Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Peter 3:20

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.

20. which sometime were disobedient ] The words that follow, however, appear to limit the range of the preaching within comparatively narrow boundaries. The “spirits” of whom St Peter speaks were those who had “once been disobedient:” the “once” being further defined as the time when “the long-suffering of God was waiting in the days of Noah.” We naturally ask as we read the words, (1) why the preaching was confined to these, or (2) if the preaching itself was not so confined, why this was the only aspect of it on which the Apostle thought fit to dwell? The answer to the first question cannot be given with any confidence. It is behind the veil which we cannot lift. All that we can say is that the fact thus revealed gives us at least some ground for seeing in it a part of God’s dealings with the human race, and that it is not unreasonable to infer an analogous treatment of those who were in an analogous condition. The answer to the second question is, perhaps, to be found in the prominence given to the history of Noah in our Lord’s eschatological teaching, as in Mat 24:37-38, Luk 17:26-27, and in the manifest impression which that history had made on St Peter’s mind, as seen in his reference to it both here and 2Pe 2:5; 2Pe 3:6. It is a conjecture, but not, I think, an improbable or irreverent one, that the disciple’s mind may have been turned by our Lord’s words to anxious enquiries as to the destiny of those who had been planting and building, buying and selling, when “the flood came and took them all away,” and that what he now states had been the answer to such enquiries. What was the result of the preaching we are not here told, the Apostle’s thoughts travelling on rapidly to the symbolic or typical aspect presented by the record of the Flood, but the notes on ch. 1Pe 4:6 will shew that his mind still dwelt on it, and that he takes it up again as a dropped thread in the argument of the Epistle. It will be noted, whatever view we may take of the interpretation of the passage as a whole, that it is the disobedience, and not any after-repentance at the moment of death, of those who lived in the days of Noah that is here dwelt on.

Such is, it is believed, the natural and true interpretation of St Peter’s words. It finds a confirmation in the teaching of some of the earliest fathers of the Church, in Clement of Alexandria ( Strom. vi. 6), and Origen, and Athanasius ( cont. Apollin. i. 13), and Cyril of Alexandria ( in Joann. xvi. 16); Even Augustine, at one time, held that the effect of Christ’s descent into Hades had been to set free some who were condemned to the torments of Hell ( Epist. ad Euodium, clxiv.), and Jerome (on Mat 12:29, Eph 4:10) adopted it without any hesitation. Its acceptance at an early date is attested by the apocryphal Gospel of Nicodemus, nearly the whole of which is given to a narrative of the triumph of Christ over Hades and Death, who are personified as the Potentates of darkness. It tells how He delivered Adam from the penalty of his sin, and brought the patriarchs from a lower to a higher blessedness, and emptied the prison-house, and set the captives free, and erected the cross in the midst of Hades, that there also it might preach salvation. Legendary and fantastic as the details may be, they testify to the prevalence of a wide-spread tradition, and that tradition is more naturally referred to the teaching of St Peter in this passage as the germ out of which it was developed than to any other source. As a matter of history, the article “He descended into Hell,” i.e. into Hades, first appeared in the Apostles’ Creed at a time when the tradition was almost universally accepted, and when the words of the Creed could not fail to be associated in men’s minds with the hope which it embodied.

It must be admitted, however, that the weight of many great names may be urged on behalf of other interpretations, and that some of them display, to say the least, considerable ingenuity. The common element in all of them is the desire to evade what seems the natural inference from the words, that they point to a wider hope of repentance and conversion as possible after death than the interpreters were willing to admit. They divide themselves into two classes: (1) those who accept the words as referring to a descent into Hades, and (2) those who give them an entirely different interpretation. Under (1) we have ( a) the view already noticed that the “preaching” was one of condemnation, anticipating the final judgment. It has been shewn to be untenable, and has so few names of weight on its side that it does not deserve more than a passing notice, ( b) The view that Christ descended into Hades to deliver the souls of the righteous, of Seth, and Abel, and Abraham, and the other saints of the Old Testament, can claim a somewhat higher authority. It entered, as has been seen, into the Gospel of Nicodemus. It was adopted by Irenus, Tertullian, Hippolytus. It was popular alike in the theology of many of the Schoolmen, and in medival art. It was accepted by Zwingli and Calvin among the Reformers, and receives a partial sanction from the teaching of our own Church as seen in the original form of Art. iii. as drawn up in 1552; and in the metrical paraphrase of the Apostles’ Creed which was at one time attached with a quasi-authority to the Prayer-Book, and in which we find the statement that Christ descended into Hell that He might be

“To those who long in darkness were

The true joy of their hearts.”

It is obvious, however, that whatever probability may attach to this speculation as such, it has scarcely any real point of contact with St Peter’s words. He speaks of “the days of Noah:” it takes in the whole patriarchal age, if not the whole history of Israel. He speaks of those who had been “disobedient.” It assumes penitence and faith, and at least a partial holiness. The touch of poetry in Calvin’s view that the word for “prison” should be taken as meaning the “watch-tower” upon which the spirits of the righteous were standing, as in the attitude of eager expectation, looking out for the coming of the King whom they had seen, as afar off, in the days of their pilgrimage, cannot rescue it from its inherent untenableness. ( c) A modification of the previous view has found favour with some writers, among whom the most notable are Estius, Bellarmine, Luther, Bengel. They avoid the difficulty which we have seen to be fatal to that view, and limit the application of St Peter’s words to those who had lived in the time of the Deluge, and they make the preaching one of pardon or deliverance, but, under the influence of the dogma that “there is no repentance in the grave,” they assume that the message of the Gospel came to those only who turned to God before they sank finally in the mighty waters. It need hardly be said that this was to strain Scripture to make it fit in with their own theories, and to read into the words something that is not found there. St Peter, as has been urged above, would have said, “to those who were sometime disobedient and afterwards repented ” if this had been what he meant to say.

(2) The other interpretation avoids all these minor difficulties by going altogether on a different track. It has the authority of some great representative theologians, Augustine among the Fathers ( ut supra), Aquinas among the Schoolmen ( Summ. Theolog. iii. Qu. LII. Art. 3), Bishop Pearson among Anglican divines. It starts with denying that there is any reference at all to the descent into Hades. Christ, it says, went in Spirit, not in the flesh, i.e. before His Incarnation, and preached to the spirits who are now in prison under condemnation, or were then in the prison-house of selfishness and unbelief, or simply in that of the body. He preached in Noah’s preaching, and that preaching was without effect except for the souls of Noah and his household. There is something, perhaps, attractive in the avoidance of what have been regarded as dangerous inferences from the natural meaning of St Peter’s words, something also in the bold ingenuity which rejects at once that natural meaning and the Catholic tradition which grew out of it: but, over and above the grave preliminary objection that it never would have suggested itself but for dogmatic prepossessions, it is not too much to say that it breaks down at every point. It disconnects the work of preaching from the death of Christ with which St Peter connects it. It empties the words “he went” of all significance and reduces them to an empty pleonasm. It substitutes a personal identification of the preaching of Christ with that of Noah for the more scriptural language, as in ch. 1Pe 1:11, that the Spirit which prompted the latter was one with the Spirit which Christ gave to His disciples. The whole line of exegesis comes under the condemnation of being “a fond thing vainly invented” for a dogmatic purpose. A collection of most of the passages from the Fathers bearing on the subject will be found in the Notes to “Pearson on the Creed” on the Article “He descended into Hell,” and in the Article Eschatology by the present writer in Smith’s Dictionary of Christian Biography.

wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water ] The last words admit of being taken either locally “they were saved, i.e. were brought safely, through the water,” “were delivered from the destruction which it brought to others,” or instrumentally, “they were saved by means of the water.” The latter interpretation presents, at first, the difficulty that it represents the waters of the deluge, as well as the ark, as a means of deliverance. The parallelism between the type and the antitype in the next verse, leaves, however, no doubt that this was the thought which St Peter had in his mind. He saw in the very judgment which swept away so many that which brought deliverance to others. In the stress laid upon the “few” that were thus saved, we may legitimately recognise the impression made by our Lord’s answer to the question, Are there few that be saved? (Luk 13:23). The Apostle looked round him and saw that those who were in the way of salvation were few in number. He looked back upon the earliest records of the work of a preaching of repentance and found that then also few only were delivered. In the reference to the “long-suffering” of God as waiting and leading to repentance, we find a striking parallel to the language of 2Pe 3:9, and in both we cannot doubt that the thought present to the writer’s mind was that “God was not willing that any should perish.”

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

Which sometime were disobedient – Which were once, or formerly, ( pote,) disobedient or rebellious. The language here does not imply that they had ceased to be disobedient, or that they had become obedient at the time when the apostle wrote; but the object is to direct the attention to a former race of people characterized by disobedience, and to show the patience evinced under their provocations, in endeavoring to do them good. To say that people were formerly rebellious, or rebellious in a specified age, is no evidence that they are otherwise now. The meaning here is, that they did not obey the command of God when he called them to repentance by the preaching of Noah. Compare 2Pe 2:5, where Noah is called a preacher of righteousness.

When once the long suffering of God waited in the days of Noah – God waited on that guilty race for 120 years, Gen 6:3, a period sufficiently protracted to evince his long-suffering toward one generation. It is not improbable that during that whole period Noah was, in various ways, preaching to that wicked generation. Compare the notes at Heb 11:7.

