Chapter 3
2022 - It was a long, very long and very illuminating morning. My brain is far more tired than it seems to have been in 2021. Further, there are some really good notes here anyway. Not saying there is nothing to add, just saying that being tired doesn't come at the price of missing this chapter completely. We will see where this goes.
2022 - First word in the verse is a big clue - "likewise". So 3 starts off at least as a continuation of what went before. Submission to authority, which began in 2:13, in general, and submission to civil government as citizens and to masters if we are slaves. Now, the theme of submission to authority continues with...
Instructions to wives begin at 3:1. They start with "...be subject to your husbands." How wrong this advice seems in that it leaves no room for exceptions. But that is what it says.
2023 - This goes on for 6 full verses. We have to remember that Peter was married - Paul wasn't - and yet both of them say wives be subject. I also think it is interesting that this comes in as a sort "...and while we're talking about submitting to Nero and all his minions, let's also talk about how a household ought to run.".
2023 - See long note on submission at 2023 next day after vs 18 in chapter 2 above.
2023 - Here also is a profound statement of why a saved wife is to stay with an unsaved husband. The example of bearing up in the face of unfairness may change him. AND, that says something also I think about how long we should keep witnessing to the very same unsaved person. If wives have no leave to abandon their witness, then neither do the rest of us!
2023 - Women are not to focus on physical adornment, but adornment with submissiveness, as Sarah submitted to Abraham, as all women did in those days. Oh my...is not this an internal biblical argument that the old ways are still valid, and not to be abandoned wholesale as a result of modern "enlightenment"?
2023 - This verse:
18 Servants, be submissive to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and gentle, but also to those who are unreasonable. [1Pe 2:18 NASB95]. This rankles our sensibilities today. But the higher concept is that anyone can be nice to those who are nice to them. Anyone can serve cheerfully if it is also serving voluntarily. What sets Christians apart is serving by force, serving bad masters as well as good, honoring good Kings as well as Bad - and governors and mayors and so on. We ought to be more careful about balking at this defining characteristic of Christian behavior.
Good FB post with 17 included. (make sure this means SLAVERY and not voluntary servanthood before posting!). VERSE 19 must also be included! 19 For this is a gracious thing, when, mindful of God, one endures sorrows while suffering unjustly. [1Pe 2:19 ESV]
Maybe two FB posts in here.
2026 - Back to vs 3 with respect to translation vs interpretation. Here is what the NASB95 shows:
3 Your adornment must not be [merely] external--braiding the hair, and wearing gold jewelry, or putting on dresses; [1Pe 3:3 NASB95]. They just add the word "merely" into this lest we interpret it as saying women should not fix their hair or wear jewelry. They take that possibility completely out of contention by just inserting "merely" in the text. At least they let us know they're out of bounds by putting brackets around it. NKJV does the same thing. The NET includes "merely" and NASB20 continues it as you would expect, but pretty much every other version leaves out the word that is not there in the first place.
Instruction to husbands begins in vs 7. Be understanding, weaker vessel. Like that. Don't hinder prayers. All in a single long verse.
2023 - The key word here, instead of submission, is honor. We are to be understanding, and we are to honor our wives. I suspect that the instructions to wives, and the justification for it, covers six verses and instructions to husbands only cover 1, is because it is FAR more difficult to be submissive to us than it is for us to honor them, if we just step back and use some common sense about it. Even in teaching women to submit, the Bible recognizes that women have the more difficult task.
The word translated understanding is "gnosis". It is often translated just knowledge, but the word really is about a deeper, more perfect, more in-depth comprehension than our word "knowledge" would convey. So in ESV they make it "understanding". KJV calls it "according to knowledge", NIV says "be considerate" and "respect". Far off the usual translations. The majority of translations use "understanding". This verse, using the same word, I think gives an idea of how we ought to read this word: 33 Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways! [Rom 11:33 ESV].
