Christian woman should be in keeping with what she is as a Christian. She should not be a Christian at heart and her adornment be that of a person of the world.” ₍₂₎

(1) John F. MacArthur Jr., The MacArthur Study Bible: New American Standard Bible. (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2006), 1 Pe 3:3.

“Your beauty should not consist of outward things like elaborate hairstyles and the wearing of gold ornaments or fine clothes. Instead, it should consist of what is inside the heart with the imperishable quality of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is very valuable in God’s eyes” (1 Peter 3:3-4 HCSB).

Genuine beauty starts from within, and our external appearance often serves to reflect our internal character. Thus, our internal relationship with God in Christ should be evident in our outward appearance. That brings us to the hairstyles mentioned here in 1 Peter 3:3-4.

An affluent woman of that era often sought to adorn herself in a manner that highlighted her jewelry and accessories. Elaborate hairstyles embellished with golden bands, pearls, or other forms of jewelry typically crowned those adornments. One source amusingly describes those hairstyles as an “…excess of mountainous coiffures with terraces of braids, which were popular in ancient Rome.” ₍₁₎

Thus, we can say that this verse does not contain a universal prohibition against the use of cosmetics, braided hairstyles, jewelry, or fashionable clothing. With this in mind, it’s important to distinguish between “attractiveness” and “drawing attention to oneself.” It is that latter distinction that our author takes issue with. Although our text is devoted to women, this concept applies to everyone: a Godly attitude should govern our appearance.

One author expands upon this idea by highlighting other gratuitous or self-promotional forms of expression…

“Christians are to spend more time developing their inner character than attempting to make themselves look beautiful on the outside (1 Sam. 16:7). Peter is not condemning women who wear jewelry. He is emphasizing the importance of a woman’s character. We can spend most of our lives on things that are transitory rather than on things that are permanent—such as what clothes or jewelry we wear, or the car we drive. It is not wrong to be involved in temporal things, but we must put special effort into the development of inner character (compare 1 Tim. 2:9, 10).” ₍₂₎

Thus, we should ask if our appearance lends dignity to our relationship with Christ. Of course, the answer to that question will often vary according to our activities. For instance, a person who is running a weekend errand, a person who is relaxing at home, and a person who is attending a formal event will each answer that question differently. Nevertheless, we should avoid an unhealthy emphasis on our external appearance at the expense of our internal character wherever we happen to be.

(1) William Macdonald, Believer’s Bible Commentary Edited by Arthur Farstad, Thomas Nelson Publishers [pg. 2267]

(2) Earl D. Radmacher, Ronald Barclay Allen, and H. Wayne House, Nelson’s New Illustrated Bible Commentary (Nashville: T. Nelson Publishers, 1999), 1683.

“Your beauty should not come from outward adornment, such as elaborate hairstyles and the wearing of gold jewelry or fine clothes. Rather, it should be that of your inner self, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is of great worth in God’s sight” (1 Peter 3:3-4 NIV).

This passage offers an opportunity to discuss a Biblical approach that can benefit anyone who seeks to cultivate a God-honoring worldview. While the Greco-Roman culture that prompted these instructions has long since faded into history, these verses present us with underlying principles that are relevant to any era.

We can begin with the acknowledgment that certain Biblical standards are immutable, or unchanging. However, the manner in which we observe those standards may vary from age to age or culture to culture. This simple principle is one that can help us interpret and apply God’s Word in a changing culture.

The following observations on this topic are worthy of our attention…

“…there is a difference between command and culture. The commands of Scripture are absolute—culture is relative. For example, few believe that Jesus’ command to His disciples not to have an extra pair of sandals with them while on an evangelistic tour applies today. And most Christians do not literally ‘Greet all the brethren with a holy kiss’ anymore (1 Thes. 5:26). Nor do they believe that ‘lifting up holy hands in prayer’ is essential to public prayer (1 Tim. 2:8).

There is a principle behind all these commands that is absolute, but the practice is not. What Christians must do is absolute, but how they do it is culturally relative. For example, Christians must greet one another (the what), but how they greet each other will be relative to their respective cultures. In some cultures, as in the NT, it will be with a kiss, in others with a hug, and in still others with a handshake.”₍₁₎

With this in mind, we can draw several practical applications from this passage…

We should seek to dress in a manner that reflects well upon our relationship with God.
We should avoid dressing in a way that seeks to occupy the attention of others. Instead, our need for approval, acceptance, and attention should find its fulfillment in Christ.
If God should bestow us with financial or material prosperity, we must be discerning and refrain from showing off such things in our appearance.

So this passage reminds us that a Godly attitude should govern our appearance. This principle is just as valid today as it was for those who lived in the Biblical era.

(1) Geisler, N. L., & Howe, T. A. (1992). When critics ask : a popular handbook on Bible difficulties (pp. 459–460). Wheaton, Ill.: Victor Books.

VII

“For in this manner, in former times, the holy women who trusted in God also adorned themselves, being submissive to their own husbands, as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord, whose daughters you are if you do good and are not afraid with any terror” (1 Peter 3:5-6).

Throughout his letter, the Apostle Peter has touched upon the concept of submission in various contexts. Those contexts involved our relationships with civil authorities, our workplace relationships, and our spousal relationships. Jesus serves as our example in this regard, for He willingly submitted to God’s plan for human redemption (1 Peter 2:21-25).

Here in verse six, Peter revisits that topic in the person of Sarah, the great Old Testament matriarch. Sarah was first known as Sarai, a name meaning “princess” (Genesis 11:29). Sarai was known by that name until God changed it to “Sarah” (or “noblewoman”) in Genesis 17:15. She was married to Abraham, the father of all who call upon God in faith. Sarah once had a memorable encounter that Peter referenced in this passage in order to make an important point…

“And [God] said [to Abraham], ‘I will certainly return to you according to the time of life, and behold, Sarah your wife shall have a son.’ (Sarah was listening in the tent door which was behind him.) Now Abraham and Sarah were old, well advanced in age; and Sarah had passed the age of childbearing. Therefore Sarah laughed within herself, saying, ‘After I have grown old, shall I have pleasure, my lord being old also?’” (Genesis 18:10-12).

Although Sarah’s reference to her husband as “lord” is undoubtedly discomfiting to some contemporary audiences, this word actually has several meanings. For instance, the word “lord” may translate to “God,” “owner,” “mister,” or “sir,” depending on the context. In this instance, the latter two designations (“sir,” or “mister”) are in view.

This tells us that Sarah employed this title as an expression of respect for Abraham. As one source adds, “In the patriarchal period, it was a polite way to address someone of higher authority or one to whose status one wished to defer…” ₍₁₎ However, that element of respect worked both ways in their marriage relationship. For instance, we’re told that Abraham deferred to Sarah on at least one occasion, a response that God later affirmed (see Genesis 21:1-12).

Thus, Peter reminded his audience that Sarah treated Abraham with the same respect she desired in return. In setting that example, Sarah lived out a principle that Jesus would later codify: “Do to others as you would have them do to you” (Luke 6:31 NIV).

(1) Craig S. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary [1 Peter 3:6].

VIII

“For this is how the holy women who hoped in God used to adorn themselves, by submitting to their own husbands, as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord. And you are her children, if you do good and do not fear anything that is frightening” (1 Peter 3:5-6 ESV).

While it may be natural to focus upon this reference to “…Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord” in this passage, one source reminds us that Sarah also displayed a remarkable depth of character…

“In holding up Sarah as a model, Peter emphasized her good works and courageous faith (compare Heb. 11:11). She followed Abraham into some risky situations where courage and righteous living were required (Gen. 12:15; 20:2).” ₍₁₎

So how might we emulate Sarah and follow her example? There are several areas where a God-honoring woman may put these verses into practice. To assist in identifying such areas, here are some questions we might ask…

Do I invest in my personal spiritual growth by prayerfully reading the Scriptures each day and allowing God to speak to me directly from His Word? (Hebrews 4:12).
Do I seek God regularly for the wisdom, perception, and discernment necessary to address the challenges of everyday life? (James 1:5).
Have I worked to develop the God-given talents, skills, abilities, and opportunities I possess? (Proverbs 31:10-31)
Does my appearance honor God, my husband, my family, and myself? (1 Peter 3:3–5).
Have there been areas where I have permitted the desire referenced in Genesis 3:16 to grow into an unhealthy effort to control various aspects of my marital relationship?
What value do I place upon my husband? Where do his needs appear upon my scale of priorities? (1 Corinthians 11:3).
A woman of discretion knows that her private conversations and intimate knowledge of her husband’s vulnerabilities and shortcomings should not be shared with others. Has that been the case in my life? (Proverbs 31:11).
Consider the counsel offered to women in the New Testament book of Titus. Have I slandered others in my conversations, abused alcohol, or lived irreverently? (Titus 2:3).
Continuing in the book of Titus, have I taken responsibility to teach younger generations of women and set the right example for them? If I have had many years of marital life, do I “…urge the younger women to love their husbands and children?” Or, if I am a young, unmarried woman, have I offered the right example for young girls to follow? (Titus 2:4-5).