While the ark was a preparing – It is probable that preparations were made for building the ark during a considerable portion of that time. Peters, at Rome, was a much longer time in building; and it is to be remembered that in the age of the world when Noah lived, and with the imperfect knowledge of the arts of naval architecture which must have prevailed, it was a much more serious undertaking to construct an ark that would hold such a variety and such a number of animals as that was designed to, land that would float safely for more than a year in an universal flood, than it was to construct such a fabric as Peters, in the days when that edifice was raised.

Wherein few, that is, eight souls – Eight persons – Noah and his wife, his three sons and their wives, Gen 7:7. The allusion to their being saved here seems to be to encourage those whom Peter addressed to perseverance and fidelity, in the midst of all the opposition which they might experience. Noah was not disheartened. Sustained by the Spirit of Christ – the presence of the Son of God – he continued to preach. He did not abandon his purpose, and the result was that tie was saved. True, they were few in number who were saved; the great mass continued to be wicked; but this very fact should be an encouragement to us – that though the great mass of any one generation may be wicked, God can protect and save the few who are faithful.

By water – They were borne up by the waters, and were thus preserved. The thought on which the apostle makes his remarks turn, and which leads him in the next verse to the suggestions about baptism, is, that water was employed in their preservation, or that they owed their safety, in an important sense, to that element. In like manner we owe our salvation, in an important sense, to water; or, there is an important agency which it is made to perform in our salvation. The apostle does not say that it was in the same way, or that the one was a type designed to represent the other, or even that the efficacy of water was in both cases the same; but he says, that as Noah owed his salvation to water, so there is an important sense in which water is employed in ours. There is in certain respects – he does not say in all respects – a resemblance between the agency of water in the salvation of Noah, and the agency of water in our salvation. In both cases water is employed, though it may not be that it is in the same manner, or with precisely the same efficacy.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Verse 20. When once the long-suffering of God waited] In Pirkey Aboth, cap. v. 2, we have these words: “There were ten generations from Adam to Noah, that the long-suffering of God might appear; for each of these generations provoked him to anger, and went on in their iniquity, till at last the deluge came.”

Were saved by water.] While the ark was preparing, only Noah’s family believed; these amounted to eight persons; and these only were saved from the deluge , on the water: all the rest perished in the water; though many of them, while the rains descended, and the waters daily increased, did undoubtedly humble themselves before God, call for mercy, and receive it; but as they had not repented at the preaching of Noah, and the ark was now closed, and the fountains of the great deep broken up, they lost their lives, though God might have extended mercy to their souls.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

Which; which spirits in prison.

Question. When were these spirits, to whom Christ preached by Noah, in prison?

Answer. Then when Peter wrote this Epistle. The Greek participle of the present tense is here to be supplied, and the word thus read, preached to the spirits which are in prison, viz. now at this time; and so the time of their being in prison is opposed to the time of their being disobedient; their disobedience going before their imprisonment; q.d. They were disobedient then, they are in prison now.

Sometime; viz. in the days of Noah, when they were upon earth.

Were disobedient; would not believe what Noah told them in Gods name, nor be brought to repentance by his preaching.

When once; not always, but for a determinate time, viz. one hundred and twenty years; which term being expired, there was no hope left for them that they should be spared.

The long-suffering of God; i.e. God in his patience and long-suffering.

Waited; for the repentance and reformation of that rebellious generation.

In the days of Noah; till the one hundred and twenty years were run out, and the ark, which was preparing for the security of him and his family, were finished.

Eight souls; i.e. eight persons, Noah, and his wife, his three sons, and their wives.

Were saved by water; either:

1. By water is here put for in, as Rom 4:11, that believe, though they be not circumcised: the same Greek preposition is used as here, and the words may be read, by, or through, or rather in uncircumcision; for uncircumcision was not the cause or means of their believing. See the like use of this particle, 2Pe 3:5. Thus, saved in the water, is as much as, notwithstanding the water, or the water not hindering; so 1Ti 2:15, saved in childbearing, where the same preposition is used. Or:

2. By water; the water which drowned the world, lifting up the ark and saving Noah and his household.

Question. Doth not this place countenance the papists limbus, or the place where the souls of the Old Testament fathers were reserved (as they pretend) till Christs coming in the flesh?

Answer. No: for:

1. The spirits here mentioned were disobedient, which cannot be said of the fathers of the Old Testament, who were true believers.

2. The spirits here mentioned are not said to be delivered out of prison, but only that Christ by his Spirit preached to them, and to his preaching to them their disobedience is opposed.

3. According to the papists, Noah and his family must be in their limbus, whereas they are opposed to those disobedient spirits to whom Christ is said to preach.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

20. oncenot in the oldestmanuscripts.

when . . . the long-sufferingof God waited in the days of NoahOldest manuscripts. Greek,“was continuing to wait on” (if haply men in thehundred twenty years of grace would repent) until the end ofHis waiting came in their death by the flood. This refutes ALFORD’Sidea of a second day of grace having been given in Hades. Noah’s daysare selected, as the ark and the destroying flood answer respectivelyto “baptism” and the coming destruction of unbelievers byfire.

while the ark wasa-preparing (Heb 11:7).A long period of God’s “long-suffering and waiting,” asNoah had few to help him, which rendered the world’s unbelief themore inexcusable.

whereinliterally, “(byhaving entered) into which.”

eightseven (the sacrednumber) with ungodly Ham.

fewso now.

soulsAs this term ishere used of living persons, why should not “spirits”also? Noah preached to their ears, but Christ in spirit, totheir spirits, or spiritual natures.

saved by waterThe samewater which drowned the unbelieving, buoyed up the ark in which theeight were saved. Not as some translate, “were brought safethrough the water.” However, the sense of the prepositionmay be as in 1Co 3:15, “theywere safely preserved through the water,” though having to be inthe water.

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

Which sometime were disobedient,…. To all the instructions and warnings which God gave them, to all the strivings of his Spirit, and to the ministry of Christ, by Noah; they continued in their profaneness and impiety, and to corrupt their ways, and fill the earth with violence and wickedness; not believing what they were threatened with, or that ever a flood would come upon them, and destroy them: and this “sometime” refers to the time of their being upon earth, who were now in hell; “to the days of Noah”; hereafter mentioned; and which the Syriac version connects with this clause, reading it thus, “who of old were disobedient in the days of Noah”; at which time it was, that Christ, by his Spirit in Noah, went and preached to them: when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah: that is, when God, who is longsuffering and patient, waited on these disobedient ones, in Noah’s time, for the space of an hundred and twenty years:

while the ark was preparing; by Noah, according to the directions which God gave him, Ge 6:14 and which, as R. Tanchuma says b, was fifty two years a building; others say c an hundred years; but Jarchi says d it was an hundred and twenty; and which seems most likely, that being the term of time in which God’s longsuffering waited on them; during which time Noah was preaching to them, and building the ark:

wherein few, that is, eight souls, were saved by water; the eight persons were, Noah, and his wife, and his three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japhet, and their three wives. It is a common tradition with the Jews e, that besides these, Og, king of Bashan, escaped the flood; and who, they say, is the same that escaped, and told Abraham of Lot’s being carried captive by the kings f; the manner of his escape at the flood they relate thus g;

“Og came, who was delivered from the men that died at the flood; and he rode upon the ark, and he had a covering upon his head, and was fed with the food of Noah; but not for his worthiness was he delivered, but that the inhabitants of the world might see the power of the Lord;”

and elsewhere h, after this manner, citing those words, “and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark”, Ge 7:23 they add,

“except Og, king of Bashan, who sat on a certain piece of wood which belonged to the scaffolding of the ark, and he swore to Noah, and his sons, that he would be their servant for ever. What did Noah do? he bored an hole in the ark, and every day reached out food to him, and he remained alive, according to what is said, De 3:11 “only Og, king of Bashan”, c.”

But this is all a mere fiction and equally fabulous is the account the Arabians give, who say i that eighty persons, together with Noah, were taken into the ark, among whom was Jorham, their father; for there were no more than eight persons saved; and this is the apostle’s sense; and agreeably the Syriac version renders it, “and eight souls” , “only entered into it, and were saved by water”; and we are told by some of the eastern writers k, that when these eight went out of the ark, they built a city, which they called Themanin, which, in the Arabic language, signifies “eight”, according to their number. The ark was a type of Christ, into whom whoever enters by faith, or in whom whoever believes, shall be saved; but as they that entered into the ark were but few, so are those that enter in at the strait gate, or believe in Christ; and they that went into the ark were saved by the water bearing up the ark, even by that by which others were destroyed; as the very same thing, for different reasons, is the cause or means of destruction and salvation; so Christ is set, for the fall and rising of many, is a stumblingblock to some, and the power and wisdom of God to others; and the Gospel, and the ministers of it, are the savour of life unto life to some, and the savour of death unto death to others. This instance of the dispensation of the providence of God to the old world is very appropriately, though by way of digression, introduced by the apostle; showing, that in times past, as then, God’s usual method has been to afford the outward means to ungodly men, and to bear with them long, and then bring down his vengeance upon them, and save his own people; and this suffering saints might depend upon would be their case, and therefore should bear their afflictions patiently.

b In Pirke Eliezer, c. 23. c Elmacin. Hist. apud Hottinger. Smegma Orient. l. 1. c. 8. p. 249. d In Gen. vi. 15. e Targum Jon. in Deut. iii. 11. T. Bab. Nidda, fol. 61. 1. f Bereshit Rabba, sect. 42. fol. 37. 2. Targum Jon. & Jarchi in Gen. xiv. 13. g Targum Jon. in Gen. xiv. 13. h Pirke Eliezer, c. 23. i Pocock. Specim. Hist. Arab. p. 38. k Eutychii Annal. p. 43. Elmacin. Hist. l. 1. c. 1. p. 12. Patricides, p. 10. Apud Hottinger, Smegma Orient. l. 1. c. 8. p. 251, 252.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

Which aforetime were disobedient ( ). First aorist active participle of (for which verb see 3:20) in the dative plural agreeing with . These spirits now in prison once upon a time () were disobedient (typical rebels, Hart calls them).