As for the word translated "honor", that is the Greek word "timen". It is about assigning value. The intent here is obviously that we ought o "prize" our wives, to "value" them highly. Here is a verse that gives a good sense of the verb "honor": 44 (For Jesus himself had testified that a prophet has no honor in his own hometown.) [Jhn 4:44 ESV]. In this case, a prophet's words are considered inconsequential by those who know him well. In the verse in 1 Peter, he means that the value of a wife ought to be very very high. I looked at a lot of verses that use this word. What I found is that when the word is used this way, it generally indicates something that is considered at least "quite valuable" if not of "great value". When the value is not a positive, but a negative, the Greek prefix a- is put in front. So instead of timen, atimen. So you don't really get a different word that say something has "a lot of timen", because timen already implies that. If it is not very valuable, you don't say it has low timen, you say it has the opposite of "great value". It is trash, in other words. So no doubt Peter means we ought to value our wives very highly.
I know that's a lot of notes just on two words, but my goodness, how important is it for husbands and wives to conform to God's plans for husbands and wives!?
2022 - But both of these instructions suggest an attitude not of authority or dominance, but of submissive respect for the other's views, honoring and respecting each other, and not of either person "owning" the relationship. Surely it is easy to spot the "two-way street" idea in these verses.
Instruction to "everyone" begins in 8. The verse starts with "finally", signalling a closing of this section. By everyone, I think he means the community of believers. Unity is urged first, and that would only apply to a group of believers. This is about how to treat those "within".
This verse:
10 For "Whoever desires to love life and see good days, let him keep his tongue from evil and his lips from speaking deceit; [1Pe 3:10 ESV] TCR links this also to the sequence on Evil Speaking, that I noted yesterday. I put it on the list to do a topical study about how we should talk. I can't help but link it also to Jordan Peterson's admonition to always tell the truth, always say what you mean, and be prepared to be called wrong - to actually be wrong - and learn from that. But it cannot happen if you don't say what you mean. This "evil speaking" topic is about what NOT to do when you decide to tell the truth.
2022 - Again in the Jordan Peterson vein, turn from evil and DO good. Not only is this about not contributing to the distress or oppression of others, but about actually doing as much good in the world as is possible for us. It is about being proactive, pushing, exhausting ourselves for the sakes of others. And so that our sleep may be sweet.
An important verse, that I once had memorized...in the ESV, you really need to memorize three verses to get it into context:
14 But even if you should suffer for righteousness' sake, you will be blessed. Have no fear of them, nor be troubled, 15 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, 16 having a good conscience, so that, when you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ may be put to shame. [1Pe 3:14-16 ESV]
We do need to be able to answer the "why" of our submissive behavior, of our hope for better in heaven, for any and all that we believe that contrasts with the values of our culture or the world. We are to be a staunch, irreproachable example of what we preach, so that those who call us "bad" people will be recognized as liars and of evil intent by others.
2021 - So this verse is not really about apologetics, as I was always led to believe. This is about answering those who believe not returning evil for evil is stupid About being able to explain why you are not just a doormat to anyone who comes along with dirty shoes, but are instead a stone in the walls of the temple being built to honor God. We need to be able to answer when lost, non-Christian friends ask us why we took that abuse - verbal or physical - without even trying to retaliate or defend ourselves. That's what this verse is really about. So...perhaps it is about apologetics in a limited way, but I don't believe Peter is talking about being able to defend creationism on FB. I don't think it is even about defending the Trinity from Muslims. This is about being able to explain Christian behavior in the face of abusive, unjustified, corrupt persecution leveled at us BECAUSE we are Christians. And in vss 17 and 18, Peter goes ahead and gives us the defense we should use:
17 For it is better to suffer for doing good, if that should be God's will, than for doing evil. 18 For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit, [1Pe 3:17-18 ESV]
2022 - Look at the piercing logic of these two verses! Why would you let those who would persecute you for Christ's sake get away with that, and not even try to get in a couple busted lips or black eyes as you go down? Why wouldn't you?!?!?! Well...Jesus didn't. Think of what he was capable of doing, how he might have just routed the Jews AND the Romans and freed himself. But he didn't. He took all that they dished out, and not only didn't fight back, he didn't even mouth off. Didn't say "Do your worst, I'll never yield", nothing like that. And that is the defense we should make. We don't retaliate because our Savior did not, and he rose from the dead, and our hope is based on his assurance that we will also, into his presence.
