Greetings!

To continue:

1 Peter 3:19-22

19. By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;

19. In quo et iis qui in specula (vel, in excubiis, vel, carcere) erant
spiritibus, profectus praedicavit;

20. Which sometime were disobedient, when once the long-suffering of
God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein
few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.

20. Quum inereduli fuissent olim, quum semel expectabatur Dei patientia
in diebus Noe; dum apparabatur arca, in qua paucae, hoc est, octo
animae servatae sunt per aquam.

21. The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not
the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good
conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

21. Cujus figura respondens baptismus, nos quoque salvos reddit, non
abjectio sordium carnis, sed bonae conscientiae examen apud Deum, per
resurrectionem Jesu Christi:

22. Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels
and authorities and powers being made subject unto him.

22. Qui est in dextera Dei profectus in coelum, subjectis sibi angelis,
et potestatibus et virtutibus.


19 By which also Peter added this, that we might know that the
vivifying power of the Spirit of which he spoke, was not only put forth
as to Christ himself, but is also poured forth with regard to us, as
Paul shews in Romans 5:5. He then says, that Christ did not rise only
for himself, but that he made known to others the same power of his
Spirit, so that it penetrated to the dead. It hence follows, that we
shall not less feel it in vivifying whatever is mortal in us.

But as the obscurity of this passage has produced, as usual, various
explanations, I shall first disprove what has been brought forward by
some, and secondly, we shall seek its genuine and true meaning.

Common has been the opinion that Christ's descent into hell is here
referred to; but the words mean no such thing; for there is no mention
made of the soul of Christ, but only that he went by the Spirit: and
these are very different things, that Christ's soul went, and that
Christ preached by the power of the Spirit. Then Peter expressly
mentioned the Spirit, that he might take away the notion of what may be
called a real presence.

Others explain this passage of the apostles, that Christ by their
ministry appeared to the dead, that is, to unbelievers. I, indeed,
allow that Christ by means of his apostles went by his Spirit to those
who were kept as it were in prison; but this exposition appears
incorrect on several accounts: First, Peter says that Christ went to
spirits, by which he means souls separated from their bodies, for
living men are never called spirits; and secondly, what Peter repeats
in the fourth chapter on the same subject, does not admit of such an
allegory. Therefore the words must be properly understood of the dead.
Thirdly, it seems very strange, that Peter, speaking of the apostles,
should immediately, as though forgetting himself, go back to the time
of Noah. Certainly this mode of speaking would be most unsuitable. Then
this explanation cannot be right.

Moreover, the strange notion of those who think that unbelievers as to
the coming of Christ, were after his death freed from their sin, needs
no long refutation; for it is an indubitable doctrine of Scripture,
that we obtain not salvation in Christ except by faith; then there is
no hope left for those who continue to death unbelieving. They speak
what is somewhat more probable, who say, that the redemption obtained
by Christ availed the dead, who in the time of Noah were long
unbelieving, but repented a short time before they were drowned by the
deluge. They then understood that they suffered in the flesh the
punishment due to their perverseness, and yet were saved by Christ, so
that they did not perish for ever. But this interpretation cannot
stand; it is indeed inconsistent with the words of the passage, for
Peter ascribes salvation only to the family of Noah, and gives over to
ruin all who were not within the ark.

I therefore have no doubt but Peter speaks generally, that the
manifestation of Christ's grace was made to godly spirits, and that
they were thus endued with the vital power of the Spirit. Hence there
is no reason to fear that it will not flow to us. But it may be
inquired, Why he puts in prison the souls of the godly after having
quitted their bodies? It seems to me that phulake rather means a
watchtower in which watchmen stand for the purpose of watching, or the
very act of watching, for it is often so taken by Greek authors; and
the meaning would be very appropriate, that godly souls were watching
in hope of the salvation promised them, as though they saw it afar off.
Nor is there a doubt but that the holy fathers in life, as well as
after death, directed their thoughts to this object. But if the word
prison be preferred, it would not be unsuitable; for, as while they
lived, the Law, according to Paul, (Galatians 3:23,) was a sort of
prison in which they were kept; so after death they must have felt the
same desire for Christ; for the spirit of liberty had not as yet been
fully given. Hence this anxiety of expectation was to them a kind of
prison.

Thus far the Apostle's words seem to agree together, and with the
thread of the argument; but what follows is attended with some
difficulty; for he does not mention the faithful here, but only the
unbelieving; and this seems to overturn the preceding exposition. Some
have for this reason been led to think that no other thing is said
here, but that the unbelieving, who had formerly persecuted the godly,
found the Spirit of Christ an accuser, as though Peter consoled the
faithful with this argument, that Christ, even when dead, punished
them. But their mistake is discovered by what we shall see in the next
chapter, that the Gospel was preached to the dead, that they might live
according to God in the spirit, which peculiarly applies to the
faithful. And it is further certain that he repeats there what he now
says. Besides, they have not considered that what Peter meant was
especially this, that as the power of the Spirit of Christ shewed
itself to be vivifying in him, and was known as such by the dead, so it
will be towards us.