Waited (). Imperfect middle of the double compound , late verb, probably first by Paul (1Co 1:7), though in the apocryphal Acta Pauli (iii) and other late writings cited by Nageli (p. 43). Perfective use of the two prepositions (, ) to wait out to the end, as for Christ’s Second Coming (Php 3:20). A hundred years apparently after the warning (Gen 5:32; Gen 6:3; Gen 7:6) Noah was preparing the ark and Noah as a preacher of righteousness (2Pe 2:5) forewarned the people, who disregarded it.

While the ark was a preparing ( ). Genitive absolute with present passive participle of , old compound (Mt 11:10), for (ark) see on Mt 24:38.

Wherein ( ). “Into which” (the ark).

That is (‘ ). Explanatory expression like our English idiom (Ro 10:6, etc.).

Souls (). Persons of both sexes (living men) as in Acts 2:41; Acts 27:37, etc.

Were saved (). First aorist passive indicative of , old compound, to bring safe through as in Ac 27:44.

Through water (‘ ). “By means of water” as the intermediate agent, an apparent change in the use of in composition just before (local use) to the instrumental use here. They came through the water in the ark and so were saved by the water in spite of the flood around them. Peter lays stress (Hart) on the water rather than on the ark (Heb 11:7) for the sake of the following illustration.

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

In which [ ] . Lit., into which. A pregnant construction; into which they were gathered, and in which they were saved.

By water [] . Rev., through. Some take this as instrumental, by means of water; other as local, by passing through the water, or being brought safely through the water into the ark. Rev., in margin, were brought safely through water.

Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament

1) “Which sometime were disobedient.” (Gk. apeithesasin pote) to the then disobeying ones, the idea is that the same spirit that raised Jesus from the dead also empowered Noah in pre-flood times to preach coming judgment and the way of deliverance, 2Pe 1:21.

2) “When once the longsuffering of God waited.” The preaching was done by Christ, thru Noah (Gk. hote) “when” the longsuffering or patience of God waited or lingered — He had warned “my Spirit will not always strive with man, Gen 6:3.

3) “In the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing.” The preaching of Christ, by the Spirit was done when God’s longsuffering lingered or waited (120) years) in the days of Noah — not after Christ was raised from the dead. There has never been but one way of salvation, by the Word and Spirit, Act 10:43.

4) “Wherein few, that is eight souls.” (eis en oligoi) in which (time and place – the ark) a few (tout estin okto psuchai) eight souls or individuals – Noah’s family Gen 7:1; Gen 7:13.

5) “Were saved by water.” (diesothesan) were saved or delivered (di hudatos) by or through water. The deliverance of Noah’s family of eight through the water – judgment,” of God on earth was effected through the Spirit empowered preaching of Noah to his family who responded by faith and obedience while the ark was preparing. They also responded as children of obedience when they entered the ark.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

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.

(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, 1Pe 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 Eph 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 ἅπαξ ἐξεδέχετο, Griesbach substitutes ἀπεξεδέχετο as being the most approved reading. — Ed.

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

1Pe. 3:20 that aforetime were disobedient, when the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water:

Expanded Translation

(spirits) that aforetime refused to believe and obey, when the longsuffering (patience, self-restraint) of God waited it out in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, inside of which few, that is eight souls (persons) were saved by means of water.

_______________________

that aforetime were disobedient

(See the latter word defined in 1Pe. 2:8.)

This phrase certainly shows when these imprisoned spirits were disobedient. And, unless all other plain teachings of the Scriptures be cast aside, we can only believe that the preaching was done to them at the time of their disobedience, and while they still had opportunity to repent, that is, while they were still living beings and in the flesh. (Note questions, end of chapter.)

when the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah

LONGSUFFERINGmakrothumia, is generally used in reference to a man who perseveres patiently and bravely, particularly in the enduring of misfortunes and troubles. Trench says that it is the self-restraint which does not hastily retaliate a wrong. The word stands in contrast to one who would become quickly full of wrath or revenge. How grateful we may be that we serve such a God!

while the ark was a preparing

It is our opinion that the preaching mentioned in 1Pe. 3:19 was also to the imprisoned spirits during this same period of time. 2Pe. 2:5 speaks of Noah as a preacher of righteousness. Gen. 6:3 states that God allowed 120 years between the time he decided to destroy the earth and the time of its actual destruction by the flood. Precisely how much of this 120 years Noah spent preaching is not known.

Was a preparingone word in the original, kataskevadzoa word meaning to prepare, put in readiness, hence to construct. build.

In view of the fact that the antediluvians as a whole did not believe Noahs preaching, he and his immediate family must have done most of the preparing themselves.

wherein few, that is, eight souls, were saved

The eight souls are mentioned in Gen. 7:7.

SAVEDdiasodzo (from dia), through, and sodzo, to save, to bring safe through, to convey in safety; but passively, as here: to reach a place or state of safety; hence, be saved, out of danger, rescued.

through water

That is, the ark was held up by water. Water was employed in their preservation in an important way and they, in a definite sense, owed their safety to that element. Though water spelled the damnation of the rebellious, it meant the salvation of the obedient. In like manner, we ourselves owe our salvation in an important way, to the same component. The stress in the illustration is not on the mode used, but rather that the same element was present in both casestheir salvation and ours.

It is striking to see the importance of water in connection with salvation down through the ages. It played an important role in the salvation of Noah and his family. It certainly was important in the deliverance of the Israelites when they were baptized in the cloud and in the sea as they escaped from the pursuing Egyptians. It was an important element as they crossed the Jordan and entered into the Promised Land. And even in the rites and ceremonies of the Old Testament Jew, water played an integral part. Should we, then, be so amazed that water should have an important place in the salvation of mankind in the Christian age?

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

(20) Which sometime were disobedient.The absence of the definite article here in the Greek (contrary to St. Peters usage in participial sentencese.g., 1Pe. 1:5; 1Pe. 1:7; 1Pe. 1:10; 1Pe. 1:17) makes it possible to think that the spirits mentioned in this verse are not co-extensive with those in prison. It is, literally, to men who once upon a time were disobedient. Our Lord preached to the whole class of spirits in prison, of all times and races; and then, to magnify the bounty of this act, St. Peter instances a particular group of them, who were the most marked criminals of any, and whose case suggested a useful application. He has a reason for using the word disobedient. It would not describe all sinners, but those who had heard and been convinced by the word of God, but refused to accept it. (See Note on 1Pe. 3:2.) This was the case with those to whom Noah preached (2Pe. 2:5); and, in spite of their disobedience, Christ, after His innocent and sacrificial death, went in spirit and preached a gospel to them. Now, let it be recollected that St. Peters object through the whole of this section is to encourage the Hebrew Christians to be ready, through a good conscience, for a brave martyrdom, if need be. They are to think how their deaths, like Christs, may bring their persecutors to God. Nayhe seems to implytheir very spirits going forth into the world of spirits may conceivably carry a gospel of some kind even to Hebrew relatives who have passed away, like those Antediluvians, in the disobedience which was characteristic of the Jews. St. Clement of Alexandria, who derives the notion from the Shepherd of Hermas, gives his belief that the Apostles also, when they died, preached to those who had died before them; and though there is little that throws light on our occupation in the intermediate state, it can hardly be pronounced impossible for some spirits to be allowed to follow Christs example there by preaching to spirits in prison. Many expositors, afraid of the consequences of admitting that there could be a possible gospel for men who died impenitent, have supposed that the imprisoned spirits to whom Christ went were the less wicked people destroyed by the Flood; others that they were those who had some motions of penitence when the rain began to fall; but these ideas are foreign to the text, which only tells us that they were disobedient, and adds nothing to extenuate their crime. They are a typical instance of men who died as evil doers (1Pe. 3:17).

When once the longsuffering of God waited.The word once has no business in the text, originating only in an ingenious but unnecessary guess of Erasmus. The clause serves to heighten the guilt of the poor sinners to whom Christ preached in prison. Not only did they die a judicial death for their extreme sensuality (Gen. 6:3; Gen. 6:11), not only did they disobey an isolated call to repentance from Noah, but continuously, through all the time of the building of the ark (traditionally 120 years), they went on refusing to listen. Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed without a preacher to warn them, the Canaanites were annihilated without an offer of repentance, but these abandoned Antediluvians sinned in spite of the long ministry of Noah, and died impenitent. Both their wickedness and Gods longsuffering with them were embodied in Hebrew proverbs, which St. Peters readers would know, and yet Christ had a gospel for them.

While the ark.Better, while an ark. It does not merely describe the period of the disobedience, but rather changes the thought altogether. We now turn from the destruction of the majority to the salvation of the few.

Wherein.Literally, whereintoi.e., by getting into which.

Few, that is, eight souls were saved.The mention of disobedience calls up to the Apostles mind at once the vast number of Hebrews who rejected the gospel of Christ. As in 1Pe. 2:4 et seq., so here, he establishes the readers against the thought, Can I be right and all these people wrong? by showing that from the beginning it was always a small number who accepted salvation, and they should naturally expect it to be so now. It is better to be one of the eight in the ark than of the many disobedient in the water.