Answers to these questions can help women of God follow Sarah’s good example in their lives.

(1) Earl D. Radmacher, Ronald Barclay Allen, and H. Wayne House, Nelson’s New Illustrated Bible Commentary (Nashville: T. Nelson Publishers, 1999), 1684.

“For this is the way the holy women of the past who put their hope in God used to adorn themselves. They submitted themselves to their own husbands, like Sarah, who obeyed Abraham and called him her lord. You are her daughters if you do what is right and do not give way to fear” (1 Peter 3:5-6 NIV).

This reference to “…do what is right and do not give way to fear ” offers a chance to consider one of life’s greatest immaterial fears: the fear of what might happen. We often encapsulate that fear in a phrase that represents one of the most helpful or destructive questions we can ask: “What if…”

On one hand, the phrase “what if” can lead us to devise innovative solutions for challenging problems. On the other hand, “what if” questions might lead us to dwell upon a myriad of negative possibilities that may come to pass. That often leads to undue stress, apprehension, and/or worry; things that God would have us avoid.

You see, the person who fixates on every negative outcome that might occur is someone who takes the focus of attention off the God who has promised to care for our needs. Two Old Testament books -the book of Psalms and the book of Proverbs- each address this subject…

“Have no fear of sudden disaster or of the ruin that overtakes the wicked, for the Lord will be at your side and will keep your foot from being snared” (Proverbs 3:25-26 NIV).

“The fear of man brings a snare, But whoever trusts in the Lord shall be safe” (Proverbs 29:25).

“Even though I walk through the darkest valley, I will fear no evil, for you are with me; your rod and your staff, they comfort me” (Psalm 23:4 NIV).

“The Lord is my light and my salvation— whom shall I fear? The Lord is the stronghold of my life— of whom shall I be afraid?” (Psalm 27:1 NIV).

To this, Jesus added the following reminder in the Gospel of Luke…

“I tell you, my friends, do not be afraid of those who kill the body and after that can do no more. But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear him who, after your body has been killed, has authority to throw you into hell. Yes, I tell you, fear him” (Luke 12:4-5 NIV).

Thus, as one commentator reminds us, “True submission, full of faith in God, has no room for fear or terror – it does good and leaves the result to God, not man.” ₍₁₎

(1) Guzik, David, 1 Peter 3 – Submission And Suffering © Copyright – Enduring Word https://enduringword.com/bible-commentary/1-peter-3/

“Husbands, likewise, dwell with them with understanding, giving honor to the wife, as to the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life, that your prayers may not be hindered” (1 Peter 3:7).

Just as wives assume a God-given role within a marriage relationship, the same is true for husbands. 1 Peter 3:7 highlights some of those responsibilities beginning with the qualities of honor, understanding, and a recognition of the couple’s joint status as “…heirs together of the grace of life.” For instance, this passage tells us that a God-honoring husband should not expect his wife to exceed her physical capabilities. He also recognizes that his failure to act upon these directives will negatively impact his own relationship with God.

For example, the husband must take the lead in identifying and meeting his wife’s needs to ensure that she is loved, honored, and secure within their relationship. He must also be mindful that his wife is a daughter of the God he serves. Therefore, he must interact with her in an appropriate and considerate manner that honors Christ.

In fact, many of the attributes of a God honoring wife apply to a God-honoring husband as well. For instance, a husband might ask the following questions of himself…

Do I invest in my personal spiritual growth by prayerfully reading the Scriptures each day and allowing God to speak to me directly from His Word?
Do I seek God regularly for wisdom (knowing how to respond to the variables of daily life), perception (a truthful and accurate assessment of a given situation), and discernment (the ability to see things as they really are)?
Have I worked to develop the God-given talents, skills, abilities, and opportunities I possess?
Does my appearance honor God, my wife, my family, and myself?
Have I sought to rule over my wife (Genesis 3:16) instead of dwelling with her with understanding as we’re told here in 1 Peter 3:7?
What value do I place upon my wife? Where does she appear on my priority list?
1 Peter 4:8 will later tell us, “…love covers a multitude of sins” (ESV). Have I ensured that my knowledge of my wife’s faults and vulnerabilities remains confidential?

Finally, we should expect sinful human beings to exhibit their shortcomings in a marriage relationship. We should not deny the existence of those faults, no matter how much we may wish to believe otherwise. When our spouses demonstrate their failings, we must accept their reality and respond in a God-honoring manner. A caring spouse will seek to help his or her partner overcome such things by implementing these instructions from 1 Peter 3:1-7.

“Finally, all of you be of one mind, having compassion for one another; love as brothers, be tenderhearted, be courteous” (1 Peter 3:8).

1 Peter 3:8 leads us into a practical discussion concerning the qualities that help identify a life that honors God. These qualities are relevant to everyone, as indicated by Peter’s opening address to “all of you.” This passage also covers five distinct areas:

be of one mind, a phrase that implies the need to work toward a shared result. One such result involves the development of Christ-like character in our relationships with one another. That commitment is manifested in the following qualities…
having compassion for one another, a statement that evokes an attitude of kindness and benevolence towards other members of the household of faith.
love as brothers, an expression that encourages us to pursue the type of loving relationships that typically exist among close family members.
be tenderhearted. This represents a mindset that is 180 degrees removed from the one given to us in the New Testament epistle of James: “Suppose you see a brother or sister who has no food or clothing, and you say, ‘Good-bye and have a good day; stay warm and eat well’—but then you don’t give that person any food or clothing. What good does that do?” (James 2:15-16 NLT).
be courteous, a behavior that is associated with the characteristics of graciousness and respect.

These five characteristics help set God’s people apart in a world that is often cold and despondent. This doesn’t mean that every Christian will enjoy a harmonious relationship with every other Christian, but we should strive to exhibit these qualities in our relationships with others through God’s empowerment. In the words of one commentary…

“It is not expected that Christians will see eye-to-eye on everything. That would be uniformity, not unity. The best formula is contained in the well-known expression: In fundamentals, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in everything, love.” ₍₁₎

In one sense, these instructions build upon our author’s earlier encouragement to “…love one another fervently with a pure heart” (1 Peter 1:22). Thus, it is helpful to remember that “love” is not necessarily synonymous with the external display of emotional affection. Instead, genuine love is something that originates in the will. If we always felt naturally affectionate towards one another, there would be little need for the instructions we find here in 1 Peter 3:8.

We’ll continue our exploration of this topic with a closer look at this mandate to “love as brothers” next.

(1) William Macdonald, Believer’s Bible Commentary Edited by Arthur Farstad, Thomas Nelson Publishers [pg. 2361]

XII

“Finally, all of you, have unity of mind, sympathy, brotherly love, a tender heart, and a humble mind” (1 Peter 3:8 ESV).

Virtually everyone recognizes the importance of family loyalty. For instance, business professionals typically help their sons and daughters begin their careers. Politicians assist their relatives. Parents leave an inheritance for their children. Nevertheless, this emphasis upon family loyalty extends beyond biological or adoptive bonds.

For instance, sports teams, enthusiast groups, and alumni associations often share a family-like connection. Even mobsters and gang members look upon fellow members as “brothers.” If these associations are valid for those individuals, then the same should hold true among the members of the Christian community as well.

However, even the closest of family members will surely encounter differences from time to time. Those differences have the potential to occur within a church family as well. For instance, we may live with an irritating family member. The same may occur within a church family, too. Some family members may disagree with an authority figure within their family. That may also happen among the members of a church family.

For better or worse, biological families and church communities often share the same family dynamics. For example, some members of our church family might interact with us in unexpected ways. We might draw an unanticipated response from those whose experience differs from our own. There may be generational differences in communication styles. Some may be more or less mature, and others may hold attitudes or viewpoints that differ from our own. However, these realities do not negate our responsibility to maintain brotherly love and work to get along with one another in Christ.