2023 FB post?
2021 - And again this year, I am tired from what has gone before, and am just now getting to the difficulty. I do think I saw a lot of new things in the first part this year. Even so, next year, I'll switch the emphasis.
We are now into the "difficult" section. Here is 19 (but you have to have 18 for it to make sense, so...):
18 For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit, 19 in which he went and proclaimed to the spirits in prison, [1Pe 3:18-19 ESV] Interesting that 18 is required to conclude the previous section, but also opens into the next section. Wonder if the translators misplaced a period? At any rate, this seems to me to refer to Jesus resurrected body, a new body, perfect, and free from the curse on all Adam's descendants.
2022 - I have often heard 18 quoted, but rarely in context. It is a clear statement of the propitiatory nature of the crucifixion, but not as a part of doctrinal treatise. As what should be an obvious to all reminder that our suffering for good can never stand up to comparison with what Christ went through.
2023 - Here I am again, having spent a serious amount of time on the first 7 verses, and finding myself quite spent - and behind schedule already with half this chapter and three chapters of Ezekiel to go. I am making a note that next year, I will START with vs 18, and then go back to the beginning, but today, I'm just reading my way on out.
2021 - "in the spirit". He went and proclaimed "in the spirit". What does that phrase mean? It is used 18 times in 18 verses. Sometimes, the "s" is capitalized, sometimes not, depending on whether or not the interpreters believed it referred to the Holy Spirit, or just spirit. First use is here:
1 The hand of the LORD was upon me, and he brought me out in the Spirit of the LORD and set me down in the middle of the valley; it was full of bones. [Eze 37:1 ESV] Seems to indicate a separation from the physical body. Since Ezekiel was not dead, this sort of thing could only be accomplished "in the Spirit". This one is a little different:
17 and he will go before him in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just, to make ready for the Lord a people prepared." [Luk 1:17 ESV] No capitalization here. Still not talking about the physical body, but to attributes of character and behavior that arise from what is inside, invisible.
Our bodies, after resurrection, will be like Christ's body after the resurrection. We will be some kind of combination of uncorrupted flesh and spirit. We can walk through walls (2023 - Or not. Read a pretty good book that says the Bible really never says he walked through a wall. Kind of implied, and we run with it, but it does not technically say that.) - Jesus certainly did - but will also still eat fish. So I think the passage here in 1Pet is about Jesus resurrected body. The body that Thomas saw and believed in. In that body, Jesus went to "prison", and "proclaimed". Here is the Strong's explanation of G2784:
κηρύσσωkērýssō, kay-roos'-so; of uncertain affinity; to herald (as a public crier), especially divine truth (the gospel):—preacher(-er), proclaim, publish. So, the "easy" way to interpret this is that Jesus proclaimed his perfect life, his sacrifice on the cross to redeem the lost, and his victory over death. If this was proclaimed to the demons in the pit, what purpose did it serve? I recall this verse: 8 Therefore it says, "When he ascended on high he led a host of captives, and he gave gifts to men." [Eph 4:8 ESV] Does it make sense here to say this is about divided Sheol, and that those OT saints who were waiting in the "good section" of Sheol -where they had been captive until the redemption price was paid - and who could now follow Christ into the presence of God? Could it be that Jesus went and proclaimed to them the mystery not revealed in their own time, but now accomplished by him? This seems to make sense here...but will it hold up in context as we move on. The following is from MSB, that I included last year. Also - I haven't really sped back up to get through this either.
MSB says the spirits in prison are the demons bound in the pit, now. They are already there. Revelation says that pit is going to be opened during Great Tribulation, and some are going to come out of there. Ultimately, those there now, and those still free to roam about, will be confined there forever. In his new body after resurrection, Jesus went to that pit and proclaimed his victory over death.
2021 - It is likely based on the next verse:
20 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. [1Pe 3:20 ESV]. So the argument would be that the disobedient do not get into heaven. Pretty much the whole world - except for 8 - was wiped out by the flood.
2022 - Vss 19, 20 just seem to me that they must reference human spirits, imprisoned and waiting for the Great White Throne Judgment, when they will be released from the place where the rich man also burns in fire, aware of the world he had left and of the hopelessness of his situation, and separated by that vast gulf - a prison of sorts from which he could never escape - for just a short time, during which they will have their every sin read out to them as though charges as they stand in the docket, and then they will go from that prison to the Lake of Fire, forever and ever. That's what I think this verse is about.
2023 - See the 2023 note on vs 4:6 below also, which seems to be about this same topic, and just as difficult. But if I could study them together, maybe I could sort out both!
(2023 - Need to get the notes I have on "descended" in the confession from Grudem, plus Kelly's notes on Eph 4 the other day, AND look again at MSB. Remembering that MacArthur says this one is tough to really pin down. Still, I would like to have my interpretation pinned down. Couple more preparatory ideas. When he "descended" it might just mean he was buried. He was "put in the ground". So the "leading" may be that he was the first to be resurrected from the dead in a glorified body, and many many more will follow at the rapture. But he lead, he was firstfruits. Also, at this point, I would still hold to the idea that no one could go into the presence of God until the price was paid in full. Not even in spirit. And remember, those in heaven now are there in spirit only. Their physical bodies do not join them until the rapture.)
2022 - I think these verses reference the same event, though they don't seem to do much for clarification:
8 Therefore it says, "When he ascended on high he led a host of captives, and he gave gifts to men." 9 (In saying, "He ascended," what does it mean but that he had also descended into the lower regions, the earth? 10 He who descended is the one who also ascended far above all the heavens, that he might fill all things.) [Eph 4:8-10 ESV]
He was leading those who formerly were captives, and he gave them spiritual gifts. Captives under the Law, separated by the veil, now freed, though Christ, to be temples of the Holy Spirit and exercise spiritual gifts? Hmm...kinda sounds good...is it right? The only way this works is if he went down to Hades, where those from before Noah's day? were imprisoned...but only them???? No. All those who died in sin are there. Unless this thought, from 1Peter and Ephesians are doctrinal and informative that those who died before Noah are treated differently than those after. This is getting a little to stretched for me today. I think the fact that Noah is talked about in connection with these is a key to understanding it, and I've never really pulled that out of it before. And I do think these 1Pet verses and the Eph verses are connected. What about this in Proverbs:
4 Who has ascended to heaven and come down? Who has gathered the wind in his fists? Who has wrapped up the waters in a garment? Who has established all the ends of the earth? What is his name, and what is his son's name? Surely you know! [Pro 30:4 ESV]
I really don't think that's what this verse is about. This is about whether anyone has been up to heaven and come back to tell the tale.
So, conclusion for 2022 - Noah, Hades, Tartarus, Paradise, and spiritual gifts are all intricately connected in a logical manner. It remains for me to unlock that connection.
MSB note to vs 20 says that the demons referred to in 19 were free to roam in the days of Noah. Perhaps this is an explanation for how the entire world, except for 8 people, was reduced to rebellion and sinfulness with no prospect of repentance. There were so many, and they were so vile, and so accomplished at evil and deceit and lies, that they deceived the whole world. If this is what it means, where does it say that after the flood, God locked them up until the end?
2021 - I went to Dake's even, trying to get more insight to this, but was unsuccessful. I am not positive, but it seems to me that Dake agrees with MacArthur, since Dake refers to the prison as Tartarus, which in Greek mythology is the pit of torment. I do note, though, that the Greeks see it as a place for evil people, and a lot of other non-biblical things, rather than a pit for the demons themselves and them alone. There are tons of images of Tartarus on the web. Here is one:
It seems to me that the ones who formerly did not obey must refer to people, not to angels. Those angels still don't obey. They rebelled with Satan, and never repented, nor will they ever repent. But also, for 120 years while the ark was being built, not one soul on earth repented either. God's patience gave these awful, evil people that long to repent, but in the end, only 8 went into the ark and were saved. If looked at this way, again, we would see Jesus proclaiming to all of Sheol, not to all the demons in the pit, that he had triumphed over death, and then he led the captives on the good side up into heaven, leaving all those pre-flood souls in the fires of hell, with the understanding that the work of Christ on earth had been accomplished, and that there is now no chance of escape for them. Perhaps their previous hope had been that if Christ failed, then in order to save His son, God would also have to bring an end to the suffering of the ungodly. I just have a huge problem with Jesus going to the pit full of demons and announcing what they would already have known. See also my notes on Sheol and Abaddon at Prov 15:11
(2023 - A bit of an aside on election. Noah preached for 120 years. Did the original ark design include room for those who might convert of their own free will? Was some kind of "scalability" factor included in the ark, so that it could just have extra sections added between the bow and stern for however many people repented because of Noah's preaching? If it was "absolutely free will", as in Grudem 32, how would even God know how big to build the boat? In some way, somehow, God knew who HE would save from the flood. HE decided and HIS decision was binding on the whole world. God knew the ark would only have 8 passengers. BUT, never forget that despite God's knowledge of this, God still had Noah preach.)