By water.Or, through water. The very water which drowned the disobedient was the instrument of saving to those who believed, for it floated their ark. It cannot be denied that this is a little forced. So, in the same way, in 1Pe. 2:8, the same stone is to some a sanctuary, to some a stumbling-block. This pregnant word water leads on to the next thought.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

20. Disobedient They disbelieved the preaching of Noah, and disobeyed his calls to repentance.

Waited Literally, was waiting; and it continued to wait for their repenting through a hundred and twenty years, when the end came.

Few Only eight; very few compared with the vast number that might have escaped.

Were saved From destruction by the flood, by means of the water which bore up the ark.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

1Pe 3:20. Were saved by water. Some would translate the words , in, or amidst the water; others, with our translation, by water: that is, the water, which destroyed the rest of mankind, lifted up the ark, whereby Noah and his family were saved. Doddridge, after Raphelius, would render it, were carried safely through the water. See the next note.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

1Pe 3:20 . The words which begin this verse: , characterize the spirits who are in prison according to their former conduct. The participle must not, with Wiesinger, be resolved into: “although, notwithstanding the fact that they had been disobedient;” an adversative relation of this kind must have been more plainly expressed. [214]

According to the uniform usage of the N. T., the word has here also the meaning of unbelief involving resistance; cf. chap. 1Pe 2:7-8 , 1Pe 3:1 , 1Pe 4:17 . The translation: “to be disobedient,” is too inexact, for the word forms the antithesis to .

. . .] serves not only to specify the time when these spirits were unbelieving, but also to mark the guilt of the .

, according to N. T. usage, equivalent to: “ patient waiting ,” is here used absolutely, as in Rom 8:25 (comp. , Heb 10:13 ; thus Schott also). The narrative itself shows the object to which this waiting of God’s long-suffering was directed. Its duration is not to be limited to the seven days mentioned in Gen 7:4 (de Wette), for this is in keeping neither with the , nor the subsequent , but embraces the whole period of 120 years mentioned in Gen 6:3 .

The time specified by . . . is still more precisely defined in the subsequent and the ; in such a way, however, that these adjuncts contain a reference to the exhortation to repentance then given, for Noah was not like the others, an unbeliever, but a believer, and the preparation of the ark gave unmistakeable testimony to the approaching judgment. “ without the article, the expression used by the LXX. for , equal to ark, arca ; comp. Mat 24:38 ; Luk 17:27 ; Heb 11:7 ” (Wiesinger).

[214] Hofmann has now justly given up his former explanation: “without being obedient.” Walther’s interpretation is evidently entirely arbitrary: “to the spirits, i.e. the devils and the damned in general, particularly to those damned who,” etc. But neither is there a warrant for inserting (Bengel: subaudi , i. e. exempli gratia, in diebus Noe; subjicitur generi species maxime insignis).

REMARK 1.

Some of the interpreters who do not apply this passage to the descensus ad inferos, as Luther (in his Auslegung der Ep. Petri , 1523), the Socinians, Vorstius, Amelius, Grotius, etc., explain as referring to the preaching of the apostles , assuming that the unbelievers in the time of Noah are mentioned only as types of the unbelievers in apostolic times. they understand to mean the heathen alone, or those along with the Jews. Amelius: . hic in genere denotant homines, quemadmodum paulo post : in captivitate erant tum Judaei, sub jugo legis existentes, tum quoque gentiles, sub potestate diaboli jacentes. Illos omnes Christus liberavit; praedicationem verbi sui ad ipsos mittens et continuans et Apostolos divina virtute instruens.

REMARK 2.

Even interpreters who apply this passage to the descensus ad inferos, and understand of the preaching of salvation, [215] are guilty of much arbitrariness, and especially in designating more precisely those to whom the preaching is addressed. Several of the Fathers, as Irenaeus, Tertullian, Hippolytus; many of the Scholastics; further, Zwingli, Calvin (in his Comment.), and others, hold those to have been the pious, especially the pious of the O. T. [216]

Marcion thinks the was addressed to those who, though in the O. T. termed ungodly, were actually better than the O. T. believers.

Clemens Al. supposes the , who, however, were still without faith and in the trammels of idolatry.

Several commentators assume that not all unbelievers in the days of Noah are meant, but those only who, at first indeed unbelieving, had still repented at the last moment when the flood came upon them; this is the view of Suarez, Estius, Bellarmin, Luther (zu der Erklrung der Genesis, 1536, und zu Hosea IV. 2, v. J. 1545), [217] Peter Martyr, etc. Bengel says: Probabile est, nonnullos ex tanta multitudine, veniente pluvia, resipuisse: cumque non credidissent, dum expectaret Deus, postea, cum poena ingrueret, credere coepisse, quibus postea Christus eorumque similibus se praeconem gratiae praestiterit. Wiesinger agrees with this interpretation, at least in so far that he assumes that the moral condition of the individual (at the time of the flood) was not in every case the same, but extremely varied; although, on the other hand, he finds fault with it on the ground “that, in contradiction to the context, it limits the only to a part.” Schott remarks, as against Wiesinger, “that although some may in respect of moral condition have differed from the majority, or still have repented in the last moment, yet these were not among the spirits in durance who listened to Christ’s preaching.”

[215] It must further be remarked that several commentators: Athanasius, Ambrosius, Erasmus, Calvin (in his Inslit . lib. II. 2, c. 16, 9), understand Christ’s preaching as at once a praedicatio salvifica and praed. damnatoria. Calvin, however, does hold by the idea of , when he says: Contextus vim mortis (Christi) inde amplificat, quod ad mortuos usque penetraverit, dum piae animae ejus visitationis, quam sollicite exspectaverant, praesenti aspectu sunt potitae; contra reprobis clarius patuit, se excludi ab omni salute.

[216] Calvin’s exposition is singular: he interprets equal to specula vel ipse excubandi actus; . . equals: the spirits of those who were on the watch-tower, i.e. in the expectation of salvation, or also in anxietas expectationis Christi, and then continues: Postquam (Ap.) dixit, Christi se mortuis manifestasse, mox addit: quum increduli fuissent olim, quo significat nihil nocuisse Sanctis Patribus quod impiorum multitudine paene obruti fuerunt. Exemplum vero ex tota vetustate prae aliis illustre deligit, nempe cum diluvio submersus fuit mundus. He removes the scruple, that the dative is not in harmony with this explanation, by observing that the apostles sometimes employ one case in room of another.

[217] On Luther’s vacillation in interpreting this passage, see Khler as above, and Schweizer as above, p. 7.

REMARK 3.

The view commonly accepted is that this preaching by Christ took place before His resurrection, whilst His body lay in the grave. Many even of the older dogmatists of the Lutheran Church, however, hold it to have been accomplished after His quickening, that is, in the time between this and His going forth from the grave. Quenstedt says: Christus totaque adeo persona (non igitur secundum animam tantum nec secundum corpus tantum) post redunitionem animae ac corporis ad istud damnatorum descendit; he fixes the time when this happened: illud momentum, quod intercessit inter et Christi stricte ita dictam. Hollaz: distinguendum inter resurrectionem externam et internam; illa est egressio e sepulcro et exterior coram hominibus manifestatio; haec est ipsa vivificatio; so, too, Hutter, Baier, Buddeus, etc. In like manner Schott: “in the new spiritual life which in that mysterious hour of midnight He had put on, and before appearing with it on the upper world by His resurrection, He descended.”

The verse does not indeed say that the belongs to this very moment, but it does certainly point to the preaching having taken place after Christ’s restoration to life, as de Wette, Brckner, Wiesinger, Zezschwitz, have rightly acknowledged; for referring as does to the connected with , it is arbitrary to find in mention made of an act of Christ which took place after the indeed, but yet before the . As, then, both expressions apply to Christ in His entire person, consisting of body and soul, what follows must not be conceived as an activity which He exercised in His spirit only and whilst separated from His body. In addition to this, if according to His intention His preaching was to be indeed a preaching of salvation, it must have had for its substance the work of redemption, completed only in the resurrection. Weiss (p. 232) objects that is not equal to , and this is undoubtedly true; but it cannot prove anything against the view that Christ as the Risen One, that is, in His glorified body, preached to the spirits in prison, inasmuch as in this body the Lord is no longer , but entirely .

Thus the passage says nothing as to Christ’s existence between His death and resurrection. If Act 2:31 presuppose the going of the dead Christ into Hades, the common dwelling-place of departed souls, this descensus ad inferos must not be identified with the one here mentioned, as also Wiesinger, Brckner, and Schott rightly observe; so that by drawing this distinction the disputed question, too, whether Christ descended into Hades, quoad animam or quoad animam et corpus, finds its correct solution. It must further be added that this passage gives no support whatever either to the doctrine of the Form. concordiae, that in Hades Christ “overcame the devil, destroyed the power of hell, and despoiled the devil of his might,” or to that of the Catholic Church of the limbus Patrum and Purgatory.

Connected with the words are the thoughts which follow, in which stress is laid, not so much on the judgment which overtook unbelievers in the flood, as on the deliverance of the few.: .