The Biblical book of Romans tells us, “Be devoted to one another in brotherly love. Honor one another above yourselves” (Romans 12:10 NIV). This passage reminds us that we must sometimes subordinate our interests for the benefit of others. There may even be times when wisdom requires us to minimize our interaction with certain individuals in order to maintain the best possible relationship (see Acts 15:36-41 for an example).

However, we should remember that love always seeks another person’s highest good from a Biblical perspective. As we’re told in the New Testament epistle of 1 John…

“If someone says, ‘I love God,’ but hates a fellow believer, that person is a liar; for if we don’t love people we can see, how can we love God, whom we cannot see? And he has given us this command: Those who love God must also love their fellow believers.” (1 John 4:20-21 NLT).

XIII

“not returning evil for evil or reviling for reviling, but on the contrary blessing, knowing that you were called to this, that you may inherit a blessing” (1 Peter 3:9).

It seems that cinematic vigilantes who seek punish evil are never in short supply. These movie characters are sometimes portrayed as men of few words who take the law into their own hands. They are often brooding loners and anti-heroes who are quick to solve problems with their fists or guns. They are men of violent action who serve as judge, jury, and executioner- and there are millions of movie-watchers who undoubtedly wish they could solve their problems in a similar manner, if only for a day.

These images stand in stark contrast to the counsel given to us here in 1 Peter 3:9: “Don’t pay back evil for evil or insult for insult…” (CEB). This represents one of the more challenging aspects of the Christian life, for it is often difficult to avoid the urge to strike back at who injure us. But such retaliatory measures often produce a negative cycle: someone hurts us, so we hurt that person back. The second person hurts us again in return, and the cycle continues.

To break that cycle, we must implement the teaching given to us here in 1 Peter 3:9: “Do not repay evil for evil or reviling for reviling, but on the contrary, bless, for to this you were called, that you may obtain a blessing” (ESV). This aligns with Jesus’ teaching from the Sermon on the Mount…

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust” (Matthew 5:43-45).

The Gospel of Luke adds…

“Love your enemies! Do good to them. Lend to them without expecting to be repaid. Then your reward from heaven will be very great, and you will truly be acting as children of the Most High, for he is kind to those who are unthankful and wicked. You must be compassionate, just as your Father is compassionate” (Luke 6:35-36 NLT).

We’ll continue with a further look at these passages in the context of 1 Peter 3:9 next.

XIV

“Do not return evil for evil or insult for insult, but instead bless others because you were called to inherit a blessing” (1 Peter 3:9 NET).

Our text from 1 Peter 3:9 echoes a portion of Jesus’ teaching from the Beatitudes…

For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet your brethren only, what do you do more than others? Do not even the tax collectors do so?” (Matthew 5:43-47).

That brings us to the characteristics of love as described in 1 Corinthians 13:4-8…

“Love suffers long and is kind; love does not envy; love does not parade itself, is not puffed up; does not behave rudely, does not seek its own, is not provoked, thinks no evil; does not rejoice in iniquity, but rejoices in the truth; bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never fails…”

So Jesus encouraged us to “love your enemies.” This, of course, assumes that we will encounter enemies in our lives, or at least those who fail to get along with us. Jesus taught us to respond to those individuals in love, but why? Why should we avoid returning evil for evil or insult for insult? Well, the answer is hiding in plain sight within our text from Matthew 5:45: “that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous.”

1 John 4:7-11 summarizes that counsel for us in the following manner…

“Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love. This is how God showed his love among us: He sent his one and only Son into the world that we might live through him. This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins. Dear friends, since God so loved us, we also ought to love one another” (NIV).

“For ‘He who would love life And see good days, Let him refrain his tongue from evil, And his lips from speaking deceit. Let him turn away from evil and do good; Let him seek peace and pursue it’” (1 Peter 3:10-11).

The Apostle Peter will quote extensively from Psalm 34:12-16 in verses ten to twelve. Within these verses, we find a few simple directions for getting along with others in life. Not surprisingly, those directives largely involve watching the things we say. Perhaps the greatest Biblical discourse on this subject appears in the New Testament book of James…

“Look also at ships: although they are so large and are driven by fierce winds, they are turned by a very small rudder wherever the pilot desires. Even so the tongue is a little member and boasts great things… For every kind of beast and bird, of reptile and creature of the sea, is tamed and has been tamed by mankind. But no man can tame the tongue. It is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison” (James 3: 4-5, 7-8).

A person on a ship without the control of a rudder is likely to end up in a bad place. The same can be said for the self-destructive words of a person who cannot control his or her tongue. But a person like that doesn’t live in isolation, for his or her words have an effect upon others as well. For instance, how many individuals have suffered injury because someone foolishly said the wrong thing at the wrong time? How many fights, misunderstandings, and disagreements have occurred because someone could not control his or her tongue?

Remember that Jesus said, “…out of the overflow of the heart the mouth speaks. The good man brings good things out of the good stored up in him, and the evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in him” (Matthew 12:34-35). Those who cannot control their tongues are like rudderless ships that eventually bring shipwreck to others.

The Biblical books of Proverbs and Ecclesiastes offer several reminders on this subject…

“The wicked are trapped by their own words, but the godly escape such trouble” (Proverbs 12:13 NLT).

“Smart people keep quiet about what they know, but stupid people advertise their ignorance” (Proverbs 12:23 GNB).

“A wise person’s heart controls his speech, and what he says helps others learn” (Proverbs 16:23 GW).

“The words of a wise person win him favor, but the words of a fool are self-destructive” (Ecclesiastes 10:12 NET).

To this, we might add one additional reminder: “Too much talk leads to sin. Be sensible and keep your mouth shut” (Proverbs 10:19 NLT).

XVI

“For the eyes of the Lord are on the righteous, And His ears are open to their prayers; But the face of the Lord is against those who do evil. And who is he who will harm you if you become followers of what is good?” (1 Peter 3:12-13)

Finite human beings often struggle to comprehend the person and nature of God. One way to enrich our understanding of God’s relationship to humanity involves the use of a literary tool known as an anthropomorphism. An anthropomorphism refers to a figure of speech in which human abilities (such as vision or hearing) or human emotion (such as anger or jealousy) are attributed to God.

These familiar terms can help us better comprehend and understand our Creator. The passage quoted above exemplifies this by ascribing the physical attributes of eyesight and hearing to the Lord. One Biblical scholar ties these references together in the larger context of 1 Peter chapter three…

“The Apostle Peter quotes Psalm 34 to affirm that ‘the eyes of the lord are on the righteous, and his ears are open to their prayer’ (1 Peter 3:12). Since the previous verses encourage good conduct in everyday life, in things such as refraining from speaking evil and turning away from evil and doing right, Peter is saying that God readily hears the prayers of those who live lives of obedience to him.” ₍₁₎

Peter continues with another literary device in the following verse: “Who will harm you if you are zealous for good?” (CEB). This example showcases the use of a rhetorical question as a literary tool. A rhetorical question features an obvious answer that serves to emphasize a point or validate an opinion. Unlike other types of questions, a rhetorical question does not seek to elicit information. Instead, the answer to a rhetorical question is self-evident.

The rhetorical question in 1 Peter 3:13 makes several points in light of the preceding verses. First, no one is likely to harm us if we bless others and do not return “evil for evil or reviling for reviling” (verse nine). Others are not likely to hurt us if we refrain from evil and deceitful speech (verse ten). People are unlikely to injure us if we turn from evil, do good, seek peace, and pursue it (verse eleven). Nevertheless, as one commentator observes, “Doing good will not harm anyone, but one may suffer for so doing.” ₍₂₎

Finally, we would not normally expect to find such tools in the literary toolbox of someone like Peter, a man who formerly served as a humble fisherman. Thus, this passage reminds us of what Jesus can accomplish in the lives of those who follow Him.

(1) Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine, Second Edition (Grand Rapids, Ml: Zondervan Academic, 2020).

(2) Charles Caldwell Ryrie, Ryrie Study Bible: New American Standard Bible, 1995 Update, Expanded ed. (Chicago: Moody Press, 1995), 1981.

XVII

“But even if you should suffer for righteousness’ sake, you are blessed. ‘And do not be afraid of their threats, nor be troubled’” (1 Peter 3:14).

