We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 12 September 2017
Much Petrine scholarship has focused on unravelling the Enochic traditions in 1 Pet 3.18–20. However, these investigations have largely overlooked the role of Noah and the flood in 1 Peter. This article seeks to rectify this deficiency by examining how Second Temple Jewish and early Christian texts used the primeval flood as a paradigm for the eschaton, a clear example of Urzeit/Endzeit correspondence. Once the Petrine use of the flood traditions is interpreted in this light, new solutions emerge not only for this difficult text, but also for the larger section of 1 Peter 3–4. Four specific points of correspondence are investigated: first, the righteousness of Noah as the righteousness of Christ (and also, believers); second, the wickedness of the flood generation as the wickedness of contemporary Gentile society; third, Noah's preaching to the flood generation as believers’ witness to their countrymen; and finally, the opportunity of repentance during Noah's lifetime as a similar opportunity for mission in contemporary Asia Minor. A robust understanding of the Noah traditions paves the way for a clearer understanding of the apocalyptic character of 1 Peter and its contemporary application to the Christians of Asia Minor.
1 Pelikan, J., Luther's Works: The Catholic Epistles (Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1967) 113Google Scholar.
2 The most notable scholarly monographs on 1 Pet 3.19 are Reicke, B., The Disobedient Spirits and Christian Baptism: A Study of 1 Peter iii.19 and its Context (Copenhagen: Ejnar Munksgaard, 1946)Google Scholar; Dalton, W. J., Christ's Proclamation to the Spirits: A Study of 1 Peter 3:18–4:6 (Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1965)Google Scholar; Pierce, C. T., Spirits and the Proclamation of Christ: 1 Peter 3:18–22 in Light of Sin and Punishment Traditions in Early Jewish and Christian Literature (WUNT ii/305; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011)Google Scholar. Important shorter studies include Frings, J., ‘Zu 1 Petr 3,19 und 4,6’, BZ 17 (1925) 75–88Google Scholar; Schweizer, E., ‘1. Petrus 4,6’, TZ 8 (1952) 152–4Google Scholar; Feinberg, J. S., ‘1 Peter 3:18–20, Ancient Mythology, and the Intermediate State’, WTJ 48 (1986) 303–6Google Scholar; Campbell, D. N. and van Rensburg, F. J., ‘A history of the interpretation of 1 Peter 3:18–22’, Acta Patrictica et Byzantina 19 (2008) 73–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
3 Wayne Grudem is one notable exception. Though containing many excellent insights, his analysis is impaired by his scepticism of the relevance of the Enochic literature for 1 Peter and by his desire to revive Augustine's interpretation of the text. See Grudem, W., ‘Christ Preaching through Noah: 1 Peter 3:19–20’, TJ 7 (1986) 3–31Google Scholar.
4 Over the last several decades, there has been a steady stream of work on the reception and use of Noah traditions in Second Temple Judaism and early Christianity. Lewis, J. P., A Study of the Interpretation of Noah and the Flood in Jewish and Christian Literature (Leiden: Brill, 1978)Google Scholar; VanderKam, J. C., ‘The Righteousness of Noah’, Ideal Figures in Ancient Judaism: Profiles and Paradigms (ed. Collins, J. J. and Nickelsburg, G. W.; SBLSCS 12; Chico, CA: Scholars, 1980) 13–32Google Scholar; Feldman, L. H., ‘Josephus’ Portrait of Noah and its Parallels in Philo, Pseudo-Philo's “Biblical Antiquities”, and Rabbinic Midrashim’, PAAJR 55 (1988) 31–57Google Scholar; Peters, D. M., Noah Traditions in the Dead Sea Scrolls: Conversations and Controversies of Antiquity (BZ; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2008)Google Scholar; L. Lieber, ‘Portraits of Righteousness: Noah in Early Christian and Jewish Hymnography’, ZRGG (2009) 332–55; Collins, J. J., ‘Noah, Deucalion, and the New Testament’, Biblica 93 (2012) 403–26Google Scholar; Wilson, M., ‘Noah, the Ark, and the Flood in Early Christian Literature’, Scriptura 113 (2014) 1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The rabbinic literature, though later than 1 Peter, may give us a window onto early Noah traditions. In several places, Philo's interpretation of Noah and the flood is similar to rabbinic interpretations, see Lewis, Noah and the Flood, 58. Early Christian texts may contain older, traditional interpretations, or interpretations shaped by Christian teaching such as 1 Peter. As such, they are important witnesses for the early reception history of 1 Peter and can provide important clues to its meaning.