] The preposition is to be explained not as equal to (Act 28:4 : ), nor as if it were (in medio aquarum), nor equivalent to non obstante aqua (Gerhard), nor even as a preposition of time (eo tempore, quo aquae inundaverant); but is to be taken either locally or instrumentally. is then either: “ through the water ,” or equivalent to: “ by means of water .” The former view (Bengel, Steiger, de “Wette, Brckner, Wiesinger, formerly Hofmann also) seems to be confirmed by the verbum compos. . But , both in the LXX. and in the N. T. (cf. Mat 14:36 ; Luk 7:3 , etc.), is often used as a strengthened form of , without the peculiar force of being pressed. And thus it must be taken here, inasmuch as it contradicts the historical narrative in Genesis, to say that Noah and his family were saved by passing through the water. has accordingly here an instrumental force, so that indicates water as the medium through which the Noahites were delivered. [218] And this interpretation is alone in harmony with the context, inasmuch as the apostle in what follows gives special prominence to the fact that the N. T. deliverance is likewise effected by means of water. If water was the means of deliverance to Noah and those with him, “in so far as it bore those hidden within the ark, and thus preserved them from destruction, comp. Gen 7:17-18 ” (Weiss, p. 313; thus also Wolf, Pott, Jachmann, Schott), this implies recourse to a pregnant construction, inasmuch as the apostle unites the two thoughts in one: “ they were saved by going into the ark ” and “they were saved .” Hofmann seeks to avoid the assumption of a pregnancy by explaining here as the water “which began to overflow the earth,” and which compelled Noah to enter with those belonging to him into the ark, in support of which he appeals to Gen 7:11 ; Gen 7:13 . But although these passages state that both the entering into the ark and the beginning of the deluge took place on the same day, still the latter event is not indicated as the motive of the former. According to the narrative in Genesis, it was the command of God which moved the Noahites to enter the ark, and as soon as they had done so, and God had closed the ark, the deluge commenced; cf. Gen 7:1 ; Gen 7:16-17 .

Further, on Hofmann’s interpretation water can be regarded only in a very loose sense as the medium of deliverance; nor would it be in keeping with the subsequent parallelism. It must be noted that is anarthrous, and although by the term no other water can be understood than that of the flood, yet Peter’s object here is not to show that the same water which destroyed some served as the means of deliverance for others, but merely to state that the deliverance of Noah and those with him was effected by water , in order that this water then may be recognised as the type of the saving water of baptism (comp. Schott).

, ] . . . justifies the use of the expression ; so much stress is laid on this particular, very probably in order to point out, on the one hand, the great number of those who perished, and on the other, the proportion to be looked for at the final judgment.

[218] Wiesinger has expressed himself in favour of the first version, but then remarks: “the writer conceives the water at the same time as the saving element;” Fronmller, too, combines both interpretations: “in which few souls sought shelter, and were saved through the water and by it;” this is evidently altogether unwarrantable.

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

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.

Ver. 20. Which sometimes were disobedient ] Gr. unpersuadable, uncounsellable. They jeered where they should have feared, and thought Noah no wiser than the prior of St Bartholomew’s in London, who upon a vain prediction of an idle astrologer, went and built him a house at Harrow on the Hill, to secure himself from a supposed flood, foretold by that astrologer. (Holinshed.)

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

20 .] which were once disobedient (this clause is a secondary and dependent one, descriptive of the spirits intended: that they were those of men who were formerly disobedient) when ( marks distinctively the time intended by the ) the longsuffering of God was waiting (and this marks the period of their disobedience, viz. those 120 years of Gen 6:3 . , imperf.: the – betokening the full time during which it was exercised. “Exspectabat donec exspectandi finis erat.” Beng.) in the days of Noah while the ark ( anarthrous as the well-known name for the ark in the LXX) was being prepared, in which (pregn. constr., “by having entered into which:” not “into which,” see below) a few persons, that is eight souls (individuals: , as being in the body: the distinction may be noted here, but is not always kept: the disembodied are in Rev 6:9 ; Rev 20:4 ) were saved (from drowning) by water (not, “into which a few, &c. got safe through the water,” which was not the fact. The water is in the Apostle’s view the medium of saving , inasmuch as it bore up the ark: cf. the next verse: or it may be, and so Bengel, Steiger, De Wette, Huther, “through (the) water”). So much for the exegesis of the detail of this passage; from which it will be seen that we have regarded it, in common with the majority of Commentators, as necessarily pointing to an event in our Lord’s redemptive agency which happened, as regards time, in the order of the context here: and that that event was, His going (whether between His death and resurrection, or after the latter, will be presently discussed) to the place of custody of departed spirits, and there preaching to those spirits, which were formerly disobedient when God’s longsuffering waited in the days of Noah. Thus far I conceive our passage stands committed: and I do not believe it possible to make it say less, or other, than this. What was the intent of that preaching, and what its effect is not here revealed; the fact merely is stated. The statement of the fact, however, has been felt to be accompanied by such great difficulties, that other meanings have been sought for the passage than that which the words present at first sight. Expositors have endeavoured to remove the idea that the gospel was preached to the dead in Hades, either, 1. by denying the reference to our Lord’s descent thither at all, or, 2. by admitting that, but supposing it to have had another purpose. I give, following the classification in Huther’s note, an account of the principal upholders of these views. Under I., I place all those who deny any reference to Christ’s descent into Hades, distinguishing the minor differences between them as to what is there indicated.

I. 1. Augustine, Bed [12] , Thos. Aquinas, Lyra, Hammond, Beza, Scaliger, Leighton, Horneius, Gerhard, al., and recently Hofmann, Schriftbeweis ii. 1. 335 341, maintain that the was the preaching of righteousness by Noah to his contemporaries : that Noah thus preached not of himself, but by virtue of the Spirit of Christ inspiring him; and that thus his preaching was in fact a preaching by Christ in the Spirit. So, e. g. Augustine, Ep. 164 (99), vol. ii., suggests, that the “spiritus conclusi in carcere” may be “anim qu tunc erant in carne, atque ignoranti tenebris velut carcere claudebantur.” Also that Christ had not indeed come in the flesh, but from the beginning of the race came from time to time to convict the evil, to console the good, or to admonish both. For this He came not in flesh, but in spirit, i. e. in substantia Deitatis. But he qualifies this by asking, “Quid facit Filius sine Spiritu Sancto, vel sine Patre, cum inseparabilia sint omnia opera Trinitatis?” But this arbitrary interpretation of = “caro, et ignoranti tenebr,” is not common to all the supporters of this view. Beza represents a large class: “Christus. jam olim in diebus Noe. prdicavit spiritibus illis, qui nunc in carcere meritas dant pnas, utpote qui recta monenti Noe. parere olim recusarint.” Thus Scaliger, Horneius, al.: and Hofmann, except that he joins with , not with . It must be evident to every unprejudiced scholar, how alien such an interpretation is from the plain meaning and connexion of the words and clauses. Not a word is indicated by St. Peter on the very far-off lying allusion to the fact that the Spirit of Christ preached in Noah: not a word, here, on the fact that Noah himself preached to his contemporaries. Again, the same subject runs through the whole, without a hint, that we are dealing with historical matter of fact in , , , and with recondite figure in . Again, whether we take the metaphorical of Aug [13] , which I suppose will find hardly any advocates, or the of Beza, al., it cannot surely be doubted that we are equally putting force on the Apostle’s words, and that the must describe the local condition of the at the time when the preaching took place . Moreover , as compared with 1Pe 3:22 (which Hofmann gets most lamely over, by saying that it presents no greater difficulty than the statement that Christ accompanied the Israelites through the wilderness in 1Co 10:4 ; to which we may answer, If this were a plain statement involving such an application of the word, we might then discuss the intelligibility of it) the part. , marked off by the as not belonging to the same time as the (which Hofmann shews he feels, by his impracticable attempt to connect with ), shew, as plainly as words can shew, that we are reading of some act of Christ which He then, at the time described, went and did, with reference to spirits who were, at some other time ( ) specified ( ), in a certain state ( ). And, which has not been sufficiently noticed, a crowning objection to this view is the use of the word , connecting ( ) our Lord’s state, with the state of those to whom He preached: a word only used of men when departed out of this life (ref.).

[12] Bede, the Venerable , 731; Bedegr, a Greek MS. cited by Bede, nearly identical with Cod. “E,” mentioned in this edn only when it differs from E.

[13] Augustine, Bp. of Hippo , 395 430

I. 2. Several Commentators, principally Socinian, but also Vorst., Grot., Schttgen, al., understand by . . either the Gentiles, or the Jews (“sub jugo legis existentes”) and Gentiles (“sub potestate diaboli jacentes:” so in both cases, Schttg. and Amelius) together, and by the preaching of the Spirit of Christ by the Apostles. These expositors take the mention of the disobedient in Noah’s time to be merely by way of sample of the disobedient in all time, or, at least, in the time when the Apostle was writing. So Grot.: “adjungere voluit Petrus similitudinem a temporibus Noe, ut ostendat quanto res nunc melius per Christum quam tunc per Noen processerit.” As Huther well says, “How this interpretation heaps on caprice upon caprice, need not be shewn.” I will add, that its fautors do not appear to attempt to justify it philologically, as indeed it is plain they cannot. Every word of every clause protests against it.

II. We now come to those who understand the passage of our Lord’s descent into Hades, but, offended by the idea of the possibility of salvation being opened to spirits of the disobedient kept awaiting judgment, diverge from one another and from the ‘prima facie’ explanation.