While no one is likely to hurt us if we bless others and do not return “evil for evil or reviling for reviling” (1 Peter 3:9), that does not represent an absolute guarantee. Unfortunately, human life often seems filled with such ironies, as mentioned earlier. For instance, those who give their best effort may go unrewarded. Those who act honorably are sometimes mocked for it. A person who attempts to do what is right may see his or her efforts go horribly wrong.

To be fair, such results may occur if we fail to pray and seek God’s direction in advance. On other occasions, we may have attempted to pursue a work that fell beyond the scope of God’s plan for our lives. Nevertheless, we should account for the possibility we are simply called to “…suffer for doing what is right” (NET) in certain instances. That has been the experience of many prominent men and women of God within the Scriptures and throughout history.

Our text from 1 Peter 3:14 assures us that we are blessed in such instances. However, Jesus also reminded us of an opposing truth as well: “Woe to you when all people speak well of you, for this is the way their ancestors used to treat the false prophets” (Luke 6:26 CSB). A modern paraphrase of this verse accentuates that contrast for contemporary audiences: “…what sadness is ahead for those praised by the crowds—for false prophets have always been praised” (TLB).

1 Peter 3:14 then continues with an image drawn from the book of the Old Testament prophet Isaiah: “…do not be afraid of their threats, nor be troubled.” A closer look at that reference from Isaiah demonstrates its value in a modern-day world marked by conspiracy theorists of every sort…

“Do not call conspiracy everything this people calls a conspiracy; do not fear what they fear, and do not dread it. The Lord Almighty is the one you are to regard as holy, he is the one you are to fear, he is the one you are to dread” (Isaiah 8:12-13 NIV).

One source illuminates the background of this passage from Isaiah and its application to Peter’s argument…

“In context, Isaiah was encouraging the Jews in light of an impending invasion by the Assyrian armies, along with a hostile confederacy uniting Syria and the Northern Kingdom of Israel against Judah. Peter appropriated God’s promise as applying also to the Christians of any period who might be facing persecution.” ₍₁₎

(1) Institute for Creation Research, New Defender’s Study Bible Notes, 1 Peter 3:14 https://www.icr.org/bible/1Peter/3/14/

XVIII

“But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts, and always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear” (1 Peter 3:15).

While every Biblical passage is important, some verses carry greater significance. 1 Peter 3:15 is one such verse. Given the importance of this passage, we will work our way slowly and methodically through this verse in order to grasp its meaning and application.

While this exhortation to “give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you” typically draws the most attention, it is important to ensure that we do not overlook the preceding portion of this verse. To illustrate, the Apostle Peter employed two key words as he urged his readers to “…sanctify the Lord God in your hearts.“

The first word is “sanctify.” Among the synonyms for “sanctify” are words like “consecrate,” “hallow,” or “separate.” This word signifies a place or object that is set apart for God. It also conveys the idea of something that is completely devoid of impurity. The second word is “heart.” This word is represented by the word kardia in the original language of this passage. It also forms the basis for our modern-day word “cardiac.” Kardia refers to our innermost being in a physical, spiritual, or emotional sense.

This passage thus presents us with an important application: those who sanctify the Lord God in their hearts are well-positioned to defend what they believe and why. That brings us to our second point: fulfilling the mandate of 1 Peter 3:15 does not require an exhaustive degree of Biblical knowledge. Remember that there are sixty-six books, eleven-hundred and eighty-nine chapters, and over thirty-one thousand verses in a standard Bible. It is unlikely that anyone has perfectly memorized each of those verses. Nor is it possible for any one person to provide a comprehensive answer to every spiritual question that others may raise.

If we encounter a Biblical question we can’t answer, we can view that inquiry as an opportunity to add to the Biblical knowledge we already possess. Then, as we seek good answers to sincere questions, we can build upon that foundation for the benefit of all. Biblical scholars have thoroughly explored and answered the majority of difficult spiritual questions throughout the centuries- and access to those answers is now easier than ever in today’s information age. A delayed (but well-researched) response to a good spiritual question is always better than a hasty and ill-considered reply.

XIX

“…regard Christ the Lord as holy in your hearts. Whenever anyone asks you to speak of your hope, be ready to defend it” (1 Peter 3:15 CEB).

In light of this exhortation to provide an answer to those with questions regarding Christianity, this study will begin a brief four-part survey on apologetics that will draw upon the insights of various commentators. We can start with some important definitions…

“Peter used an interesting word here when he told these believers to ‘give an answer.’ The word in Greek is apologia… It means something akin to ‘giving a well-reasoned reply’ or ‘providing a thoughtful response to a question offered.’ Apologia has nothing to do with being remorseful or apologetic. Instead, it simply describes our duty to ‘make the case’ for what we believe. The word is used (in one form or another) seventeen times in the New Testament (Luke 12:11; 21:14; Acts 19:33; 22:1; 24:10; 25:8; 25:15; 26:1-2, 24; Romans 2:1 5; 1 Corinthians 9:3; 2 Corinthians 7:11; 12:19; Philippians 1:7; 1:17; and 2 Timothy 4:1).

Apologia is used most often in the context of some form of persecution on the part of believers (as Peter used it here when addressing Christ followers who had been dispersed in to regions filled with hostile nonbelievers). Peter was unequivocal in his directive to these Christ followers. Unlike Paul, who clearly said not everyone is an evangelist, Peter made a point to say everyone must be a case maker, particularly when living in a hostile environment. Peter’s words apply to all of us. It’s time for each and every one of us to accept our duty and calling as Christian case makers.” ₍₁₎

“This is the Greek term apologia, which is a compound of apo (from) and logos (word). It refers to a legal defense in a courtroom setting (cf. Acts 19:33; 22:1; 25:16; 26:1,2,24). This text is often used to encourage believers to be an evangelistic witness, which is surely needed, but in context this probably refers to official trials or interrogations. Notice that it is important for all believers to have a prepared, logical presentation of their faith in Christ, whether for a court or for a neighbor. Every believer should be ready to be a verbal witness!” ₍₂₎

“Despite popular opinion, apologetics is not a discipline for elite Christians. Nor is the practice of apologetics limited to formal debate. Apologetics is as practical as anything in the Christian life. Every believer is required and expected to be an apologist (1 Pet. 3:15). As such, every believer is required and expected to think and prepare like an apologist. Of course, if apologetics is the highly philosophical, formal process we have come to expect, this sounds like an impossible task for most Christians. However, if apologetics is as simple as knowing what we believe and why we believe it, and being able to communicate that to others in a humble, winsome, biblical manner, that’s a horse of a different color!” ₍₃₎

(1) J. Warner Wallace, Forensic Faith, First Edition (Colorado Springs, CO, David C Cook, 2017) [pg.58]

(3) Baucham, V., Jr. (2015). Expository Apologetics: Answering Objections with the Power of the Word. Wheaton, IL: Crossway. Page 5

“But dedicate your lives to Christ as Lord. Always be ready to defend your confidence in God when anyone asks you to explain it. However, make your defense with gentleness and respect” (1 Peter 3:15 GW).

Having defined apologetics in our previous study, we will now take some time to establish what apologetics is not with the help of the following authors…

“We view apologetics as primarily a philosophical endeavor to be employed only by those with quick, keen, nimble minds and specialized training. We also believe you have to be a bit of a jerk to be any good at it, since the primary goal, as we understand it, is to vanquish our foe and stand triumphantly atop his lifeless intellect with face lifted toward the heavens and chest swollen with pride. As a result, the average Christian not only believes he or she is intellectually inadequate to engage in apologetics but also has an aversion to the attitude associated with the practice….

I am convinced that when we understand Peter’s teaching on apologetics we will see that (1) his admonition is for every Christian, (2) it has nothing to do with creating an elite, special forces brand of Christian, (3) it is rooted in the context of humility, holiness, and suffering, and (4) it ought to be a natural part of our Christian walk.” ₍₁₎

Thus, apologetics serves (or should serve) a critical function in the life of a Christian as illustrated by the following commentator…

“It is one of the tragedies of the modern situation that there are so many Church members who, if they were asked what they believe, could not tell, and who, if they were asked why they believe it, would be equally helpless. The Christian must go through the mental and spiritual toil of thinking out his faith, so that he can tell what he believes and why.” ₍₂₎

Another source makes a similar argument in a more direct fashion…

“…contrary to popular opinion, Christians are not supposed to ‘just have faith.’ Christians are commanded to know what they believe and why they believe it. They are commanded to give answers to those who ask (1 Pet. 3:15), and to demolish arguments against the Christian faith (2 Cor. 10:4-5). Since God is reasonable (Isa. 1:18) and wants us to use our reason, Christians don’t get brownie points for being stupid.” ₍₃₎

We’ll continue with our “apologetic for apologetics” with a look at some challenges to Christian parents and Christian leaders in our next study.