5 Achtemeier, P. J., 1 Peter: A Commentary on First Peter (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996) 240Google Scholar.
6 Achtemeier, 1 Peter, 240.
7 Dalton, Christ's Proclamation, 4, 14. See also Reicke, The Disobedient Spirits, 2–3.
8 ‘[K]eine streng logische Aufeinanderfolge der Gedanken einhält, ja kaum ein bestimmtes, fest umrissenes Thema behandelt’ , Frings, ‘Zu 1 Petr 3,19 und 4,6’, 76 (English translation mine).
9 Both 2.11 and 4.12 begin with a vocative, Ἀγαπητοί, which provides clear dividing points in the letter. Achtemeier, 1 Peter, 73–4.
10 For example, see Frings, ‘Zu 1 Petr 3,19 und 4,6’, 75–88; Reicke, The Disobedient Spirits, 202–10; Horrell, D. G., ‘“Already Dead” or “Since Died”? Who Are “the Dead” and When Was the Gospel Preached to Them (1 Pet. 4.6)?’, Becoming Christian: Essays on 1 Peter and the Making of Christian Identity (LNTS 394; London: Bloomsbury, 2013) 73–99Google Scholar.
11 Elliott, J. H., I Peter: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary 37B (AYB; New Haven: Yale University Press, 2000) 64–80Google Scholar. On link words, see Dalton, Christ's Proclamation, 74–5. Egan is especially sensitive to the author's anticipatory use of key terms in the letter, see Egan, P. T., Ecclesiology and the Scriptural Narrative of 1 Peter (Eugene, OR: Pickwick, 2016) 125–7, 132Google Scholar.
12 Egan, Ecclesiology and the Scriptural Narrative of 1 Peter, 16–17, 54–6.
13 Egan, Ecclesiology and the Scriptural Narrative of 1 Peter, 55.
14 For more on the use of Urzeit/Endzeit terminology, see Doering, L., ‘Urzeit-Endzeit Correlation in the Dead Sea Scrolls and Pseudepigrapha’, Eschatologie – Eschatology: The Sixth Durham-Tübingen Research Symposium: Eschatology in Old Testament, Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity (ed. Eckstein, H.-J. et al. ; WUNT 272; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011) 19–58, at 19–20Google Scholar.
15 Streett, D. R., ‘As It Was in the Days of Noah: The Prophet's Typological Interpretation of Noah's Flood’, CTR 5 (2007) 33–51Google Scholar.
16 According to Ezek 14.13–23, Noah, Daniel and Job, if alive in Ezekiel's day, would have been able only to save themselves. It is noteworthy that all three lived at times of great destruction and also lived as exiles. Ezek 7.2–6 describes an ‘end’ (קץ) comparable only to the flood. Peters, Noah Traditions, 23–4. Cf. Wacholder, B. Z., ‘Ezekiel and Ezekielianism as Progenitors of Essenianism’, The Dead Sea Scrolls: Forty Years of Research (ed. Dimant, D. and Rappaport, U.; STDJ 10; Leiden: Brill, 1988) 186–96, at 188Google Scholar.
17 Peters, Noah Traditions, 24.
18 Lutz Doering and James VanderKam have studied how Noah's flood came to be understood as a model of future judgement. Doering, ‘Urzeit-Endzeit Correlation’, 23–31. VanderKam, J. C., ‘Studies in the Apocalypse of Weeks (1 Enoch 93:1–10; 91:11–17)’, CBQ 46 (1984) 511–23, at 519Google Scholar.
19 Doering, ‘Urzeit-Endzeit Correlation’, 23–31. Doering also notes that the use of the flood to prefigure judgement can be found elsewhere in 1 Enoch, see p. 31 n. 68.