Let us, however, see why it is that he mentions only the unbelieving;
for he seems to say, that Christ in spirit appeared to those who
formerly were unbelieving; but I understand him otherwise, that then
the true servants of God were mixed together with the unbelieving, and
were almost hidden on account of their number. I allow that the Greek
construction is at variance with this meaning, for Peter, if he meant
this, ought to have used the genitive case absolute. But as it was not
unusual with the Apostles to put one case instead of another, and as we
see that Peter here heaps together many things, and no other suitable
meaning can be elicited, I have no hesitation in giving this
explanation of this intricate passage; so that readers may understand
that those called unbelieving are different from those to whom he said
the Gospel was preached.

After having then said that Christ was manifested to the dead, he
immediately adds, When there were formerly unbelievers; by which he
intimated, that it was no injury to the holy fathers that they were
almost hidden through the vast number of the ungodly. For he meets, as
I think, a doubt, which might have harassed the faithful of that day.
They saw almost the whole world filled with unbelievers, that they
enjoyed all authority, and that life was in their power. This trial
might have shaken the confidence of those who were shut up, as it were,
under the sentence of death. Therefore Peter reminds them, that the
condition of the fathers was not different, and that though the
multitude of the ungodly then covered the whole earth, their life was
yet preserved in safety by the power of God.

He then comforted the godly, lest they should be cast down and
destroyed because they were so few; and he chose an example the most
remarkable in antiquity, even that of the world drowned by the deluge;
for then in the common ruin of mankind, the family of Noah alone
escaped. And he points out the manner, and says that it was a kind of
baptism. There is then in this respect also nothing unsuitable.

The sum of what is said is this, that the world has always been full of
unbelievers, but that the godly ought not to be terrified by their vast
number; for though Noah was surrounded on every side by the ungodly,
and had very few as his friends, he was not yet drawn aside from the
right course of his faith. [43]

When once the long-suffering of God waited This ought to be applied to
the ungodly, whom God's patience rendered more slothful; for when God
deferred his vengeance and did not immediately execute it, the ungodly
boldly disregarded all threatenings; but Noah, on the contrary, being
warned by God, had the deluge for a long time before his eyes. Hence
his assiduity in building the ark; for being terrified by God's
judgment, he shook off all torpidity.

21 The like figure whereunto I fully think that the relative ought to
be read in the dative case, and that it has happened, through a
mistake, that ho is put, and not ho. The meaning, however, is not
ambiguous, that Noah, saved by water, had a sort of baptism. And this
the Apostle mentions, that the likeness between him and us might appear
more evident. It has already been said that the design of this clause
is to shew that we ought not to be led away by wicked examples from the
fear of God, and the right way of salvation, and to mix with the world.
This is made evident in baptism, in which we are buried together with
Christ, so that, being dead to the world, and to the flesh, we may live
to God. On this account, he says that our baptism is an antitype
(antitupon) to the baptism of Noah, not that Noah's baptism was the
first pattern, and ours an inferior figure, as the word is taken in the
Epistle to the Hebrews, where the ceremonies of the law are said to be
antitypes of heavenly things, (Hebrews 9:9,10.) Greek writers apply the
same word to sacraments, so that, when they speak of the mystical bread
of the holy Supper, they call it the antitype. But here there is no
comparison made between the greater and the less; the Apostle only
means that there is a likeness, and as they commonly say, a
correspondence. Perhaps it might more properly be said to be
correspondency, (antistrophon,) as Aristotle makes Dialectics to be the
antistrophe of Rhetoric. But we need not labor about words, when there
is an agreement about the thing itself. As Noah, then, obtained life
through death, when in the ark, he was enclosed not otherwise than as
it were in the grave, and when the whole world perished, he was
preserved together with his small family; so at this day, the death
which is set forth in baptism, is to us an entrance into life, nor can
salvation be hoped for, except we be separated from the world.

Not the putting away of the filth of the flesh This was added, because
it might be that the greatest part of men would profess the name of
Christ; and so it is with us, almost all are introduced into the church
by baptism. Thus, what he had said before would not be appropriate,
that few at this day are saved by baptism, as God saved only eight by
the ark. This objection Peter anticipates, when he testifies that he
speaks not of the naked sign, but that the effect must also be
connected with it, as though he had said, that what happened in the age
of Noah would always be the case, that mankind would rush on to their
own destruction, but that the Lord would in a wonderful way deliver His
very small flock.

We now see what this connection means; for some one might object and
say, "Our baptism is widely different from that of Noah, for it happens
that most are at this day baptized." To this he replies, that the
external symbol is not sufficient, except baptism be received really
and effectually: and the reality of it will be found only in a few. It
hence follows that we ought carefully to see how men commonly act when
we rely on examples, and that we ought not to fear though we may be few
in number.

But the fanatics, such as Schuencfeldius, absurdly pervert this
testimony, while they seek to take away from sacraments all their power
and effect. For Peter did not mean here to teach that Christ's
institution is vain and inefficacious, but only to exclude hypocrites
from the hope of salvation, who, as far as they can, deprave and
corrupt baptism. Moreover, when we speak of sacraments, two things are
to be considered, the sign and the thing itself. In baptism the sign is
water, but the thing is the washing of the soul by the blood of Christ
and the mortifying of the flesh. The institution of Christ includes
these two things. Now that the sign appears often inefficacious and
fruitless, this happens through the abuse of men, which does not take
away the nature of the sacrament. Let us then learn not to tear away
the thing signified from the sign. We must at the same time beware of
another evil, such as prevails among the Papists; for as they
distinguish not as they ought between the thing and the sign, they stop
at the outward element, and on that fix their hope of salvation.
Therefore the sight of the water takes away their thoughts from the
blood of Christ and the power of the Spirit. They do not regard Christ
as the only author of all the blessings therein offered to us; they
transfer the glory of his death to the water, they tie the secret power
of the Spirit to the visible sign.

What then ought we to do? Not to separate what has been joined together
by the Lord. We ought to acknowledge in baptism a spiritual washing, we
ought to embrace therein the testimony of the remission of sin and the
pledge of our renovation, and yet so as to leave to Christ his own
honor, and also to the Holy Spirit; so that no part of our salvation
should be transferred to the sign. Doubtless when Peter, having
mentioned baptism, immediately made this exception, that it is not the
putting off of the filth of the flesh, he sufficiently shewed that
baptism to some is only the outward act, and that the outward sign of
itself avails nothing.

But the answer of a good conscience The word question, or questioning,
is to be taken here for "answer," or testimony. Now Peter briefly
defines the efficacy and use of baptism, when he calls attention to
conscience, and expressly requires that confidence which can sustain
the sight of God and can stand before his tribunal. For in these words
he teaches us that baptism in its main part is spiritual, and then that
it includes the remission of sins and renovation of the old man; for
how can there be a good and pure conscience until our old man is
reformed, and we be renewed in the righteousness of God? and how can we
answer before God, unless we rely on and are sustained by a gratuitous
pardon of our sins? In short, Peter intended to set forth the effect of
baptism, that no one might glory in a naked and dead sign, as
hypocrites are wont to do.

But we must notice what follows, by the resurrection of Jesus Christ By
these words he teaches us that we are not to cleave to the element of
water, and that what is thereby typified flows from Christ alone, and
is to be sought from him. Moreover, by referring to the resurrection,
he has regard to the doctrine which he had taught before, that Christ
was vivified by the Spirit; for the resurrection was victory over death
and the completion of our salvation. We hence learn that the death of
Christ is not excluded, but is included in his resurrection. We then
cannot otherwise derive benefit from baptism, than by having all our
thoughts fixed on the death and the resurrection of Christ.

22 Who is on the right hand of God. He recommends to us the ascension
of Christ unto heaven, lest our eyes should seek him in the world; and
this belongs especially to faith. He commends to our notice his session
on the Father's right hand, lest we should doubt his power to save us.
And what his sitting at the right hand of the Father means, we have
elsewhere explained, that is, that Christ exercises supreme power
everywhere as God's representative. And an explanation of this is what
follows, angels being made subject to him; and he adds powers and
authorities only for the sake of amplification, for angels are usually
designated by such words. It was then Peter's object to set forth by
these high titles the sovereignty of Christ.
__________________________________________________________________

[43] The most satisfactory explanation of this passage is that of Beza,
Doddridge, Macknight, and Scott; that the reference is to what was done
in the time of Noah, that is, that Christ by his Spirit employed him as
a preacher of righteousness, though with no success, as the spirits of
the men to whom he preached were then in prison, reserved, as the
fallen angels are represented to be, for the judgment of the last day.
The Apostle had before said that Christ's Spirit was in the prophets
who foretold his coming, 1 Peter 1:11. The passage may be thus
rendered, -- 19. "By which also he, having gone, preached to the
spirits who are in prison, formerly disobedient, when the
long-suffering of God waited in the days of Noah," etc.; or, according
to Mackight, "to the spirits now in prison, who formerly were
disobedient," etc. The word "formerly" seems to require "now" in the
previous clause, or, "who are," as rendered by Beza. "He, having gone,
preached," is similar to a phrase in Ephesians 2:17, "And came and
preached," etc.; or, literally, "And having come he preached," etc.
Paul does not speak of his coming personally, but by his ministers: and
Peter evidently speaks of his going in the same sense. For hapax
exedecheto, Griesbach substitutes apexedecheto as being the most
approved reading. -- Ed.