Lent 1B 2nd Reading
Sam Powell
Those who would preach from 1 Peter 3:18-20 face challenges that explain this passage’s rare appearance in sermons. It contains an obscure reference to Christ preaching to disobedient spirits in prison; it draws an unlikely parallel between the flood and baptism; and flatly declares that baptism saves us—a sentiment that is anathema to Evangelical Christians. If we add the fact that the grammar of the passage is highly ambiguous, allowing the text to be translated in several alternative ways, it is not difficult to see why Christian preachers and teachers avoid these verses with remarkable consistency and dedication. And yet, the canonical principle obliges us to take this passage seriously as scripture. Moreover, these verses are an integral portion of the overall teaching of 1 Peter; its themes—suffering, Christology, and baptism—are central to the letter.
Let us begin with verses 18 and 19 and their context:
For Christ also suffered for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, in order to bring you to God. He was put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit (NRSV).
Suffering is a major theme in 1 Peter. 2:21 tells us that Christ suffered as an example for us; 4:13 affirms that disciples who suffer thereby share in Christ’s sufferings. This explains why v. 18 begins with for—it points us back to v. 17 (“it is better to suffer for doing good, if suffering should be God’s will, than to suffer for doing evil” (NRSV). Disciples who suffer are following the example of Jesus, who likewise suffered unjustly and for the cause of God. Our passage, which begins with a note about Christ’s suffering, is thus situated in a larger concern of 1 Peter–the need to place Christian suffering in a meaningful context.
The next portion of our passage consists in a series of Christological affirmations. Jesus “was put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit in which also he went and made a proclamation to the spirits in prison, who in former times did not obey, when God waited patiently in the days of Noah, during the building of the ark” 3:18-20 (NRSV). These verses narrate the appearance of Jesus in realm of the dead, sheol in Hebrew, hades in Greek. They present several interpretive difficulties. The most notable concern the identity of the spirits in prison and the nature of Christ’s proclamation. In the long history of biblical interpretation, the following options have been developed:
The spirits are either 1) the “sons of God” mentioned in Genesis 6 who had intercourse with human women or 2) human beings who lived during the time of Noah.
Christ’s proclamation is either a declaration of judgment and condemnation or a preaching of the gospel.
Unfortunately, there is no way to definitively determine which of these options is best; good arguments have been fashioned for them all.
Complicating the matter is 1 Peter 4:5-6:
They [i.e., those who slander believers] will have to give an accounting to him who stands ready to judge the living and the dead. For this is the reason the gospel was proclaimed even to the dead, so that, though they had been judged in the flesh as everyone is judged, they might live in the spirit as God does.
Like 3:19, 4:6 seems to refer to a moment between Christ’s death and ascension when he appeared in the realm of the dead and proclaimed. Most interpreters have regarded the dead in 4:6 as followers of God in the time before Jesus. In this interpretation, Jesus preached the gospel to the Old Testament saints so that they might be saved and share in the resurrection. Some commentators have equated this preaching with the preaching mentioned in 3:19; however, this seems doubtful, as the dead in 3:19 are described as those who were disobedient in the time of Noah. But if these two preaching events are different moments, then 1 Peter must be saying that following his death Christ made two distinct appearances in the realm of the dead.
Stepping away from the interpretive problems of our passage, what can we say about its function as scripture? What is it proclaiming to us? Perhaps the main point is that, by virtue of the resurrection, Jesus has become lord of all reality—not just of heaven and earth, but of sheol/hades as well. Indeed, Jesus holds the keys of death and hades (Revelation 1:18). That is why the gates of hades cannot prevail against Christ’s church (Mathew 16:18). Sheol/hades does not lie outside of God’s domain; it is not marked by God’s absence: “If I ascend to heaven, you are there; if I make my bed in Sheol, you are there” (Psalm 139:8 NRSV). The appearance of Christ in sheol/hades is thus expected; he is the lord of the dead and of the living. Whether his proclamation was a word of judgment on disobedient spirits or the announcement of the gospel to Old Testament saints, Jesus proves himself to be the one to whom all authority has been given. Accordingly,
I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and in the sea, and all that is in them, singing, “To the one seated on the throne and to the Lamb be blessing and honor and glory and might forever and ever!” (Revelation 5:13 NRSV).
Even the dead, those dwelling “under the earth,” acknowledge Jesus’ lordship and offer praise.
So, although the details of 3:18-20 are quite difficult to interpret, its main doxological affirmation is clear: All of reality comes under the authority of God and of Jesus; there is no part of reality that is alien to God or over which God does not exercise authority through Christ. This explains why our passage ends as it does: “. . . Jesus Christ, who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers made subject to him.” The assertion that Jesus appeared and proclaimed in the realm of the dead is an element of the larger Christian confession that all things have been subjected to Christ.
The final portion of our passage deals with baptism:
. . . in the days of Noah, during the building of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were saved through water. And baptism, which this prefigured, now saves you—not as a removal of dirt from the body, but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ (NRSV).
Without going into detail, it should be noted that this passage suffers from its own grammatical ambiguities which permit readers to form more than one plausible interpretation. In particular, “good conscience” could mean 1) that the act of baptism constitutes our request to God to grant us a good conscience or 2) that in baptism we are offering a pledge to God from a good conscience. Both interpretations are grammatically plausible. Nonetheless, the general points of the passage are clear enough:
Baptism is analogous to the deliverance of Noah and his family. They were delivered through water. Through can have a physical meaning (they journeyed through the flood waters) but it can also have an instrumental meaning (they were delivered by the water). The instrumental meaning seems unlikely, since the water was the instrument of destruction, not deliverance; we thus expect the text to say that eight persons were saved from water. And yet it uses the preposition through in order to make a connection between the flood waters and the water of baptism. The point seems to be that what was destructive in Genesis has now become saving.
Baptism saves. Obviously, if we think of salvation as evangelical conversion as such conversion has come to be understood, then baptism cannot save; it does not cause us to have an experience of conversion as that experience has been defined by Evangelicals. But if we think of salvation as deliverance from the rebellious principalities and powers that control human destiny and as liberation from the present evil age, then baptism does indeed save us in so far as in baptism we are reborn, as new creatures, into God’s kingdom and domain.
Christian attitudes toward 1 Peter 3:18-22 range from rampant speculation (e.g., about whether Jesus preached to the dead in order to offer them a second chance of salvation), to denial (e.g., Evangelical refusal to accept that baptism saves us), to neglect. This passage deserves better treatment. It is, admittedly, difficult and careful interpretation requires more study than do other, easier texts. Nonetheless, its status as scripture and its Christological and sacramental affirmations should encourage us to invest the time and study necessary to do it justice.
Sam Powell
Professor, PLNU