20 VanderKam, ‘The Righteousness of Noah’, 17.
21 VanderKam, ‘The Righteousness of Noah’, 17. See Jub. 5.1–16. VanderKam, J. C., The Book of Jubilees (2 vols.; CSCO 510–11; Scriptores Aethiopici 87–8; Leuven: Peeters, 1989) 33Google Scholar.
22 VanderKam, ‘The Righteousness of Noah’, 25.
23 VanderKam, ‘The Righteousness of Noah’, 27.
24 Lewis, Noah and the Flood, 76.
25 Reicke, The Disobedient Spirits, 72–3.
26 Wilson, ‘Noah, the Ark, and the Flood’, 2–7; Selwyn, E. G., The First Epistle of St. Peter: The Greek Text with Introduction, Notes and Essays (London: Macmillan, 1946) 331Google Scholar; Dalton, Christ's Proclamation, 112–13. English translations of both the Old and New Testament are taken from the RSV.
27 Dubis, M., Messianic Woes in First Peter: Suffering and Eschatology in 1 Peter 4:12–19 (SBLSBL 33; New York: Peter Lang, 2002) 37–45Google Scholar; Webb, R. L., ‘Intertexture and Rhetorical Strategy in First Peter's Apocalyptic Discourse: A Study in Sociorhetorical Interpretation’, Reading First Peter with New Eyes: Methodological Reassessments of the Letter of First Peter (ed. Webb, R. L. and Bauman-Martin, B.; LNTS 364; London: T&T Clark, 2007)Google Scholar; Pierce, Spirits and the Proclamation of Christ, 203.
28 Elliott, I Peter, 111–12, 674–5; Dubis, Messianic Woes, 39–41.
29 Horrell, D. G. and Wan, W. H., ‘Christology, Eschatology and the Politics of Time in 1 Peter’, JSNT 38 (2016) 263–76, at 267Google Scholar.
30 Achtemeier, 1 Peter, 266–7.
31 Elliott, I Peter, 674.
32 1 Pet 3.9, 13–14, 16, 17, 18; 4.4.
33 See also Jub. 5.5 and Sib. Or. 3.824.
34 So also Philo, Congr. 90.
35 Philo is aware that some believed Noah to be only righteous in comparison with his generation, see Abr. 36, 47. Lewis, Noah and the Flood, 46. This view is also found in the rabbinic literature (Gen 6.9; Gen. Rab. 30.9; 32.6; Sanhedrin 108a). By contrast, some argue that Noah deserves greater praise for being righteous in a wicked generation (Gen. Rab. 30.9; Sanhedrin 108a). Cf. Feldman, ‘Portrait of Noah’, 43–4. Though the rabbinic literature was written later than 1 Peter, it may contain earlier traditions. Used in conjunction with other evidence, it is a useful body of comparative and corroborative evidence.
36 At Noah's death, Jub. 10.17 states: ‘And in his life on earth he excelled the children of men save Enoch because of the righteousness wherein he was perfect.’ VanderKam, ‘The Righteousness of Noah’, 13, 23.
37 Ezek 14.14 (cf. 14.12–20); Sir 44.17; Jub. 5.19; Wis 10.4; 1 En. 1.2, 10.3; 11.16–17; 12.4; 15.1; 67.1; Heb 11.7; Josephus, Ant. 1.3.2 §75; 2 Esd 3.11; 2 En. 35.1 [B]; Sib. Or. 1.280. See also 1 En. 65.11–12, Jub. 10.6, 17; LAB 3.4, Tob 4.12. VanderKam, ‘The Righteousness of Noah’, 13–14; Lewis, Noah and the Flood, 7–8, 21–2.
38 Translation by VanderKam, The Book of Jubilees, 35.
39 Philo, QG 1.87; 2.45; Abr. 27; Leg. 3.77; Det. 121. Lewis, Noah and the Flood, 46. Philo frequently uses ‘righteous’ and related cognates as epithets for Noah, Det. 170; Post. 48, 173, 174; Migr. 125; Conf. 105; Gig. 3, 5; Mut. 139; QG 2.33, 34; Her. 260. See also Deus 25.117; Abr. 5.27; 6.34; 7.36. Feldman, ‘Portrait of Noah’, 43.