(1) Baucham, V., Jr. (2015). Expository Apologetics: Answering Objections with the Power of the Word. Wheaton, IL: Crossway. Page 16

(2) Barclay, William. William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, “The Christian Argument For Christ (1Pe_3:15 b-16)”

(3) Norman L. Geisler and Frank Turek, I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist Wheaton, IL: Crossway. Page 29

XXI

“But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear” (1 Peter 3:15 KJV).

Our brief mini-series on the subject of apologetics from 1 Peter 3:15 continues with some insights from a commentator who addresses the importance of apologetics from a parental perspective…

“…we need to pass on the good reasons that should lead to our kids’ trust in Jesus. Otherwise, they’re just borrowing our own trust without knowing the justification for it. That’s a faith that’s waiting to crumble as soon as it’s significantly challenged. It’s worth a side note here that parents shouldn’t assume a well-lived Christian faith is even desirable to their kids.

There are numerous kids who grow up in loving Christian homes, with parents who truly ‘walk the walk,’ but abandon their faith. Why? Those kids might admire the sincerity of their parents’ convictions, but feel no desire to ‘catch’ that same faith because they don’t believe it’s built on good reason. Once again, this points back to the need to pass on the reasons for the hope we have (1 Peter 3:15), not simply our own trust.” ₍₁₎

Our next source issues an important challenge to Christian leaders…

“The Bible makes it clear that as Christians we are to ‘always be prepared to give an answer’ for our faith (1 Pet. 3:15, NIV). Such an answer may take a variety of forms and styles, and it may involve a host of different issues. Nevertheless, the ability to give reasons for faith -solid, rational, and powerful reasons- should be part and parcel of the follower of Jesus Christ.”₍₂₎

“Since all Christians are called and commanded to have a reason for the hope within them (1 Pet. 3:15), Christian teachers, pastors, mentors, and educators of all kinds are remiss if they avoid, denigrate, or minimize the importance of apologetics to biblical living and Christian witness. The commonly heard canard, ‘No one comes to Christ through arguments,’ is patently false. Many people, such as the apologists C. S. Lewis and John Warwick Montgomery, were drawn to the gospel through apologetic arguments… Not all Christian teachers are equally gifted in apologetics, and some will emphasize this discipline more than others; but none should minimize the necessity of apologetics or preach around it when the biblical text requires otherwise.” ₍₃₎

(1) Natasha Crain, The Idea That Faith Is Caught And Not Taught Is False… And It’s Hurting The Next Generation October 8, 2019, https://crossexamined.org/the-idea-that-faith-is-caught-and-not-taught-is-falseand-its-hurting-the-next-generation/ Accessed 27 December 2023.

(2) Norman L. Geisler and Chad V. Meister, Reasons for Faith, Wheaton, IL: Crossway. [Preface].

(3) Ibid , p. 405

XXII

“but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect” (1 Peter 3:15 ESV).

We will conclude our short commentary series on the subject of apologetics from 1 Peter 3:15 with some closing thoughts on this passage…

“In the discipline of apologetics, we endeavor to make a case for why we believe what we believe as Christians. This we do in fulfillment of 1 Peter 3:15, which tells us to be always ‘prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you.’ Typically, Christian apologists—those who practice apologetics—focus on intellectual challenges that skeptics pose concerning God’s existence, the reliability of the Bible, and similar issues.

This is important work, but seasoned apologists testify that it is never intellectual issues alone that keep people from believing in Christ. What prevents people from trusting in Jesus is the fact that they know trusting Him as Savior means following Him as Lord, and they just do not want to give up their sin and perceived autonomy.” ₍₁₎

“Faith and reason are not mutually exclusive. A person should not believe in something without first inquiring whether it is a worthy object of belief. For example, few people would undergo a serious medical operation by a totally unknown person whom they had no reason to believe was anything but a quack. Likewise, God does not call on us to exercise blind faith. Since God is a God of reason (Isa. 1:18), and since He has made us rational creatures in His image (Gen. 1:27; Col. 3:10), He wants us to look before we leap. No rational person should step into an elevator without first looking to see if there is a floor. Likewise, God wants us to take a step of faith in the light of the evidence, but not a leap of faith into the dark. ” ₍₂₎

“The unique claims of Christianity are offensive to the unbelieving mind. ‘The message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God’ (1 Cor 1:18). Nonetheless, the offended critic deserves an answer” (Col. 4:5–6 ; 1 Pet. 3:15). ₍₃₎

(1) R.C. Sproul, “What Do You Do With Your Guilt?” Tabletalk Magazine, May, 2014 [pg. 55]

(2) Norman L. Geisler and Thomas A. Howe, When Critics Ask : A Popular Handbook on Bible Difficulties (Wheaton, Ill.: Victor Books, 1992), 165.

(3) Geisler, N. L. 1999. Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics. Baker Reference Library. Baker Books: Grand Rapids, Mich.

XXIII

“but sanctify in your hearts Christ as Lord: being ready always to give answer to every man that asketh you a reason concerning the hope that is in you, yet with meekness and fear” (1 Peter 3:15 ASV).

“Meekness” is a characteristic that is closely associated with “…a humble opinion of one’s self, a deep sense of one’s (moral) littleness, modesty, lowliness of mind.” ₍₁₎ Although meekness is commonly (and mistakenly) equated with weakness, it is more accurately defined as “power under control.” Thus, it describes those who willingly defer to others instead of asserting their preferences.

Another source defines this attribute as, “…that temper of spirit in which we accept [God’s] dealings with us as good, and therefore without disputing or resisting; it is closely linked with the word… humility…” ₍₂₎ So, the positive qualities of graciousness, courtesy, and restraint serve to distinguish someone who exhibits this characteristic.

Not surprisingly, Jesus was someone who personified this quality, for He, “…being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage; rather, he made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to death- even death on a cross!” (Philippians 2:6-9 NIV).

Therefore, this passage encourages us to communicate Biblical truths to others in the same way we would like them to interact with us. As another source observes, “There are many people who state their beliefs with a kind of arrogant belligerence. Their attitude is that anyone who does not agree with them is either a fool or a knave and they seek to ram their beliefs down other people’s throats. The case for Christianity must be presented with winsomeness and with love…” ₍₃₎

However, the following author reminds us that others may not respond in a similar manner…

“This gives us a glimpse into the context wherein apologetics takes place. We should not expect those at enmity with God to be friendly toward his apologists. Jesus made this clear when he warned, ‘If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you’ (John 15:18). Paul later confirms the veracity of the Lord’s words, both in his own experience and in the conclusion drawn therefrom: ‘Indeed, all who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted’ (2 Tim. 3:12). Yet Paul’s admonition, like Peter’s, is that we ‘bless those who persecute [us]; bless and do not curse them’ (Rom. 12:14).” ₍₄₎

(1) Youngblood, R. F., Bruce, F. F., & Harrison, R. K., Thomas Nelson Publishers (Eds.). (1995). In Nelson’s new illustrated Bible dictionary. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, Inc.

(2) G4240 prautes Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words. See https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g4240/kjv/tr/0-1/

(3) Barclay, William. William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, “The Christian Argument For Christ (1Pe_3:15 b-16)”

(4) Baucham, V., Jr. (2015). Expository Apologetics: Answering Objections with the Power of the Word. Wheaton, IL: Crossway. Page 19.

XXIV

“having a good conscience, that when they defame you as evildoers, those who revile your good conduct in Christ may be ashamed” (1 Peter 3:16).

The following definition can help enhance our understanding of the word “conscience” in the context of 1 Peter 3:16…

Conscience (noun) 1. the internal sense of what is right and wrong that governs somebody’s thoughts and actions, urging him or her to do right rather than wrong.
2. behavior in compliance with what your internal sense of right and wrong tells you is right. ₍₁₎

To this, we can add the following definition from the original language of this passage: “the soul as distinguishing between what is morally good and bad, prompting to do the former and shun the latter, commending one, condemning the other.” ₍₂₎ So, much like an umpire, judge, or referee, our consciences arbitrate the differences between right and wrong.