2022 - See also the notes on 4:6 below. There is a good theory there, though we must still deal with the phrase "because they formerly did not obey". But good notes on 4:6 as to this difficult passage. And still, is it something about pre-flood faith that made this necessary? Had there been any prophecy at all about the coming of Christ before the flood in Genesis 8?
And that last part - safely through the water...MSB note says they were kept safe not BY the water, but DESPITE the water. The water symbolizes judgement on the earth here, not salvation.
21 Baptism, which corresponds to this, 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, [1Pe 3:21 ESV]
I turn again to MSB, because I am getting tired from a long morning of study, I am distracted by things going on, and because this is "hard".
MSB says that the "correspondence" is between the way the ark "kept safe" the 8 people inside during God's judgement of the whole world, and the way that we are "kept safe" by our position in Christ as the world is continually judged in our own day. Christ is "the ark of our salvation".
Going to just quote the MSB on the rest of it. I don't think I have enough left to absorb it:
"Peter is not at all referring to water baptism here, but rather a figurative immersion into union with Christ as an ark of safety from the judgment of God. The resurrection of Christ demonstrates God's acceptance of Christ's substitutionary death for the sins of those who believe. Judgement fell on Christ just as the judgement of the flood waters fell on the ark. The believer who is in Christ is thus in the ark of safety that will sail over the waters of judgment into eternal glory." As to the phrase "not the removal of dirt from the flesh.", to be sure he is not misunderstood, Peter clearly says he is not speaking of water baptism. In Noah's flood, they were kept out of the water while those who went into the water were destroyed. Being in the ark and thus saved from God's judgment on the world prefigures being in Christ and thus saved from eternal damnation."
This seems a pretty good analogy - but not a simple, clear, concise, inarguable analogy. This is the kind of thing that a person stubbornly committed to another view of it could easily disregard because of the complexity of the argument. I agree it does seem to "reach" for an explanation. But if we want to say it truly is about baptismal regeneration, then that view must be based solely on the basis of water being present both then and in baptism., and must disregard the symbolism of the water. In the first instance, water killed all but those who stayed out of it. In baptismal generation, water saves only those who are immersed completely into it - and then taken back out. There is no correspondence here.
2021 - Dake's actually has a pretty good note on this verse. It is a long note, and there's no way for me to copy it, so going to do this the hard way, then move right on through 4 and 5...they're pretty short anyway. First, I need to show the verse as Dake translates it:
"20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water." And here is the very long note:
The like figure of baptism in water also saves us. How does it save us? Is it the water that saves or the thing that it is a figure of? It was not the water that saved the 8 persons of v 20. It was the ark that saved them from drowning in the flood. So baptism in water does not save the soul, but faith in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ, that which baptism is a figure of, does save the soul (Rom. 6:3-5; 1Cor 15:1-4; Eph 1:14; Col 1:20-22). A mere figure can have no power to save, but the reality of the figure can. Peter, lest some should trust in water baptism to save the soul, makes it very clear that baptism does not save one from the filth or moral depravity of the flesh. He shows it to be only the answer of a good conscience toward God, one that has been made clean by faith in the resurrection of Jesus Christ (v 21). It is clear here that at baptism the conscience is already supposed to be good and clean and baptism merely answers to it. As the waters of the flood could not have saved these 8 persons, had they not made use of the ark, so the water of baptism does not save the soul of anyone, but testifies figuratively to the salvation that comes by faith (Rom 1:16; 3:24-25; 10:9-10). See note a, Mt. 3:11, note q, Acts 22:16.
Moving quickly on through the last two chapters.