II. 1. Flacius, Calov., Buddus, Wolf, Aretius, al., understand . . of souls awaiting condemnation, but explain of announcing, not salvation, but condemnation. So Hollaz (in Huther), “fuit prdicatio Christi in inferno non evangelica, qu hominibus tantum in regno grati annunciatur, sed legalis, elenchtica, terribilis, eaque turn verbalis, qua ipsos terna supplicia promeritos esse convincit, tum realis, qua inimanem terrorem iis incussit.” But, besides that , as remarked above, has, as applied to Christ and His Apostles, but the one meaning of preaching the good tidings of salvation, besides the utter superfluity of such a ‘concio damnatoria’ to spirits already reserved to damnation, what a context would such a meaning give, in the midst of a passage intended to convey consolation and encouragement by the blessed consequences of Christ’s sufferings! See this well insisted on in Wiesinger’s careful discussion of the opinions on our passage, p. 241.

II. 2. Some of the Fathers, as Iren. (iv. 27. 2, p. 264; v. 31. 1, p. 331; al.; see Stieren’s Index, p. 1017), Tertullian, Hippolytus, the Schoolmen, Zwingle, Calvin, al., explain rightly, of announcing salvation, but regard . as the spirits of the just , especially of the O. T. saints. The most extraordinary instance of this class of interpreters is Calvin, who explains to mean “specula, sive ipse excubandi actus:” and the spirits in are, according to him, those which were in waiting for Christ’s salvation: “pi anim in spem salutis promiss intent, quasi eminus eam considerarent.” Then he proceeds, “Postquam dixit, Christum se mortuis manifestasse, mox addit: quum increduli fuissent olim ; quo significat, nihil nocuisse sanctis patribus quod impiorum multitudine pne obruti fuerint:” and regards this consideration as one calculated to console the believers, few as they were in the midst of the ungodly world. And having thus interpreted, he ingenuously confesses, “Discrepat, fateor, ab hoc sensu Grca syntaxis; debuerat enim Petrus, si hoc vellet, genitivum absolutum ponere. Sed quia apostolis novum non est liberius casum unum ponere alterius loco, et videmus Petrum hic confuse multas res simul coacervare, nec vero aliter aptus sensus elici poterat: non dubitavi ita resolvere orationem implicitam, quo intelligerent lectores, alios vocari incredulos, quam quibus prdicatum fuisse evangelium dixit.” A sentence to be well remembered for many reasons.

II. 3. Suarez, Estius, Bellarmine, Luther (on Hos 4:2 , anno 1545, quoted in Bengel), Peter Martyr, Bengel, al., assume that the words refer, not to all the unbelievers of Noah’s time, but only to those who repented at the last moment when the flood was upon them. “Probabile est,” says Bengel, “nonnullos ex tanta multitudine, veniente pluvia, resipuisse: cumque non credidissent dum exspectaret Deus, postea cum arca structa esset et pna ingrueret, credere cpisse: quibus postea Christus, eorumque similibus, se prconem grati prstiterit.”

II. 4. Athanasius, Ambrose, Erasmus, Calvin (Instit. 2:16. 9), hold both kinds of prdication, the ‘evangelica’ to the spirits of the just, the ‘damnatoria’ to those of the disobedient.

One or two singular interpretations do not fall under any of the above classes: e. g. Marcion maintained that the preaching of Christ was to those whom the O. T. calls ungodly, but who were in reality better than the O. T. saints; Clem.-alex. (Strom. vi. 6, p. 762 P.), that they were the , who were nevertheless imprisoned under idolatry.

It remains that we should enquire, whether this preaching to the imprisoned spirits by our Lord, took place between His death and His resurrection, or after the latter. The answer will very much depend on the sense which we give to . The argument which Wiesinger so much insists on, that the clauses must come in chronological sequence, will not determine for us; because . might very well be a taking up again of , recapitulating some former act also done in the Spirit: qu. d. “put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the Spirit, that Spirit in which also, ere He was made alive with the full resurrection life, He” &c. And this I incline to think the sense of the passage: referring not to the complex resurrection life, but properly and strictly to the Spirit, in which the Lord never ceased to be, even when His complex life of body and soul was dissolved. And Wiesinger is in fact assuming too much, when he says that “Christ ” is the subject of the sentence: that subject is simply from 1Pe 3:18 , of whatever period we understand this act. When again Wiesinger says that . cannot be understood of the time intermediate, because in no case can we think of our Lord’s state in death in dualistic wise, so that while His body was held by the bands of death, His Spirit should be carrying on the Messianic work, I answer, why not? Surely the reply to the penitent thief implies a , and in that a joy and triumph sufficient to be the subject of a consoling promise at that terrible moment. And might not the reasoning be turned, with as much propriety? Might not we say that it is impossible to conceive of our Lord during that time as other than employed in the Spirit in which He continued, not to exist merely, but to live? That, granted that His dying words imply a special delivering of his Spirit into the hands of his Father, and by consequence, a resting of his Spirit in those Hands in the death-state, yet must we not conceive of His Spirit as going thither, where “the righteous souls are in the hand of God?” And if so, who shall place a limit to His power or will to communicate with any departed spirits of whatever character? So that, while I would not say that the conditions of the passage are not satisfied by the supposition that the event happened after the Resurrection, I believe there can be no reason for saying that they are not, on the other hypothesis. And I own, that the inclines me to this other. It seems most naturally to be taken as a resumptive explanation of with a view to something ( 1Pe 3:21 ) which is to follow; and the , capable indeed of being otherwise explained, yet seems to favour this idea, that the Lord was strictly speaking when that happened which is related.

From all then which has been said, it will be gathered, that with the great majority of Commentators, ancient and modern, I understand these words to say, that our Lord, in His disembodied state, did go to the place of detention of departed spirits, and did there announce His work of redemption, preach salvation in fact, to the disembodied spirits of those who refused to obey the voice of God when the judgment of the flood was hanging over them. Why these rather than others are mentioned, whether merely as a sample of the like gracious work on others, or for some special reason unimaginable by us, we cannot say. It is ours to deal with the plain words of Scripture, and to accept its revelations as far as vouchsafed to us. And they are vouchsafed to us to the utmost limit of legitimate inference from revealed facts. That inference every intelligent reader will draw from the fact here announced: it is not purgatory, it is not universal restitution; but it is one which throws blessed light on one of the darkest enigmas of the divine justice: the cases where the final doom seems infinitely out of proportion to the lapse which has incurred it. And as we cannot say to what other cases this may have applied, so it would be presumption in us to limit its occurrence or its efficacy. The reason of mentioning here these sinners, above other sinners, appears to be, their connexion with the type of baptism which follows. If so, who shall say, that the blessed act was confined to them?

The literature of the foregoing passage is almost a library in itself. The principal Commentators nave given accounts more or less complete, of the history of its interpretation. The most concise and comprehensive is that in De Wette’s Handbuch.

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

wherein = into (App-104.) which.

souls. App-110.

were saved = (entered and) were saved. Figure of speech Ellipsis. App-6.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

20.] which were once disobedient (this clause is a secondary and dependent one, descriptive of the spirits intended: that they were those of men who were formerly disobedient) when ( marks distinctively the time intended by the ) the longsuffering of God was waiting (and this marks the period of their disobedience, viz. those 120 years of Gen 6:3. , imperf.: the – betokening the full time during which it was exercised. Exspectabat donec exspectandi finis erat. Beng.) in the days of Noah while the ark ( anarthrous as the well-known name for the ark in the LXX) was being prepared, in which (pregn. constr., by having entered into which: not into which, see below) a few persons, that is eight souls (individuals: , as being in the body: the distinction may be noted here, but is not always kept: the disembodied are in Rev 6:9; Rev 20:4) were saved (from drowning) by water (not, into which a few, &c. got safe through the water, which was not the fact. The water is in the Apostles view the medium of saving, inasmuch as it bore up the ark: cf. the next verse: or it may be, and so Bengel, Steiger, De Wette, Huther, through (the) water). So much for the exegesis of the detail of this passage; from which it will be seen that we have regarded it, in common with the majority of Commentators, as necessarily pointing to an event in our Lords redemptive agency which happened, as regards time, in the order of the context here: and that that event was, His going (whether between His death and resurrection, or after the latter, will be presently discussed) to the place of custody of departed spirits, and there preaching to those spirits, which were formerly disobedient when Gods longsuffering waited in the days of Noah. Thus far I conceive our passage stands committed: and I do not believe it possible to make it say less, or other, than this. What was the intent of that preaching, and what its effect is not here revealed; the fact merely is stated. The statement of the fact, however, has been felt to be accompanied by such great difficulties, that other meanings have been sought for the passage than that which the words present at first sight. Expositors have endeavoured to remove the idea that the gospel was preached to the dead in Hades, either, 1. by denying the reference to our Lords descent thither at all, or, 2. by admitting that, but supposing it to have had another purpose. I give, following the classification in Huthers note, an account of the principal upholders of these views. Under I., I place all those who deny any reference to Christs descent into Hades, distinguishing the minor differences between them as to what is there indicated.