40 Feldman, ‘Portrait of Noah’, 44.
41 For Noah's faithfulness, see 1 Clem. 9.4.
42 One exception is Grudem, who notes this correspondence. See Grudem, ‘Preaching through Noah’, 24.
43 Achtemeier, 1 Peter, 249.
44 Dalton, Christ's Proclamation, 124–34; Achtemeier, 1 Peter, 249.
45 Egan may be correct in hearing an echo of Isa 53, notably v. 11. Egan also notes, intriguingly, several other connections between 1 Pet 3.18–22 and Isa 53–4, such as the reference to Noah in Isa 54.9–11, Egan, Ecclesiology and the Scriptural Narrative of 1 Peter, 181–2.
46 Debates concerning the antecedent of ἐν ᾧ hinge on interpretations of vs. 18. See for example, Achtemeier, 1 Peter, 252–253.
47 Cf. 1 En. 9.1; QG 1.100. Feldman, ‘Portrait of Noah,’ 37.
48 Dimant, D., ‘Noah in Early Jewish Literature’, Biblical Figures outside the Bible (ed. Stone, M. E. and Bergren, T. A.; Harrisburg: Trinity Press, 1998) 123–50, at 126–9Google Scholar.
49 Pierce, Spirits and the Proclamation of Christ, 31–6, 54–7, 112–19. For evidence specifically on human sin in the flood traditions, see Grudem, ‘Preaching through Noah’, 12–14.
50 Philo, Gig. 19–20; QG 1.98; CD 2.18–20; Jub. 5.1–4; Test. of Naph. 3.5. Cf. Dalton, Christ's Proclamation, 169–70.
51 1 En. 6.2; 7.1; 9.8; 10.11; 12.4; 15.4–5; 19.1; 39.1; 67.8, 10; 69.4–5. See also Jub. 5.1–2.
52 1 En. 7.2–5; 9.9; 10.11–15; 15.8–11.
53 1 En. 8.1–3; 9.6, 8; 10.7; 16.3; 64.1; 65.6–7, 10–11; 69.8–11.
54 1 En. 7.4–5; 9.9–10. See also Jub. 5.2; 7.23–5.
55 The specific expressions of these sins are complex, as older traditions are reworked by later interpreters. Different texts within what is now known as 1 Enoch emphasise different themes, chronologies and ideologies. For more details, see Pierce, Spirits and the Proclamation of Christ, 25–123.
56 Philo, Abr. 40.
57 VanderKam, ‘The Righteousness of Noah’, 21. Cf. Jub. 5.1–5; 6.7–10, 12–14, 38.
58 Josephus, Ant. 1.72–3.
59 ὑβριστάς παῖδας, Ant. 1.73. Feldman, ‘Portrait of Noah’, 37–8.
60 Feldman, ‘Portrait of Noah’, 37. Lewis, Noah and the Flood, 127–30.
61 Grudem cites M. Sanh. 10.3; Eccl. Rab. on 2.23, sec. 1; Song Rab. on 1.4; Num. Rab. 9.18 (on 5.21); 14.6 (on 7.54); and 20.2, Grudem, ‘Preaching through Noah’, 14.
62 In contrast with other texts, the activities depicted in Matthew and Luke are not in themselves sinful. However, it is interesting that both Matthew and Luke draw attention to the themes of feasting (eating and drinking) and sexuality (marrying and being given in marriage).
63 ‘In the flood of debauchery’ is my literal translation of the phrase here (see below); the RSV has ‘in the same wild profligacy’.
64 Philo, QG 2.12; trans. LCL.
65 For more on the messianic woes, see Dubis, Messianic Woes, 5–36. After surveying themes related to the messianic woes in rabbinic literature, the Dead Sea Scrolls and Second Temple texts, Dubis concludes that ‘an increased wickedness and apostasy mark the period of the woes’, Messianic Woes, 35. This is consistent with the theme of messianic woes elsewhere as well as in 1 Peter, which exhibits a realised eschatology in which the end has begun. The use of flood traditions in 1 Peter fits very well in this context.
66 Montanarí, F., The Brill Dictionary of Ancient Greek (Leiden: Brill, 2015) 161Google Scholar.
67 Montanarí, The Brill Dictionary of Ancient Greek, 161.
68 Philo, Abr. 42; Mos. 2.63; Contempl. 86. Cf. Aet. 147.
69 Achtemeier, 1 Peter, 50–1.
70 Goppelt, L., A Commentary on I Peter (trans. Alsup, J. E.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978) 285–6Google Scholar.
71 Goppelt, I Peter, 248–5.
72 Feldman notes that this exonerates Noah from the charge of abandoning his countrymen. See Feldman, ‘Portrait of Noah’, 42.
73 Sib. Or. 1.149–99.
74 Feldman, ‘Portrait of Noah’, 41; Grudem, ‘Preaching through Noah’, 13–14.
75 Additionally, Philo explains the time immediately before the flood as an opportunity for people to heed ‘the announcing (τῷ κηρύγματι) of the flood’ (QG 2.13). Cf. Grudem, ‘Preaching through Noah’, 15.
76 For more sources in early Christian literature, see Lewis, Noah and the Flood, 34–5, 37 n. 36.
77 Though debated, the present scholarly consensus favours seeing συνειδήσεως ἀγαθῆς as an objective genitive. The ‘good conscience’ is the content of the pledge. However, as Crawford notes, there may be reason to question this consensus, or at least see the grammatical construction as ambiguous. See M. R. Crawford, ‘“Confessing God from a Good Conscience”: 1 Peter 3:21 and Early Christian Baptismal Theology’, JTS (forthcoming).
78 Crawford, ‘Confessing God’; Achtemeier, 1 Peter, 269–72.
79 Crawford, ‘Confessing God’.
80 Horrell, D. G., ‘The Label Χριστιανός (1 Pet. 4.16): Suffering, Conflict, and the Making of Christian Identity’, Becoming Christian: Essays on 1 Peter and the Making of Christian Identity (LNTS 394; London: Bloomsbury, 2013) 164–210Google Scholar.
81 VanderKam, ‘The Righteousness of Noah’, 18. Also see Reicke, The Disobedient Spirits, 138; Dalton, Christ's Proclamation, 204.
82 Philo, QG 1.91; trans. LCL. Cf. Wis 12.20. Lewis, Noah and the Flood, 45.
83 So Grudem: ‘Tg. Neof. on Gen 6:3 reports God saying to Noah, “Behold, I have given you 120 years, hoping that they might repent.” The same idea is repeated in Tg. Onq., Tg. Ps–J., and the Frg. Tg. on Gen 6:3.’ Grudem, ‘Preaching through Noah’, 14.
84 Mek. Shirata 5.38–9 (on Exod 15.5–6). Cf. Grudem, ‘Preaching through Noah’, 14. Some rabbinic texts also state that the generations from Adam to Noah continued to provoke God on account of his long-suffering nature. Aboth 5.2. Cf. Grudem, ‘Preaching through Noah’, 14.
85 Philo, QG 2.13. Cf. Lewis, Noah and the Flood, 48.
86 Philo, QG 2.13.
87 Rom 2.4; 3.25; Acts 17.30–1; 2 Pet 3.8–9. Achtemeier, 1 Peter, 263.
88 1 En. 12–13.
89 Reicke, The Disobedient Spirits, 68, 90; Dalton, Christ's Proclamation, 170–6; Pierce, Spirits and the Proclamation of Christ, 184–92.
90 Reicke, The Disobedient Spirits, 100–1; Dalton, Christ's Proclamation, 170–1.
91 Cf. Reicke, The Disobedient Spirits, 115–25; Dalton, Christ's Proclamation, 177–87; Pierce, Spirits and the Proclamation of Christ, 204–7; Campbell and van Rensburg, ‘1 Peter 3:18–22’, 73–96; Feinberg, ‘1 Peter 3:18–20’, 303–36.
