I PETER: QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

I Peter 3:18b-20 I am confused about these verses and the related verse I Peter 4:6. What do they mean?

You are not alone, Martin Luther said this regarding the I Peter 3 passage: “This is a strange text and certainly a more obscure passage than any other passage in the NT. I still do not know for sure what the apostle means.” This event is actually part of the Apostle's Creed (but not the later creeds) even though no one knows for sure what transpired in Hell. If the dead were given a second chance, it could be used as an argument for the existence of Purgatory.

My wife and I had the ill fortune to visit a small church in the Northeast years ago on a vacation. These verses were being taught in the college Sunday school class by the pastor. One poor boy had the gall to sheepishly note that these verses seemed to teach the possibility of repentance after death. The pastor yelled at him at the top of his voice, “You've been reading Catholic books!” Of course, that effectively cut off any further discussion on the subject. I will try to be a little more open-minded.

In M. Eugene Boring's commentary on I Peter he outlines ten “overlapping and interlocking issues” that need to be resolved before properly understanding this passage. They include questions such as the relationship of this passage to other teachings in the Bible, whether Peter composed these verses or took them from existing liturgy, the relationship between this passage and the seemingly similar statement in I Peter 4:6, the timing and number of trips of Christ to “prison,” the location of this prison, the form in which he went and to whom he preached, the possible background of this passage in Old Testament apocalyptic literature or Greek mystery religions, the nature of the “preaching,” and any specific historical context behind the writing of the letter to his audience. Since there are several possible answers to each of these questions and all are interrelated, the number of combinations and permutations are so numerous that any authoritative answer is highly unlikely to ever arise this side of the grave. Nevertheless, here are a few possibilities to consider:

    View 1: Christ announced his victory to imprisoned evil spiritual beings (fallen angels) referred to in Genesis 6 and II Peter 2:4-5. “Preach” can mean proclaim, without any idea of possible repentance (Peter does not use the common Greek word from which we get “evangelism,” used by him elsewhere). In favor of this view is the fact that “spirit” never refers to a dead human being in the Bible without clearly identifying it as such. In I Enoch, the fallen angels are said to be in prison. This is not the same as Hell at all, but a special holding tank. Thus, Jesus pronounces the final judgment on them. Other possibly pertinent cross-references to this idea are Colossians 2:15; II Peter 2:4-5; Revelation 12:7-9; Revelation 20:1-2; and Jude 6.

Variation on this theme: The spirits are the Nephalim mentioned in Genesis 6.

Anti: see Hebrews 2:16.

    View 2: It refers to the preincarnate Jesus preaching (in his spirit through Noah) to those who would later die in the flood. Prison = flesh. This has the advantage of fitting in with two other statements in the same letter: I Peter 1:10-11, which indicates that the OT prophets had the spirit of Christ within them, and I Peter 3:20, which indicates that during the building of the ark, God attempted to reach sinners through the person of Noah.

Anti: It doesn't really fit in with the immediate context of Christ's death and resurrection.

    View 3: This refers to Christ after his death preaching to spirits of human beings who died in the flood (since they were prime examples of a particularly evil generation) (a) with the possible chance of repentance or (b) just to announce judgment on them. Those who favor option 3a sometimes cite Ephesians 4:8-10 to support their view, but that passage is almost equally ambiguous in meaning. In possible support of view 3b is I Peter 4:6, which may be related:

Anti: Why preach only to them? Also, second chances after death are not mentioned anywhere else in Bible.

I Peter 4:6

    View 1: Refers to those dead in their sins who accepted the word while they were physically alive. Now they are alive in the spirit even though they may have died physically. Not related to I Peter 3.

    View 2: Refers to all who are spiritually dead. Not related to I Peter 3.

Anti: “Dead” in the rest of the passage refers to the physically dead. And “preached” is in the past, one-time, tense.

    View 3: Refers to all the dead up to that time (or at least to the righteous dead), so that they had a second chance. Might be related to the event in I Peter 3.

Anti: Second chance not mentioned elsewhere.

I Peter 4:13 How would this verse have been understood by the original audience?

We must assume that the audience, whether converted Jews and/or Gentiles, would have been well schooled in the Old Testament scriptures. In addition, at this relatively late date, they would be aware of the teachings of Jesus, whether by oral transmission or written Gospels. Also, by the time of writing of this letter, Paul's letters were widely circulating among the churches in the Roman world, especially his earlier epistles. Therefore the concepts in I Peter 4:13 would probably have been familiar to them already from one or all of these sources.