I. 1. Augustine, Bed[12], Thos. Aquinas, Lyra, Hammond, Beza, Scaliger, Leighton, Horneius, Gerhard, al., and recently Hofmann, Schriftbeweis ii. 1. 335-341, maintain that the was the preaching of righteousness by Noah to his contemporaries: that Noah thus preached not of himself, but by virtue of the Spirit of Christ inspiring him; and that thus his preaching was in fact a preaching by Christ in the Spirit. So, e. g. Augustine, Ep. 164 (99), vol. ii., suggests, that the spiritus conclusi in carcere may be anim qu tunc erant in carne, atque ignoranti tenebris velut carcere claudebantur. Also that Christ had not indeed come in the flesh, but from the beginning of the race came from time to time to convict the evil, to console the good, or to admonish both. For this He came not in flesh, but in spirit, i. e. in substantia Deitatis. But he qualifies this by asking, Quid facit Filius sine Spiritu Sancto, vel sine Patre, cum inseparabilia sint omnia opera Trinitatis? But this arbitrary interpretation of = caro, et ignoranti tenebr, is not common to all the supporters of this view. Beza represents a large class: Christus. jam olim in diebus Noe. prdicavit spiritibus illis, qui nunc in carcere meritas dant pnas, utpote qui recta monenti Noe. parere olim recusarint. Thus Scaliger, Horneius, al.: and Hofmann, except that he joins with , not with . It must be evident to every unprejudiced scholar, how alien such an interpretation is from the plain meaning and connexion of the words and clauses. Not a word is indicated by St. Peter on the very far-off lying allusion to the fact that the Spirit of Christ preached in Noah: not a word, here, on the fact that Noah himself preached to his contemporaries. Again, the same subject runs through the whole, without a hint, that we are dealing with historical matter of fact in , , , and with recondite figure in . Again, whether we take the metaphorical of Aug[13], which I suppose will find hardly any advocates, or the of Beza, al., it cannot surely be doubted that we are equally putting force on the Apostles words, and that the must describe the local condition of the at the time when the preaching took place. Moreover , as compared with 1Pe 3:22 (which Hofmann gets most lamely over, by saying that it presents no greater difficulty than the statement that Christ accompanied the Israelites through the wilderness in 1Co 10:4; to which we may answer, If this were a plain statement involving such an application of the word, we might then discuss the intelligibility of it)-the part. , marked off by the as not belonging to the same time as the (which Hofmann shews he feels, by his impracticable attempt to connect with ), shew, as plainly as words can shew, that we are reading of some act of Christ which He then, at the time described, went and did, with reference to spirits who were, at some other time () specified (), in a certain state (). And, which has not been sufficiently noticed, a crowning objection to this view is the use of the word , connecting () our Lords state, with the state of those to whom He preached: a word only used of men when departed out of this life (ref.).

[12] Bede, the Venerable, 731; Bedegr, a Greek MS. cited by Bede, nearly identical with Cod. E, mentioned in this edn only when it differs from E.

[13] Augustine, Bp. of Hippo, 395-430

I. 2. Several Commentators, principally Socinian, but also Vorst., Grot., Schttgen, al., understand by . . either the Gentiles, or the Jews (sub jugo legis existentes) and Gentiles (sub potestate diaboli jacentes: so in both cases, Schttg. and Amelius) together, and by the preaching of the Spirit of Christ by the Apostles. These expositors take the mention of the disobedient in Noahs time to be merely by way of sample of the disobedient in all time, or, at least, in the time when the Apostle was writing. So Grot.: adjungere voluit Petrus similitudinem a temporibus Noe, ut ostendat quanto res nunc melius per Christum quam tunc per Noen processerit. As Huther well says, How this interpretation heaps on caprice upon caprice, need not be shewn. I will add, that its fautors do not appear to attempt to justify it philologically, as indeed it is plain they cannot. Every word of every clause protests against it.

II. We now come to those who understand the passage of our Lords descent into Hades, but, offended by the idea of the possibility of salvation being opened to spirits of the disobedient kept awaiting judgment, diverge from one another and from the prima facie explanation.

II. 1. Flacius, Calov., Buddus, Wolf, Aretius, al., understand . . of souls awaiting condemnation, but explain of announcing, not salvation, but condemnation. So Hollaz (in Huther),-fuit prdicatio Christi in inferno non evangelica, qu hominibus tantum in regno grati annunciatur, sed legalis, elenchtica, terribilis, eaque turn verbalis, qua ipsos terna supplicia promeritos esse convincit, tum realis, qua inimanem terrorem iis incussit. But, besides that , as remarked above, has, as applied to Christ and His Apostles, but the one meaning of preaching the good tidings of salvation,-besides the utter superfluity of such a concio damnatoria to spirits already reserved to damnation,-what a context would such a meaning give, in the midst of a passage intended to convey consolation and encouragement by the blessed consequences of Christs sufferings! See this well insisted on in Wiesingers careful discussion of the opinions on our passage, p. 241.

II. 2. Some of the Fathers, as Iren. (iv. 27. 2, p. 264; v. 31. 1, p. 331; al.; see Stierens Index, p. 1017), Tertullian, Hippolytus,-the Schoolmen, Zwingle, Calvin, al., explain rightly, of announcing salvation, but regard . as the spirits of the just, especially of the O. T. saints. The most extraordinary instance of this class of interpreters is Calvin, who explains to mean specula, sive ipse excubandi actus: and the spirits in are, according to him, those which were in waiting for Christs salvation: pi anim in spem salutis promiss intent, quasi eminus eam considerarent. Then he proceeds, Postquam dixit, Christum se mortuis manifestasse, mox addit: quum increduli fuissent olim; quo significat, nihil nocuisse sanctis patribus quod impiorum multitudine pne obruti fuerint: and regards this consideration as one calculated to console the believers, few as they were in the midst of the ungodly world. And having thus interpreted, he ingenuously confesses, Discrepat, fateor, ab hoc sensu Grca syntaxis; debuerat enim Petrus, si hoc vellet, genitivum absolutum ponere. Sed quia apostolis novum non est liberius casum unum ponere alterius loco, et videmus Petrum hic confuse multas res simul coacervare, nec vero aliter aptus sensus elici poterat: non dubitavi ita resolvere orationem implicitam, quo intelligerent lectores, alios vocari incredulos, quam quibus prdicatum fuisse evangelium dixit. A sentence to be well remembered for many reasons.

II. 3. Suarez, Estius, Bellarmine, Luther (on Hos 4:2, anno 1545, quoted in Bengel), Peter Martyr, Bengel, al., assume that the words refer, not to all the unbelievers of Noahs time, but only to those who repented at the last moment when the flood was upon them. Probabile est, says Bengel, nonnullos ex tanta multitudine, veniente pluvia, resipuisse: cumque non credidissent dum exspectaret Deus, postea cum arca structa esset et pna ingrueret, credere cpisse: quibus postea Christus, eorumque similibus, se prconem grati prstiterit.

II. 4. Athanasius, Ambrose, Erasmus, Calvin (Instit. 2:16. 9), hold both kinds of prdication, the evangelica to the spirits of the just, the damnatoria to those of the disobedient.

One or two singular interpretations do not fall under any of the above classes: e. g. Marcion maintained that the preaching of Christ was to those whom the O. T. calls ungodly, but who were in reality better than the O. T. saints; Clem.-alex. (Strom. vi. 6, p. 762 P.), that they were the , who were nevertheless imprisoned under idolatry.

It remains that we should enquire, whether this preaching to the imprisoned spirits by our Lord, took place between His death and His resurrection, or after the latter. The answer will very much depend on the sense which we give to . The argument which Wiesinger so much insists on, that the clauses must come in chronological sequence, will not determine for us; because . might very well be a taking up again of , recapitulating some former act also done in the Spirit: qu. d. put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the Spirit,-that Spirit in which also, ere He was made alive with the full resurrection life, He &c. And this I incline to think the sense of the passage: referring not to the complex resurrection life, but properly and strictly to the Spirit, in which the Lord never ceased to be, even when His complex life of body and soul was dissolved. And Wiesinger is in fact assuming too much, when he says that Christ is the subject of the sentence: that subject is simply from 1Pe 3:18, of whatever period we understand this act. When again Wiesinger says that . cannot be understood of the time intermediate, because in no case can we think of our Lords state in death in dualistic wise, so that while His body was held by the bands of death, His Spirit should be carrying on the Messianic work,-I answer, why not? Surely the reply to the penitent thief implies a , and in that a joy and triumph sufficient to be the subject of a consoling promise at that terrible moment. And might not the reasoning be turned, with as much propriety? Might not we say that it is impossible to conceive of our Lord during that time as other than employed in the Spirit in which He continued, not to exist merely, but to live? That, granted that His dying words imply a special delivering of his Spirit into the hands of his Father, and by consequence, a resting of his Spirit in those Hands in the death-state,-yet must we not conceive of His Spirit as going thither, where the righteous souls are in the hand of God? And if so, who shall place a limit to His power or will to communicate with any departed spirits of whatever character? So that, while I would not say that the conditions of the passage are not satisfied by the supposition that the event happened after the Resurrection, I believe there can be no reason for saying that they are not, on the other hypothesis. And I own, that the inclines me to this other. It seems most naturally to be taken as a resumptive explanation of with a view to something (1Pe 3:21) which is to follow; and the , capable indeed of being otherwise explained, yet seems to favour this idea,-that the Lord was strictly speaking when that happened which is related.

From all then which has been said, it will be gathered, that with the great majority of Commentators, ancient and modern, I understand these words to say, that our Lord, in His disembodied state, did go to the place of detention of departed spirits, and did there announce His work of redemption, preach salvation in fact, to the disembodied spirits of those who refused to obey the voice of God when the judgment of the flood was hanging over them. Why these rather than others are mentioned,-whether merely as a sample of the like gracious work on others, or for some special reason unimaginable by us, we cannot say. It is ours to deal with the plain words of Scripture, and to accept its revelations as far as vouchsafed to us. And they are vouchsafed to us to the utmost limit of legitimate inference from revealed facts. That inference every intelligent reader will draw from the fact here announced: it is not purgatory, it is not universal restitution; but it is one which throws blessed light on one of the darkest enigmas of the divine justice: the cases where the final doom seems infinitely out of proportion to the lapse which has incurred it. And as we cannot say to what other cases this may have applied, so it would be presumption in us to limit its occurrence or its efficacy. The reason of mentioning here these sinners, above other sinners, appears to be, their connexion with the type of baptism which follows. If so, who shall say, that the blessed act was confined to them?