Another commentator expands upon these definitions in a practical manner…

“Paul uses this term twice in his trials in Acts (cf. Acts 23:1 and 24:16). It refers to his sense that he had not knowingly violated any expected duties toward God (cf. 1 Cor. 4:4). Conscience is a developing understanding of believers’ motives and actions based on 1. a biblical worldview 2. an indwelling Spirit 3. a knowledge of the word of God 4. the personal reception of the gospel. Peter has used this expression three times, 1 Pet. 2:19; 3:16 and 21. This is exactly what religious legalism could not provide, but the gospel can.”₍₃₎

This idea also builds upon a foundation that the Apostle Peter established in an earlier portion of this letter: “having your conduct honorable among the Gentiles, that when they speak against you as evildoers, they may, by your good works which they observe, glorify God in the day of visitation” (1 Peter 2:12). The correlation is this: we can maintain a clear conscience if the suffering we encounter stems from our allegiance to Christ rather than misconduct on our part.

Finally, we should note that our consciences are not infallible arbiters of moral behavior. For instance, it is possible for two people to act in good conscience while pursuing different courses of action. As Paul the Apostle said to the Corinthian church, “My conscience is clear, but that does not make me innocent. It is the Lord who judges me” (1 Corinthians 4:4 NIV). Nevertheless, our consciences can serve as excellent guides whenever they are led and informed by God’s Word.

(2) G4893 syneidesis https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g4893/kjv/tr/0-1/

XXV

“For it is better, if it is the will of God, to suffer for doing good than for doing evil” (1 Peter 3:17).

Although this verse begins one of the most challenging portions of the New Testament, it starts with a concept that is easy to grasp: if it is necessary to endure suffering, it is preferable to suffer for doing good than doing wrong. In the words of one commentator…

“…if it is God’s ‘will’ for us to suffer misunderstanding, abuse, or bullying, ‘it is better’ that that suffering be for good conduct (‘doing … right’ than for bad (‘doing … wrong’; cf. Rom. 8:28). Peter probably meant these words as assurance rather than as admonition. He meant that we are much better off, when we suffer, than the evildoers are who oppress us.” ₍₁₎

As mentioned earlier, this passage reminds us that God’s Word does not deny the existence of genuine suffering. Instead, the Scriptures acknowledge the fact that we may endure conditions that are unethical, discriminatory, inequitable, wrong, and/or unfair. We can illustrate this passage by returning to a scene from the life of Jacob, the great Old Testament patriarch, and his devious father-in-law Laban.

Whenever Laban saw an opportunity to serve his best interests, he seized that opportunity with no apparent concern for anyone who might be negatively affected by his actions. For instance, Laban once tricked Jacob into marrying both his daughters in exchange for fourteen years’ worth of free labor.

Jacob and Laban later entered a business arrangement, but Laban repeatedly attempted to change the terms of their agreement to benefit himself. Unfortunately, Jacob’s experience with Laban was not unusual, even today, for it is not uncommon to find employers who follow Laban’s example. The New Testament book of James also makes reference to those who acted in a similarly inappropriate manner…

“Listen! Hear the cries of the wages of your field hands. These are the wages you stole from those who harvested your fields. The cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord of heavenly forces” (James 5:4 CEB).

If we find ourselves in a similar condition, we can learn something important from Jacob’s experience with Laban. Jacob did not grumble or complain about the inequity of Laban’s treatment. Instead, he worked hard and patiently waited for God to address the situation. Then he remembered to honor God for His provision. Thus, Jacob lived out the words of Psalm 118:6 before they were written: “The Lord is on my side; I will not fear. What can man do to me?”

(1) J. Ramsey Michaels, 1 Peter, p. 192. Quoted in Notes on 1 Peter 2023 Edition, Dr. Thomas L. Constable https://www.planobiblechapel.org/tcon/notes/html/nt/1peter/1peter.htm

XXVI

“For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit” (1 Peter 3:18).

1 Peter 3:18 represents a difficult to interpret passage that begins with a statement that is far less controversial: “For Christ also suffered once for sins…” This portion of Scripture thus serves to invalidate those belief systems that teach we can get right with God through doing (or not doing) certain things. Such “do’s and don’ts” might include praying at specified times, abstaining from certain foods, chanting mantras, taking part in ceremonies, or doing certain good deeds to ensure God’s favor.

Instead, this passage tells us that Christ suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, to bring us to God. The New Testament epistle to the Hebrews also underscores the finality of this “once for all” sacrifice when it tells us, “…when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet” (Hebrews 10:12-13 ESV).

So, unlike the Old Testament offerings that had to be presented over and over, Jesus suffered once for sins. In the words of one source, “…Christ’s one sacrifice for sins was of such perpetual validity that it was sufficient for all and would never need to be repeated.” ₍₁₎

We should also note the purpose behind Jesus’ sacrificial death: “…that He might bring us to God.” No other elements (such as human effort) were necessary to bring us to God other than Jesus’ work on the cross. That vicarious sacrifice was offered by the One who was “just” (or guiltless) on behalf of those who were “unjust” (or guilty).

The result was that He might bring us “…into the presence of God” (CEB). So those who seek to be accepted into God’s presence must approach Him through the mediator He has established. That mediator is Christ, for “…there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus…” (1 Timothy 3:16).

Jesus accepted the death penalty associated with our sin and opened the way that enables us to approach God and establish a relationship with Him. Thus, as Jesus Himself said, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6).

(1) John F. MacArthur Jr., The MacArthur Study Bible: New American Standard Bible. (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2006), 1 Pe 3:18.

XXVII

“For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive in the Spirit” (1 Peter 3:18 NIV).

This reference to Christ “being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit” represents one of the more interpretively challenging passages in this epistle. Perhaps the most straightforward treatment of this verse has been offered by the following author…

“The statement that Christ was ‘made alive in the Spirit,’ therefore, means simply that he was raised from the dead, not as a spirit, but bodily (as resurrection always is in the NT), and in a sphere in which the Spirit and power of God are displayed without hindrance or human limitation (cf. 1:21).” ₍₁₎

Another Biblical scholar addresses the cultic interpretations of this passage that erroneously claim that Jesus’ resurrected body was not flesh, but “spirit” (or immaterial)…

“To interpret this as proof of a spiritual, rather than a physical resurrection, is neither necessary nor consistent with the context of this passage and the rest of Scripture. The passage is best translated, ‘He was put to death in the body but made alive by the [Holy] Spirit’ (NIV). The passage is translated with this same understanding by the New King James Version and others. God did not raise Jesus a spirit but raised him by his Spirit.

The parallel between death and being made alive normally refers to the resurrection of the body in the New Testament. For example, Paul declared that Christ died and rose and lived again (Rom. 14:9), and ‘He was crucified in weakness, yet he lives by the power of God’ (2 Cor. 13:4a NIV). The context of 1 Peter 3:18 refers to the event as ‘the resurrection of Jesus Christ’ (3:21). This is everywhere in the New Testament understood as a bodily resurrection (Acts 4:33; Rom. 1:4; 1 Cor. 15:21; 1 Peter 1:3; Rev. 20:5)…

We must also keep in mind that however we interpret 1 Peter 3:18, it must be consistent with what other verses say about the resurrected Christ. In Luke 24:39 the resurrected Christ said, ‘See My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself; touch Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have’ (Luke 24:39 NIV). The resurrected Christ testifies in this verse that he is not a spirit and that his resurrection body is made up of flesh and bones…

The resurrected Christ also ate physical food on four different occasions to prove he had a real physical body (Luke 24:30; 24:42–43; John 21:12–13; Acts 1:4). It would have been deception on Jesus’ part to have offered his ability to eat physical food as a proof of his bodily resurrection if he had not been resurrected in a physical body.” ₍₂₎

(1) E. G. Selwyn, The First Epistle of Peter, p. 197. Quoted in Notes on 1 Peter 2023 Edition, Dr. Thomas L. Constable. https://www.planobiblechapel.org/tcon/notes/html/nt/1peter/1peter.htm

(2) Norman L. Giesler and Ron Rhodes, When Cultists Ask A Popular Handbook on Cultic Misinterpretations [note on 1 Peter 3:18]. Baker Books, 1997

XXVIII

“by whom also He went and preached to the spirits in prison, who formerly were disobedient, when once the Divine longsuffering waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water” (1 Peter 3:19-20).

Our text from 1 Peter 3:19-20 presents us with several difficult questions…

First, this reference to “He” pertains to Jesus, as inferred from the previous verse. What was the subject of the message He preached?
Who were these spirits that comprised the audience for that message?
When did Jesus deliver that proclamation?
Why were these spirits imprisoned? What was the nature of their transgression?

These questions require prayerful forethought and careful study in order to develop an accurate understanding of this passage. Yet despite the difficulties posed by this text, this portion of Scripture serves a purpose that may not be readily apparent.

You see, these verses help explain why God does not simply present His Word in an abbreviated “question and answer” format. Difficult passages such as 1 Peter 3:19-20 compel us to seek God for the meaning and application of His Word. They also encourage us to seek insight from God-honoring leaders or Biblically based commentators who work to help us understand, remember, and apply God’s Word.

These difficult passages thus prompt us to develop a relationship with the Author of these texts. If the Bible was structured as a collection of answers to a series of frequently asked questions, such a relationship might not develop. While it may have been more convenient if God had organized His Word differently, convenience may not represent what’s best for us.

So while these passages are certainly challenging, they provide us with an excellent path to spiritual growth. With this in mind, we can best address this enigmatic passage if we take an inductive approach. The inductive Bible study model involves the use of three foundational tools: observation, interpretation, and application:

Observation: what does this portion of Scripture say?
Interpretation: what does this portion of Scripture mean?
Application: how should I apply this portion of Scripture?

If we begin with our first tool of inductive Bible study, we can observe the following…

Jesus went to a place of incarceration and preached a message.
His audience consisted of “spirits in prison who formerly were disobedient.“
Their disobedience has a chronological link to Noah, the famous Old Testament personality.

We’ll begin our interpretative journey of discovery regarding this passage next.

XXIX

One important step on the road to understanding this passage begins with a definition of the word “preached.” This word carries the following definitions in the original language of this passage…

to be a herald, to officiate as a herald.
1a) to proclaim after the manner of a herald.
1b) always with the suggestion of formality, gravity and an authority which must be listened to and obeyed.
2) to publish, proclaim openly: something which has been done.
3) used of the public proclamation of the gospel and matters pertaining to it, made by John the Baptist, by Jesus, by the apostles and other Christian teachers. ₍₁₎

To this, one Biblical scholar adds, “The Greek word for ‘preached’ here is not the word for ‘preached the gospel’ (eyaggelizo) as in 1 Peter 1:12,25; 4:6, but rather kerusso, which means ‘proclaimed’ (Lk 12:3) or ‘published’ (Lk 8:39).” ₍₂₎ This seems to eliminate the possibility of an offer of salvation for these imprisoned spirits.

A well-known portion of Scripture from the New Testament book of Hebrews also supports this conclusion: “People are destined to die once and then face judgment” (Hebrews 9:27 CEB). While the idea of a second chance at salvation after death is undoubtedly appealing to many, the Scriptures do not allow for that possibility. Thus, as we’re told in the Biblical book of 2 Corinthians, “…the ‘right time’ is now. Today is the day of salvation” (2 Corinthians 6:2 NLT).

This brings us to one of the more ambiguous portions of this text: who are these imprisoned spirits? Unlike the word “preached” discussed earlier, a look at the word “spirits” in the original language of this verse offers little help. You see, this reference to “spirits” may be associated with human beings, angelic beings, or demonic beings. ₍₃₎ Therefore, it is difficult to identify these individuals based on the language that is used to describe them.

With this in mind, we would do well to stay with the facts as we know them until we reach the next stage of our inquiry: “We know three things for sure about the spirits mentioned in 1 Peter 3:19. They are incorporeal, they are imprisoned, and their sin was committed before the Flood. Their relation to Jesus and the nature of His announcement to them are open to speculation.” ₍₄₎

(1) G2784 kerysso Strong’s Greek Lexicon https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g2784/kjv/tr/0-1/

(3) G4151 pneuma Strong’s Greek Lexicon https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g4151/kjv/tr/0-1/

(4) GotQuestions.org, “Who were the spirits in prison?” Retrieved 05 January, 2024 from https://www.gotquestions.org/spirits-in-prison.html

XXX

“in which he went and proclaimed to the spirits in prison, because they formerly did not obey, when God’s patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water” (1 Peter 3:19-20 ESV).

The next stop in our investigation of this passage brings us to the “prison” mentioned here. In this instance, the word “prison” means exactly what it says: “…a place where captives are kept.”₍₁₎ This allows us to build upon the foundation we have established thus far in our study of these verses: Jesus issued a proclamation to a group of spirits during their period of incarceration.

The reason for their imprisonment is stated next: “because they formerly did not obey.” If we were to approach this passage from the perspective of a professional investigator, this information serves to narrow the identity of these spirits to two groups: the spirits of human beings who have departed this life or demonic beings. With these things in mind, let’s consider our first option: these verses are speaking of human beings who have departed this life.

In this view, the place of confinement mentioned here is traditionally linked to Hades, or its Old Testament counterpart, Sheol. This was a realm that served as the abode of the dead. It was also said to have featured two separate areas, each very different from the other. The first was inhabited by the righteous dead, or those who had placed their faith in God during their earthly lives. Jesus may have alluded to this place in speaking of “Paradise” in Luke 23:43 or “Abraham’s Bosom” in Luke 16:22. Thus, it was associated with a place of comfort and rest for the righteous men and women who had passed from this life.

The other portion of Hades represented the destination point for the unrighteous upon their entrance to the afterlife. This was said to be a place of suffering and punishment. A great chasm separated the righteous dead from the unrighteous dead, making it impossible for anyone to cross from one side to the other. Jesus described these characteristics in His account of a man named Lazarus and his experience with a wealthy (but indifferent) individual in Luke 16:19-31.

While some may argue that Jesus’ account of Lazarus was nothing more than a fictional story that conveyed a moral lesson, we should note that Jesus’ parables typically referenced real-life events and circumstances. So even if Lazarus was a fictitious character, the events portrayed within his narrative undoubtedly pointed to something real.

(1) G5438 phylake Strong’s Greek Lexicon https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g5438/kjv/tr/0-1/

XXXI

“After being made alive, he went and made proclamation to the imprisoned spirits– to those who were disobedient long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water” (1 Peter 3:19-20 NIV).

Some hold the view that the the imprisoned spirits of 1 Peter 3:19 are associated with the wicked human beings of Noah’s day who perished in the great flood of Genesis chapter six. That represented a time “When the Lord saw that human wickedness was widespread on the earth and that every inclination of the human mind was nothing but evil all the time” (Genesis 6:5 CSB).

If this is accurate, then we are left with two possibilities that emerge from this view. The first is that the preincarnate Christ preached to these individuals through Noah and faithfully testified to the godless of his day. Another (and perhaps more likely) possibility is that Jesus issued a proclamation to those unrighteous individuals following their passing from this life.

In this view, Jesus’ proclamation took place at some point during the interval between His death on the cross and subsequent resurrection. His audience is thus identified as “spirits” because they had passed from their earthly lives and had become inhabitants of the realm of the dead. Since this text informs us that these imprisoned spirits were formerly disobedient, the content of that proclamation likely involved an announcement of Jesus’ triumph over sin and death, or a message of condemnation.

Finally, these is another aspect of this view that involves Jesus’ declaration of salvation to the righteous who had passed from this life. We’ll consider this view more thoroughly when we reach 1 Peter chapter four.

The second possibility regarding the identity of these disobedient spirits involves fallen angels or demonic entities. One commentator offers a summary of this perspective that we will examine in greater detail in our next study. In this view, these demons have been imprisoned…

“…since the time of Noah, and who were sent there because they severely overstepped the bounds of God’s tolerance with their wickedness.

The demons of Noah’s day were running riot through the earth, filling the world with their wicked, vile, anti-God activity, including sexual sin, so that even 120 years of Noah’s preaching, while the ark was being built, could not convince any of the human race beyond the 8 people in Noah’s family to believe in God… Thus God bound these demons permanently in the abyss until their final sentencing.” ₍₁₎

(1) John F. MacArthur Jr., The MacArthur Study Bible: New American Standard Bible. (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2006), 1 Pe 3:20.

XXXII

“in which He also went and preached to the spirits now in prison, who once were disobedient, when the great patience of God was waiting in the days of Noah, during the building of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons [Noah’s family], were brought safely through the water” (1 Peter 3:19-20 AMP).

One interpretation of 1 Peter 3:20 associates these incarcerated spirits with the demonic entities who promoted the moral corruption that characterized the world prior to Noah’s flood. One source offers a helpful synopsis of this view: “Christ’s announcement of his victory over evil to the fallen angels who await judgment for their role in leading the Noahic generation into sin; this proclamation occurred sometime between Christ’s death and ascension.” ₍₁₎

This suggests that a select group of fallen angels has been imprisoned, while others maintain a degree of freedom. The following exchange between Jesus and a group of malevolent spiritual entities may serve to identify that prison: “…they begged [Jesus] that He would not command them to go out into the abyss” (Luke 8:31).

The Scriptures associate this abyss with “the abode of demons,” a place so deep that it defies measurement. In fact, the word “abussos” in the original language of that passage means “bottomless.”₍₂₎ The Abyss seems to be a place of incarceration for some exceptionally wicked demons. Revelation chapter nine also identifies this abyss as the departure point for a menacing group of creatures that tormented those who had rejected God. Thus, it appears to be a terrifying place, and the demonic entities of Luke 8:31 acknowledged Jesus’ power and authority to send them there.

The New Testament book of Jude also appears to shed light on this place of imprisonment when it speaks of “…the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own abode, He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day” (Jude 1:6). Peter himself will make a similar declaration in the Biblical book we know today as 2 Peter…

“God didn’t spare the angels when they sinned but cast them into the lowest level of the underworld and committed them to chains of darkness, keeping them there until the judgment” (2 Peter 2:4 CEB).

Thus, it is possible that Jesus entered this “penal institution” following His crucifixion to proclaim His triumphant victory over sin as well as judgment upon these members of the demonic realm. We will close our extended look at these verses with some concluding thoughts next.

(1) NET Bible notes on 1 Peter 3:19 https://classic.net.bible.org/bible.php?book=1Pet&chapter=3&mode=print

(2) “Abyss” The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia James Orr, M.A., D.D., General Editor

XXXIII

“And it was by the Spirit that he went to preach to the spirits in prison. In the past, these spirits were disobedient—when God patiently waited during the time of Noah. Noah built an ark in which a few (that is, eight) lives were rescued through water” (1 Peter 3:19-20 CEB).

As we’ve already seen, there are several opinions regarding this reference to these spirits who were disobedient. In considering those views, it seems likely that this text depicts Jesus’ declaration of victory over sin and death to a group of demonic spirits who were active during Noah’s era. That proclamation was not evangelistic in nature. Instead, it appears that Jesus delivered a victorious message to some exceptionally wicked entities who had been sentenced to prison.

The Biblical book of Colossians may offer some insight into this view when it tells us, “Having disarmed principalities and powers, He made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them in it” (Colossians 2:15). That triumphant declaration may represent the message Jesus proclaimed to these imprisoned spirits.

A related topic concerns Jesus’ location during the period between His physical death on the cross and His resurrection. The Apostle Peter himself provides us with insight into this question in a quotation from David, the great Old Testament king…

“David saw what God was going to do in the future, and so he spoke about the resurrection of the Messiah when he said, ‘He was not abandoned in the world of the dead; his body did not rot in the grave’” (Acts 2:31 GNT).

In speaking of Jesus, the book of Ephesians adds the following…

“But grace was given to each one of us according to the measure of Christ’s gift. Therefore it says, ‘When he ascended on high he led a host of captives, and he gave gifts to men.’ (In saying, ‘He ascended,’ what does it mean but that he had also descended into the lower regions, the earth? He who descended is the one who also ascended far above all the heavens, that he might fill all things)” (Ephesians 4:7-10 ESV).

While interpretations vary on this subject, the idea is that Jesus undertook two missions in the period between His crucifixion and resurrection:

He effectuated the transfer of the Old Testament righteous dead from Sheol to heaven. We can infer this from a piece of information contained within Matthew 27:52. That portion of Scripture tells us, “…the bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life” (NIV) upon Jesus’ death on the cross.
He proclaimed His triumphant victory as detailed above.

Thus, in the words of one commentator, “The point… is that just as Jesus was vindicated, so will Christians be vindicated.” ₍₁₎

(1) R. C. Sproul, ed., The Reformation Study Bible: English Standard Version (2015 Edition) (Orlando, FL: Reformation Trust, 2015), 2247.

XXXIV

“There is also an antitype which now saves us–baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 3:21).

1 Peter 3:20 closed with a reference to “…the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water.” 1 Peter 3:21 now follows with an uncommon word that makes a connection between Noah’s flood and the sacrament of baptism. That word is “antitype.”

An “antitype” is something that corresponds to something else. Today, we might use words like “example,” “symbol,” or “counterpart” to express this idea. ₍₁₎ The following sources explore the relationship between the Biblical account of Noah and the great flood of Genesis 6-8 in the context of our text from 1 Peter 3:21…

“Baptism symbolizes judgment on sin in the death of Christ and then also renewal of life (Rom. 6:4). The floodwaters were a judgment on the wicked, and at the same time physical salvation for Noah and his family.” ₍₂₎

“Peter says that Noah’s salvation from the Flood symbolized baptism, a ceremony involving water. In baptism we identify with Jesus Christ, who separates us from the lost and gives us new life. It is not the ceremony that saves us; instead, the ceremony is evidence of our faith in Christ’s death and resurrection. Baptism is a symbol of the cleansing that happens in the hearts of those who believe (Rom_6:3-5; Gal_3:27; Col_2:12). By identifying themselves with Christ through baptism, Peter’s readers could resist turning back, even under the pressure of persecution. Public baptism would keep them from the temptation to renounce their faith” ₍₃₎

While there are several viewpoints associated with the meaning and significance of baptism, it is perhaps best seen as an outward expression of Jesus’ inner work within our lives. Baptism serves (or should serve) as our visible identification with Jesus Christ and a reflection of the inner spiritual change that has taken place in the lives of those who have accepted Him.

One Biblical translation offers a vivid illustration of this idea in its rendering of Colossians 2:12: “…you were placed in the tomb with Christ through baptism. In baptism you were also brought back to life with Christ through faith in the power of God, who brought him back to life” (GW). Therefore, the act of baptism symbolizes the death and burial of our old lives and our “resurrection” to a new life in Christ.

The act of baptism does not make anyone right with God. However, it serves to represent Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection and our identification with Him.

(1) See G499 antitupon https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g499/kjv/tr/0-1/

(2) R. C. Sproul, ed., The Reformation Study Bible: English Standard Version (2015 Edition) (Orlando, FL: Reformation Trust, 2015), 2248.

XXXV

“who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, angels and authorities and powers having been made subject to Him” (1 Peter 3:22).

The Biblical Scriptures often employ the imagery of one’s right hand to symbolize power, authority, or favor. That image derives from an ancient, cross-cultural symbol of leadership and dominion. Since most human beings are right-handed, the right hand (or right arm) served as a metaphor that depicted skill, strength, and power to the peoples of the ancient world.

This eventually led to a further association with the concepts of privilege, influence, virtue, approval, and supremacy. In fact, we continue to employ this ancient imagery whenever we use the term “right hand” to refer to someone who supports and assists a person in a position of authority. The idea is that such a person is as valuable to a leader as his or her own right hand.

This imagery reappears periodically in the pages of the New Testament, perhaps most prominently in the Biblical book of Hebrews…

“…when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high” (Hebrews 1:3 KJV).

“But to which of the angels has He ever said: ‘Sit at My right hand, Till I make Your enemies Your footstool’?” (Hebrews 1:13).

“Now this is the main point of the things we are saying: We have such a High Priest, who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens” (Hebrews 8:1).

“…after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God” (Hebrews 10:12).

Thus, for Christ to be seated at the right hand of God tells us that He occupies the place of highest privilege and authority. That place is one that is above all “…angels and authorities and powers.” The following commentator will close our look at 1 Peter chapter three with a practical application from this passage…

“After Jesus accomplished His cross work and was raised from the dead, He was exalted to the place of prominence, honor, majesty, authority, and power (cf. Ro 8:34; Eph 1:20, 21; Php 2:9–11; Heb 1:3–9; 6:20; 8:1; 12:2). The point of application to Peter’s readers is that suffering can be the context for one’s greatest triumph, as seen in the example of the Lord Jesus.” ₍₁₎

This reference to suffering and triumph prepares us for entry into 1 Peter chapter four, where the great Apostle will counsel his audience on how to deal with adversity in light of Christ’s example.

(1) John F. MacArthur Jr., The MacArthur Study Bible: New American Standard Bible. (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2006), 1 Pe 3:22.