Two typical references to the fact that the OT predicted Christ's suffering before he could be revealed in his full glory are found in Luke 24:26 and I Peter 1:10-11. In both cases, it is probably the “Suffering Servant” passages in Isaiah that are being alluded to.

The coupling of earthly suffering with earthly joy and eventual glorification is found in the Beatitudes, such as: “Blessed are you when people revile you and persecute you...on my account. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.” (Matthew 5:11-12)

From Paul's letters, the audience would have understood:

    “...we suffer with him so that we may also be glorified with him.” Romans 8:17

    We should rejoice in suffering. II Corinthians 8:2; Colossians 1:24

    If we share in Christ's suffering, we will also share in His resurrection. Philippians 3:10

    “If we have died with him, we will also live with him; if we endure, we will also reign with him.” II Timothy 2:11-12

This last reference is especially interesting since most scholars feel that Paul is quoting an even earlier hymn composed and widely sung by Christians of the time.

Some of the concepts in I Peter 4:13 are also found in Hebrews 10:32-37 and 13:13-14, written about the same time. These clearly present the idea that present suffering with Christ will lead, when Christ comes again, to a future possession in heaven. The ideas are presented by the author without much explanation as if the audience should already be familiar with them.

Even if Peter's audience was somehow totally unaware of all these other teachings, Peter hammers in the same points found in 4:13 throughout his epistle to make them clear. Thus, this one verse would not have been understood in isolation from the rest of the letter. From other passages we are told that Jesus will bring grace when he is revealed (i.e., at the Second Coming) (1:13); suffering results in praise and glory and honor when Jesus is revealed in the Last Time (1:3-7); Christ's suffering and glory are coupled (5:1), and when the Shepherd appears, believers will win the crown of glory (5:4).

In conclusion, I think the audience would have understood clearly that present suffering for the cause of Christ can be endured joyfully in the here and now because (1) it demonstrates our unity with Christ and the prophets who were reviled and (2) it will lead eventually to our glorification when Christ comes again, whether we are alive or dead when that happens.

I Peter 5:13 In his concluding thoughts Peter notes, “She who is in Babylon, chosen together with you, sends you her greetings, and so does my son Mark.” Who is this “she” that he refers to in Babylon? Did I miss that earlier?

Let's first deal with the matter of “where” before discussing “who.” It is the unanimous opinion of the ten commentaries I consulted that “Babylon” refers to Rome. The reason for using this code name has been variously explained as (a) an attempt to avoid persecution by Roman authorities, (b) an allusion to the fact that Rome was a second Babylon since they both destroyed Jerusalem, or (c) pointing to the similarity of the Jews living in Babylonian exile and Christians living as exiles in a hostile world.

Other suggestions, mainly discredited, for the location of “Babylon” include (a) a Roman garrison town in what is now Cairo, Egypt and (b) the historical Babylon on the Euphrates River. These suggestions did not even arise until the time of the Reformation. The Daily Bible introduction to I Peter is unique in suggesting that Jerusalem might be the true identity of “Babylon.”

Next, who is the “she” mentioned in 5:13?

Three suggestions have been made for her identity, listed in increasing order of probability: a nameless female missionary who accompanied Peter (mentioned in Leonhard Goppelt, A Commentary on I Peter), Peter's wife, and the local church. The first possibility has few followers, and it seems unlikely that Peter would go to the trouble of mentioning her at all without further identification.

If there were a particular woman traveling with him, it would more likely be his wife (the second possibility) since it is known that she did accompany him on occasion (see I Corinthians 9:5). This explanation is held by those who feel that the “son Mark” mentioned in I Peter 5:13 is their biological son. Most commentators, however, believe that this is a clear reference to John Mark, the author of the second Gospel.

The majority opinion is that “she” most likely refers to the local congregation in Rome from which Peter is writing his letter. “She” is used since the Greek word for church, ekklesia, is feminine. A similar usage can be found in the opening and closing greetings of II John: “to the elect lady and her children” and “the children of your elect sister send you their greetings,” respectively. The same Greek root for “chosen/elect” appears in I Peter 5:13, II John 1, and II John 13.

Several English translations make the same point clear:

    “The church that is at Babylon” KJV

    “Your sister church in Babylon” NRSV, TEV

    “Your sister-church here in 'Babylon'” J. B. Phillips

    “The church here in Rome” Living Bible