The literature of the foregoing passage is almost a library in itself. The principal Commentators nave given accounts more or less complete, of the history of its interpretation. The most concise and comprehensive is that in De Wettes Handbuch.

Fuente: The Greek Testament

1Pe 3:20. , who had been unbelieving) who in their life had not believed the patriarchs, when they admonished them in the name of God.-, sometime) This sometime (used in 1Pe 3:5 also with reference to a long time [ago]), and this long-suffering, of which he speaks immediately after, have reference to all ages of the Old Testament previously to the death of Christ. It is called forbearance, Rom 3:26. Long-suffering preceded the first coming of Christ, as here shown, and His second coming, 2Pe 3:9, note.-, when) The weak reading, , is rightly refuted by Wolf. A certain edition, which has , is very corrupt, even in this very word. Some copies have , according to Erasmus, even in his first edition; but the Basileensis II. is the only one which is found, from which Erasmus rarely deviated, though he did in this instance, and with reason.-[32]) Other copies have ; but very few have this reading, being first corrupted into , as is often the case; nor does the simple verb agree with the passage. See App. Crit. on this place. , that is, God continued waiting, that men might believe. But there is greater force in the Greek double compound: He continued waiting on, until there was an end of His waiting, in the death of the men.-, in) Understand : that is, for instance [to wit], in the days of Noah. The most remarkable species is subjoined to the genus, for these reasons: 1) On no occasion did a greater number perish together than at the deluge. 2) By mention of water, Peter conveniently passes to the subject of baptism. 3) The destruction of the world by water is a prelude to its destruction by fire, 2Pe 3:6-7, in conjunction with the last judgment, ch. 1Pe 4:5. Nor is it matter of surprise that the word sometime is used in a wider meaning than the days of Noah; since also the days of Noah altogether were many more than the days of the building of the ark; but these, however, are immediately added. Compare with this the definite marking of time, which gradually becomes more particular, in Mar 14:30; Luk 4:25; Deu 31:10. O what ample (noble) preaching!- , while an [not the] ark was in preparation) without the article: Heb 11:7. The expression is adapted to the mind of the unbelieving spectators. This building occupied a long season, for it is not probable that many assisted Noah in his work. During the whole of that time especially the long-suffering of God waited.- , into which) Having entered into the ark by faith, they sought and found safety.-, a few) It is the more probable that some out of so great a multitude repented, when the rain came; and though they had not believed while God was waiting, and while the ark was building, afterwards, when the ark was completed, and punishment assailed them, began to believe; and to these, and to all like them, Christ afterwards presented Himself as a preacher of grace. Luther attributed less weight to this interpretation in his homilies on 1st Peter, published in A.D. 1523; but shortly before his death he more decidedly embraced it. There is a well-known passage in his Comm. on Gen 7:1, and his Exposition of Hosea agrees with it, published in the year 1545, in which, ch. 1Pe 4:2, he referred the two days (spoken of by the prophet) to the descent into hell; and quoting this passage of Peter, he says; Here Peter plainly says, not only that Christ appeared to the fathers and patriarchs who were dead, some of whom undoubtedly Christ, on His resurrection, raised with Himself to eternal life, but also preached to some who in the time of Noah did not believe, and waited for the patience of God, that is, who hoped that God would not deal so severely with all flesh, in order that they might recognise that THEIR sins were FORGIVEN through the sacrifice of Christ. In accordance with this are the comments of L. Osiander on this passage, of Hutter, in Expl. Concordi, p. 993; and also of Peter Martyr, T. I. LL. CC., col. 783.-, eight) Ham, who was about to incur the curse, being taken from this number, there were seven, a sacred number.- , through water) , through; an appropriate particle, denoting passage, without consideration either of the peril which threatened from the waters in themselves, or of the safety afforded in their being borne above them in the ark. Thus the following verse accords with this.

[32] So ABC Vulg. Orig. 2,553d and 4,135a. Rec. Text has , with no authority except Orig. 4,135a in a MS.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

once

Omit “once.”

Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes

sometime: Gen 6:3, Gen 6:5, Gen 6:13

the longsuffering: Isa 30:18, Rom 2:4, Rom 2:5, Rom 9:22, 2Pe 3:15

the days: Mat 24:37-39, Luk 17:26-30

while: Gen 6:14-22, Heb 11:7

wherein: Gen 7:1-7, Gen 7:13, Gen 7:23, Gen 8:1, Gen 8:18, Mat 7:14, Luk 12:32, Luk 13:24, Luk 13:25, 2Pe 2:5

by: Gen 7:17-23, 2Co 2:15, 2Co 2:16, Eph 5:26

Reciprocal: Gen 5:29 – he called Gen 6:12 – for all Gen 6:17 – bring Gen 6:18 – come Gen 7:7 – General Job 22:16 – whose foundation was overflown with a flood Dan 4:29 – end Luk 3:36 – Noe Act 27:37 – souls Rom 15:5 – the God Phi 3:9 – be 1Ti 1:9 – disobedient 1Ti 1:16 – all Heb 6:2 – the doctrine Heb 11:31 – believed not 2Pe 3:9 – but is Rev 2:21 – space

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

1Pe 3:20. The preceding verse tells what was done–that some preaching was done to people in the prison house of sin. The present verse tells when it was done, namely in the days- of Noah. The reason given for the preaching is that they were disobedient. A fuller description is given in Gen 6:5 which says “every imagination [purpose] of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.” The length of time during which God labored or “strived” with man (through Noah) is explained by the longsuffering of Him. The period of longsuffering included the time necessary for the building of the ark. One of Thayer’s definitions of the original Greek word for soul is, “That in which there is life; a living being,” hence it is used in this passage to mean the eight members of Noah’s family. Saved by water. Being heavier than the ark and its contents, the water bore them on its bosom and thus kept them safe from the revages of the flood.

1Pe 3:21

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

1Pe 3:20. aforetime disobedient. The disobedient means here again, as in 1Pe 2:7-8, 1Pe 3:1 disbelieving, refusing belief and withstanding truth. The clause may describe the spirits according to the conduct which made them spirits in prison. So it is understood by most. It may, however, also indicate the date of the disobedience. The latter view is more in harmony with the specification of time which immediately follows, the when giving a more exact definition of the aforetime. We should thus translate it: when of old they were disobedient, to wit, at the time when the long-suffering of God, etc., rather than (with the R. V., etc.), which aforetime were disobedient, etc.

when the long-suffering of God was waiting. The once which is inserted by the A. V. has very little documentary evidence, and is supposed to have been due to a conjecture of Erasmus. The waiting is given in the imperfect tense to bring out its lengthened continuance. It is expressed, too, by a verb for which Paul has a particular fondness, and which conveys the idea of the intenseness or patience of the waiting. It is applied to the earnest expectation of the creation (Rom 8:19), the waiting of those who have the first-fruits of the Spirit (Rom 8:23; Rom 8:25), the waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ (1Co 1:7), or for the hope of righteousness by faith (Gal 5:5), the looking for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ (Php 3:20). Outside Paul it occurs only here and in Heb 9:28.

in the days of Noah while the ark was being prepared. Both the date and the duration at once of the Divine waiting and of the mens disobedience are thus more clearly defined, the date being identified with the times immediately prior to the flood, and the duration with the whole period of warning afforded by the construction of the Ark, which is indicated to have extended to 120 years (Gen 6:3).in which few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water. Literally it is into which, i.e =by entering into which, etc. By souls are meant here individuals or persons. The word soul, meaning life or the principle of life, comes to mean life embodied, or the living individual. Occasionally, however (see above on spirits), it designates the departed. The mention of the precise number saved serves to throw into still stronger light both the disobedience to which the long-suffering of God addressed itself, and the grace that failed not to separate the believing few. There is considerable difference of opinion as to what is meant by the saved through water. The through, which the A. V. renders by, may have either a local sense or an instrumental. In the former case the idea will be either that those few were saved by passing through the water, or that they were brought safely through water into the ark. This latter seems favoured in the margin of the Revised Version, which gives into which few, that is, eight souls, were brought safely through water. In favour of this local sense (which is preferred by Bengel, de Wette, etc.) we have the analogous phrase saved, yet so as by (or, through) fire(1Co 3:15). But we are left thus with no obvious connection between this mention of water and the following notice of a salvation by water. Most interpreters, therefore, accept the instrumental sense, taking the thought to be that water was the means by which these few were saved. As Huther rightly observes, however, there is nothing to suggest that Peter meant that the same water which was the means of destruction to the mass was the means of safety to the few. All that he has in view is (as the indefinite water, not the water, indicates) that it was by means of water that the few entering the ark which floated thereon were preserved. And this relation of water to the preservation of the righteous at the time of the Flood is introduced in view of what is to be said of the relation of water, namely that of Baptism, to the salvation of Christian believers now.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

Verse 20

Which; that is, not the same individuals, but the same class of men, namely, sinners.–Sometime; formerly.–Eight souls; Genesis 6:18.

Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament

3:20 Which sometime were disobedient, when {n} once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight {o} souls were saved by water.

(n) This word “once” shows that there was a furthermost day appointed, and if that were once past, there should be no more.

(o) Men.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes