This verse starts with the Greek particle de (“but” or “and”), which has the dual function of marking a new section and of connecting this new section with the previous one. As already stated above, it is the mention of imminent judgment in verse 5 which leads to the affirmation in verse 7.

Most translations leave this Greek particle out, and signal the beginning of a new section by either the use of a section heading or by beginning a new paragraph.

The end of all things refers to the expected end of the world, which will be ushered in by the second coming of Jesus Christ. It is part of early Christian belief that on the day of Christ’s second coming, all human history will come to an end, the earth, together with everything in it, will pass away, and Jesus Christ will rule as the victorious and triumphant King (compare 1.5, 6; 4.13, 17; 5.1, 10). Furthermore, the early Christians believed that this event was near, which means that they expected it to happen in the very near future, perhaps the next day or the next month, but most surely during their own lifetime. The Greek word translated near is actually a perfect verb (literally “has drawn near”), and is the same word used in the preaching of Jesus about the Kingdom of God (compare Mark 1.15). Many translations capture this aspect of immediacy by their restructurings (for example, New English Bible “The end of all things is upon us”; Jerusalem Bible “Everything will soon come to an end”; Barclay “It will not be long now until the end of the world comes”).

It is quite impossible in a number of languages to translate literally The end of all things as a statement related to events, for a literal rendering would simply mean a particular end of all objects. What is involved is a reference to the end of all that is happening, so that The end of all things is near must be rendered in some languages as “all that is now happening will soon come to an end” or “… will cease” or “… will happen no longer.”

It is perhaps important to note that Peter, in contrast with the apocalyptic sections of the Gospels (for example, Mark 13 and parallels; compare 1 Thes 4.15-18), simply states the belief in the imminent end of the world, without mentioning any accompanying signs. However, in conformity with other passages pertaining to this eschatological event, Peter draws out the ethical implications of such a belief, particularly in terms of proper Christian attitude and behavior (compare Matt 24.45–25.13; Mark 13.33-37; Rom 13.11-14; etc.). So he advised them, first of all, to be self-controlled and alert. (For alert, see 1.13.) The two verbs are close synonyms, with the first one (Greek sophroneō “to keep one’s head”) referring to the control of one’s mental faculties (compare Revised Standard Version “keep sane”), and the second (Greek nephō) putting emphasis on sobriety (Jerusalem Bible “a sober mind”) and watchfulness (compare Knox “keep your senses awake”). But the two verbs together denote complete control of oneself, resulting in calmness, sobriety, self-control, sensibleness, steadiness.

In some languages it may be possible to translate You must be self-controlled as literally “you must control yourselves,” but normally You must be self-controlled is expressed in more figurative language, “you must be in command of what you do” or “you must not let your thoughts go in every direction” or “you must not let your heart wander away.” Similarly, alert may be rendered as “always ready” or “be constantly watchful in your hearts” or “keeping your mind awake.”

To be able to pray translates a prepositional phrase (literally “into prayer”) connected with either alert, or more probably with both the preceding imperatives. The preposition “into” may be interpreted as temporal, in which case Peter is saying that they should be self-controlled and alert when they pray, or during their prayers (compare Revised Standard Version “keep sane and sober for your prayers”; Knox “keep your senses awake to greet the hours of prayer”). More probably, however, it expresses purpose, in which case Peter is saying that the purpose of their possessing self-control and sobriety is so that they will be able to pray better.

If one interprets the Greek phrase literally “into prayer” as expressing purpose, it may be necessary to expand somewhat the implications of the rendering to be able to pray. What Peter is trying to say is that one should be self-controlled and alert in order to be able to pray properly, and therefore one may translate to be able to pray as “in order to be able to pray as you should.”

Quoted with permission from Arichea, Daniel C. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The First Letter from Peter. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1980. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The exhortation to love one another is grounded on the purification of the believer; this purification is a result of their obedience to the truth, and in turn results in a sincere love for fellow believers. The Good News Translation has rearranged the order in the Greek according to the above logical sequence.

The transitional phrase Now that may express a cause for the imperative which follows, namely, love one another, for example, “since you now have love for one another.” One may also express the transition as “in view of the fact that now you have love for one another.”

The truth is only used once in this letter, and probably is equivalent to the gospel (as in 1 Thes 2.10, 12, 13), that is, the Good News of what God has done in Jesus Christ. It is further elaborated in verse 23 by the expression the living and eternal word of God. A proper translation of the truth then, would be “the true teaching from God” or “the true teaching about Jesus Christ” or “the true words about Jesus Christ” or “the teaching about Jesus Christ which is true.”

Obedience refers not to a continuing attitude, but to actual action, that is, acting in accordance with the truth. This is quite clearly the intention: truth leads to the purification of the believer.

Your obedience to the truth may be rendered as “your doing what the truth about Jesus Christ says you should do.”

You have purified yourselves is literally “having purified your souls,” but as in 1.9, “soul” here denotes the whole person, and many translations render it accordingly (for example, New International Version, New American Bible, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch “You have become pure”). The word used for purified (Greek agnizō) is used of ceremonial purification in the Old Testament (for example, of objects, Num 31.23; or of people, Exo 19.10), but in the New Testament has come to refer to moral and spiritual purification (for example, James 4.8; 1 John 3.3). In the light of 1.2, “purification” here should probably be understood as moral cleansing, that is, deliverance from the power of sin. The perfect participle refers to an act in the past which remains effective to the present, and accordingly, many scholars see in this a reference to baptism.

It may be important in some languages to translate you have purified yourselves in a negative fashion, for example, “you have become no longer contaminated by sin” or “you have gotten rid of the sin that spoiled you.”

Purification leads to sincere love for fellow believers. Literally, the expression used here is “sincere brotherly love,” which was formerly used to refer to the love between actual brothers and sisters. In the New Testament, however, “brothers” has come to mean fellow believers. The adjective sincere means negatively, free from hypocrisy or deceit, and positively, “genuine” (Phillips, Barclay), a love that comes directly from the heart. To have a sincere love for your fellow believers may be rendered as “to really love your fellow believers.” Such fellow believers may be rendered as “those who believe even as you do.”

After laying the groundwork, Peter moves on to the imperative: love one another earnestly with all your heart. The exhortation to love one another already appears in 1.17 and will be mentioned again in 3.8 and 4.8. Earnestly appears again in 4.8, and in both instances contains the elements of steadiness, ferventness and constancy (compare New International Version “deeply”). Taken as a whole, to love earnestly with all your heart is to involve the whole being in the task of fervently and constantly loving others.

It may be somewhat difficult to provide a satisfactory contrast between the two statements have come to have a sincere love for your fellow believers and love one another earnestly with all your heart. The latter expression should of course indicate an even more intense degree of love. Love one another earnestly may be expressed as “love one another indeed very much,” but the phrase with all your heart must in some languages be translated figuratively with some other organ of the body, for example, “love with all your abdomen” or “love with all your liver.”

Quoted with permission from Arichea, Daniel C. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The First Letter from Peter. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1980. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

To conclude is literally “finally” (Revised Standard Version). The translation of this expression depends on how one understands the section as a whole. If the section is taken as a summary of the arguments which preceded it then a translation like New English Bible “to sum up” would be appropriate (compare New American Bible “In summary”). If, however, the section is taken not just as a summary, but as a concluding statement, in which Peter moves from particular groups to the whole Christian community, then the Good News Translation rendering would be more appropriate (compare Moffatt “Lastly”; Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch “To finish off the subject”). In view of the fact that Peter does not just repeat himself, this latter position seems preferable.

The infinitive phrase To conclude must be expanded somewhat in some languages, for example, “now I wish to conclude what I want to say” or “now I will finish what I have to say” or “what I am going to say now will finish what I have to say.”

Peter then proceeds to mention six attitudes which should be present among believers. (1) First of all they must have the same attitude (literally “of one mind”). The Greek word is used only here in the whole New Testament (although Paul expresses the same idea in Rom 15.5; Phil 2.2), and means both oneness in opinion (compare New English Bible “one in thought”; New American Bible “like-minded”), and in outlook, attitude (compare Barclay “one in your attitude to life”), disposition, and sentiment.

You must all have the same attitude may be expressed as “you must all think the same about life” or “… about what you should do” or “you must all think about life in the same way….”

(2) They must have the same feelings (literally “feel sympathy for one another”). Again, the Greek adjective is used only here in the whole New Testament and may mean sharing in the feelings of others, whether those feelings be of joy or of sorrow. A similar idea is expressed in Romans 12.15 “Rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep” (compare Heb 10.34; 1 Cor 12.26). You must all have … the same feelings may be expressed as “you must feel sympathy for what happens to one another,” or, as expressed idiomatically in some languages, “your hearts should go out to one another” or “you should feel pain when others are hurt and feel happy when others rejoice.”

(3) They must love one another as brothers (literally “love for the brothers”). For this, see 1.22. There may be a difficulty in a literal rendering of love one another as brothers, since in at least some societies brothers are expected to be rather competitive. This problem may be overcome by rendering “love one another as brothers should.”

(4) They must be kind. Here the Greek word (eusplanchnoi) is derived from the noun splanchna, which means the internal organs (for example, liver, kidney, heart, etc.), and in an extended sense, the internal organs as the seat of emotion and feeling. So in the New Testament, to have splanchna is to feel deeply for someone, in terms of love, compassion, pity, kindness. Perhaps no English expression is strong enough to capture the impact of such a word, although many translations have tried to do justice to its rich meaning (for example, Barclay “You must be deeply concerned for others”).

In view of the important connotations in the Greek term here translated kind, it is frequently not possible to provide an equivalent rendering apart from some rather extensive idiomatic equivalent, for example, “feel deeply in your hearts for” or “show how much you are pained on behalf of” or “let your kindness demonstrate how much you feel for others.”

(5) They must be humble. Humility was not considered a virtue in the Hellenistic world, but in the New Testament it is spoken of as a good quality of life (compare Eph 4.2; Phil 2.3 and following; Gal 5.23). Perhaps the attitude of Jesus (for example, Matt 11.29) has influenced Christians to think of humility as a virtue rather than as a sign of weakness.

An expression equivalent to humble is frequently expressed from a negative standpoint, for example, “do not feel proud” or “do not make yourself big.”

Quoted with permission from Arichea, Daniel C. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The First Letter from Peter. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1980. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

This verse is a quotation from Proverbs 11.31 (Septuagint) and supports the idea of the preceding verse. The Greek simply starts with “and if,” but since this is an Old Testament quotation, the Good News Translation has made this information explicit. In its Old Testament context, this saying has to do primarily with life on earth, but in this letter, it is used in an eschatological sense.

As in so many instances, it is not possible in a number of languages to say As the scripture says, since the Scriptures do not “speak.” Therefore one may translate As the scripture says as “as one may read in the Scriptures.”

Good people translates “the righteous” (singular), but which the Good News Translation has taken as a general designation for all good people and therefore has rendered it plural. It is also possible to understand “righteous” in this context to refer to those who obey God’s will (compare Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch “he who takes God’s will seriously”), or in a more technical way, God’s own people, but no translation reflects this last alternative.

Difficult … to be saved (Revised Standard Version “scarcely saved”) refers to the trials and persecutions that the good man, that is, the Christian, has to undergo before he is saved. Saved should probably be interpreted eschatologically, not simply referring to being rescued from suffering in the present, but referring to the final salvation at the end of the age (compare 1.5). The implicit agent of saved is most probably God.

A strictly literal translation of It is difficult for good people to be saved may involve certain complications in meaning, since the implication might be that it is difficult for God to save people. A more satisfactory solution may be found in the expression “there will be difficulties for good people in being saved” or “there will be difficulties for good people before they are saved” or “good people will encounter troubles before they are saved” or “… in being saved.”

The last part of the quotation is again a rhetorical question, with the clear meaning that it is doubly difficult, perhaps almost impossible, for godless sinners to be saved. Godless sinners translates two singular words connected by “and” (literally “the godless and the sinner”), but the Good News Translation takes these two words to refer generally to all those who do not obey God, hence godless sinners. Godless describes someone who acts contemptuously against God, hence “impious” (Revised Standard Version). Sinner is found only here in the whole letter, but the noun form “sin” (hamartia) occurs several times (for example, 2.22-24; 3.18; 4.1, 8).

What, then, will become of godless sinners? may be expressed as “what then is going to happen to sinners who disobey God?” or “… have no use for God.” In languages which employ emphatic statements rather than rhetorical questions, the final clause of verse 18 may be translated as “there will be great difficulties indeed for godless sinners.”

Quoted with permission from Arichea, Daniel C. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The First Letter from Peter. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1980. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

In the last two verses of this section, the author now turns his attention once more to his readers, particularly in their corporate existence as a believing community. Using the Old Testament liberally, he ascribes to the Christian community the titles applied to Israel. The conclusion is inevitable that here the church is described as the new Israel, although the thought perhaps is not that the church has supplanted Israel, but that God’s people should be what the church is now, namely, a community not bound to one nation or blood, but encompassing all nations and all peoples.

But you contrasts the believers with the unbelievers referred to in the immediately preceding verses. What follows are four descriptions of the church, all taken from the Old Testament.

(1) The chosen race (literally “a chosen race”) is from Isaiah 43.20. For chosen, see 1.1 and 2.4, where it is applied to Christians and to Christ respectively. Here it is applied to the whole church. The implicit actor is God, since in the New Testament it is normally God who chooses (compare Phillips “God’s chosen generation”). In the Old Testament, Israel is God’s chosen people; here it is Christians as members of a believing community who are the chosen people of God. Race (Greek genos) includes the idea of blood relationship and is a term appropriate for the old Israel. When applied to the church as the new Israel, blood relationship is no longer in focus, but corporate unity; that is, Christians of all races are one family in union with Christ.

The passive phrase the chosen race must be rendered in some languages as “the people that God has chosen.” In certain instances the concept of race may be expressed as “tribe,” that is to say, “the tribe that God has selected.” In employing a word for “chosen” or “selected” it is important to avoid the implication of God having shown undue favoritism.

(2) The King’s priests translates the Greek phrase basileion hierateuma (literally “a kingdom of priests,” or “a kingly priesthood”). The quotation is from Exodus 19.6. The difficulty here is that baseleion can be taken either as a noun or as an adjective. Arguments for it being a noun include: (1) The word baseleion is usually used as a noun both in religious and secular literature of that day. (2) If it is an adjective, then it would be more natural to have it after “priesthood” rather than before it. (3) Elsewhere in the New Testament, the word, taken with “priesthood,” is used as a noun. (Compare Rev 5.10, where the Good News Bible translates “kingdom of priests.” The word used in Revelation, however, is not “priesthood” but “priests.”) As a noun, the meaning could be (a) a royal palace (compare Kelly “a royal house”), (b) kingdom, as territory, (c) a group of kings. To treat it as a noun would further mean that it should be taken separately from hierateuma (for example, Kelly “a royal house, a priesthood”).

Most translations and interpreters, however, take baseleion as an adjective for the following reasons: (1) Since the other collective nouns in the verse are modified by adjectives, it is logical to expect an adjective modifying “priesthood.” (2) It is more likely that baseleion in Exodus 19.6 is treated by the Septuagint translators as an adjective (Good News Translation “you will serve me as priests”). As an adjective, the term then can mean “kingly,” but more probably “royal,” that is, priests in the service of the king, who in this instance is God. Most translations follow this interpretation. The idea of the church as the King’s priests harks back to 2.5, but with the focus not on function, but on privilege. In verse 5, every believer is a priest, but here, the whole church as a corporate body is a “priesthood.”

In most instances the mere use of capitalization of King’s will not indicate that this is a reference to God (this is certainly true in oral communication of the message). It may therefore be important to translate the King’s priests as “the priests of God who is King” or “the priests who serve God as King.”

(3) Holy nation is also from Exodus 19.6. As in 1.15 and 2.4, holy characterizes the church’s unique relationship to God: it is holy because it is consecrated to God and set apart for his service. (Compare New English Bible “a dedicated nation”; Jerusalem Bible “a consecrated nation”; also Moffatt, Knox.) In Exodus 19.6, the Good News Translation translates the same expression as “a people dedicated to me alone.” Holy nation may be rendered as “the nation dedicated to God” or “the nation dedicated to serve God.”

(4) God’s own people is literally “a people for possession,” an allusion to Exodus 19.5 (Revised Standard Version “my own possession among all peoples”); Malachi 3.17 (Revised Standard Version “my special possession”); and Isaiah 43.21 (Revised Standard Version “The people whom I formed for myself”). The Old Testament background of the expression indicates that God is the implied subject of “possession,” and most translations make this fact explicit (for example, New English Bible “a people claimed by God for his own”; Knox “a people God means to have for himself”; Moffatt “the people who belong to him”; Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch “God has chosen you to be his people”; Biblia Dios Habla Hoy “a people that belongs to God”). The word for people here is laos, a term used for Israel in the Old Testament to describe its intimate relationship with God; this term is now used of the Christian community. What is being emphasized here is that the Christians now have a relationship to God which is different from that of non-Christians: they are God’s people and are completely dedicated to him.

In the phrase God’s own people there is an emphasis in the Greek text upon the corporate unity and entity which is involved. It is not simply God’s “persons.” The closest equivalent of God’s own people may simply be “the nation that belongs to God” or “God’s tribe.”

The relationship between the four expressions the chosen race, the King’s priests, the holy nation, and God’s own people must be explicitly indicated in some languages, for example, “you are the chosen race; you are also the King’s priests, also the holy nation, also God’s own people.” Otherwise, readers might understand that the believers were divided into four different groups rather than being related to God in these four supplementary ways.

The purpose of the church’s intimate relationship with God is now set forth, namely, that they may proclaim the wonderful acts of God, a quotation from Isaiah 43.21. Proclaim translates a word associated with announcing something through speech; this may be the primary meaning here, although the idea of proclamation through deed and example is not excluded (compare Phillips “demonstrate”). Wonderful acts translates a Greek word (aretē) to mean “wonderful deeds” (Revised Standard Version). In the Greek literature of that day, aretē was used to describe the powerful acts and miraculous deeds which were attributed to a god. God is literally “him,” but the pronoun clearly refers to God.

The passive expression chosen to proclaim the wonderful acts of God may require recasting as “God has chosen you to proclaim his wonderful acts” or “… his wonderful deeds” or “… what he has done which is so wonderful.”

In translating this clause, one should be careful to relate it not only with what immediately precedes, but with all the four previous designations. The Good News Translation achieves this by repeating chosen as an introduction to the clause; other translations start a completely new sentence or a new clause here (for example, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, Barclay “and it is your task to proclaim…”; also Knox, Phillips “It is for you now to demonstrate…”). God is now described as the one who called believers out of darkness into his marvelous light. Called here primarily means “summon” (but compare Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch “brought you out”). Darkness and light are favorite metaphors in the New Testament, referring to unbelief and belief, or ignorance of God and true knowledge of him. Here the metaphors are used to describe the conversion of Peter’s readers from heathenism to Christianity, from their allegiance to pagan gods to their trust in and commitment to Jesus Christ. Darkness describes their condition as separated from God; light, their condition as God’s own people. Most translations keep the metaphors. Marvelous translates a Greek word which means “wonderful,” “remarkable” (Arndt-Gingrich), and is used primarily to describe divine rather than human attributes.

Who called you out of darkness may require some amplification in some instances so as to read “who called you to come out of darkness.” A literal rendering could be understood in some languages to mean that God himself had called from a position of darkness to his people, but obviously the phrase must refer to God’s having summoned his people to leave the darkness and to come into his own marvelous light. Into his own marvelous light may also require some indication of movement, for example, “to come into his own marvelous light” or “to come into the light which he provides and which is marvelous.”

Quoted with permission from Arichea, Daniel C. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The First Letter from Peter. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1980. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

In his spiritual existence is literally “in which,” referring either to the whole of verse 18, that is, during his death and resurrection, or more specifically to the immediately preceding phrase (that is, “in the spirit”). If this second one is taken to be the meaning here, then the way to translate it depends on how one understands “in the spirit.” For example, if one understands “in the spirit” to mean “by the Spirit” then “in which” is also translated accordingly (for example, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch “in the strength of this Spirit”). If, however, “in the spirit” is understood in the way the Good News Translation interprets it, then the translation of “in which” will likewise be affected. Many translations are ambiguous at this point (for example, Phillips “in the Spirit,” Jerusalem Bible “in the spirit,” Barclay, Knox “in his spirit”).

But what does in his spiritual existence refer to? Does it refer to the resurrection, or to the ascension, or even perhaps to a time prior to the incarnation? The answer to this question is dependent on how one interprets the clause he went and preached to the imprisoned spirits. When did this occur? And who are these imprisoned spirits Furthermore, what did Jesus preach: salvation or condemnation?

These questions are not easy to answer, and many scholarly treatises have been written dealing with this matter. For the purposes of a Translator’s Handbook, it is impossible to go into all the details of the arguments. All that can be done is to give a brief summary of the various possible interpretations, in order to lead one to a better understanding of the passage and to translate it more meaningfully. Briefly, then, these various positions are listed below.

A. When did Jesus go and preach to the imprisoned spirits?
1. Some time before the incarnation, that is, it was the pre-existent Christ who did the preaching.
2. Between his death and resurrection.
3. During or after his ascension.

Favoring No. 1 is the fact that the pre-existence of Christ is mentioned more than once in the New Testament (for example, John 1.1 and following; Phil 2.6, 7). However, it seems to be foreign to the passage which has as its starting point not the incarnation, but the suffering of Jesus Christ.

Favoring No. 2 is that it is somewhat in logical sequence, since Christ’s death is mentioned in verse 18, his resurrection in verse 21, and his ascension in verse 22. Furthermore, there are other references in the New Testament which support the idea that Jesus did something between his death and resurrection (for example, Acts 2.25 and following; 13.35; Rom 10.7; Matt 12.40). Arguing against it are two things: (1) it breaks the sequence of events, since the resurrection is already mentioned in the last part of verse 18; and (2) it is necessary to interpret in his spiritual existence as different from made alive spiritually in verse 19, not to mention the problem of positing a spiritual existence to the dead Jesus prior to his resurrection. However, those who favor this position counter that Peter may have been using a creedal text here, and the positioning of events is dependent not only on logical sequence, but perhaps primarily on the demands of literary form. This second alternative seems to be the most logical and natural, considering the whole structure of the passage.

Favoring No. 3 is the fact that resurrection is mentioned in verse 18, and the preaching must necessarily come after that (but see argument above). Furthermore, the Greek verb for he went is the same verb used in verse 22 for the ascension, and it must also be interpreted this way in verse 19. There are, however, two arguments against this. First, the verb is primarily neutral, indicating simply movement which is either up or down; besides, in verse 22 the verb is qualified by “to heaven,” a qualification which is absent in the present context. Secondly, the verb here is in the aorist tense, indicating a specific action at a particular place and time; if the preaching occurred during the ascension, one would perhaps expect a participle, indicating a process.

B. Who are the imprisoned spirits
1. The fallen angels mentioned in Genesis 6.1-4 (compare Gen 6.2 “the sons of God”). Favoring this is the description of these spirits in 20a, as those who had not obeyed God … during the days that Noah was building the boat. Furthermore, these fallen angels are understood in intertestamental literature (for example, the book of Enoch) as prototypes of heathen rulers, and Christ’s preaching to them would inculcate in the minds of Christians that they too should proclaim the gospel to pagan rulers of their own day.
2. The people during Noah’s time, that is, all the people who perished during the flood. These people are singled out because of the belief which was current in Judaism at that time, that these people were the worst sinners, for whom no hope of salvation is possible (compare Mishnah Sanhedrin 10.3 “The generation of the flood have no share in the world to come, nor shall they stand in the judgment”). Accordingly, that Christ preached to them is a manifestation of the universal nature of the salvation that he offers, a salvation which touches everyone, including the worst sinners. This message would indeed be a very encouraging one for the Christians of that time, who were facing all kinds of difficulties arising out of their relationship with their pagan neighbors. These people are by no means without hope; on the contrary, there is a distinct possibility that through the life of believers, these unbelievers may be led also to have faith in Jesus Christ, a possibility which is already mentioned more than once in the letter (for example, 2.12; 3.1). The idea of the dead listening to the gospel and even reacting positively to it is found in other parts of the New Testament. A good example is Philippians 2.10, where Paul, describing the response of creation to the exalted Christ, writes, “So that all beings in heaven, and on earth, and in the world below will fall on their knees in honor of the name of Jesus” (Good News Translation, boldface added). One other example is John 5.25 “… the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear it will come to life” (Good News Bible).
Arguing against this second position is that there is very scanty linguistic evidence regarding the use of “spirits” for dead people, or for the surviving part of a person after death. In the New Testament, this sense appears only in Hebrews 12.23 (Good News Translation “the spirits of good people”).
3. Angelic beings in general. Linguistically, this can be supported by the use of “spirits” for supernatural beings (for example, “evil spirits,” as used in the Gospels). But arguing against it is the reference to the time of Noah.
4. Both the fallen angels and the disobedient people during Noah’s time, or in other words, a combination of 1 and 2.

It might be noted that many translations do not make any adjustment at this point, thus allowing for any or all of the above possibilities to be understood. Those who want to be more definite make it clear that no. 2 above (that is, “spirits – dead people”) is their preference, as can be seen by their rendering of verse 20 (for example, Good News Translation the spirits of those; Phillips, Barclay “the spirits of men”).

C. Where did Jesus preach?
1. In the lower regions, that is, “Sheol” or “Hades,” the place of the dead. This would be the natural and logical preference of those who interpret “spirits” as referring to people. “Sheol” is sometimes spoken of as a prison house (compare Rev 18.2; 20.1-7; 2 Peter 2.4). This position is also possible even if one takes “spirits” to refer to the fallen angels, since there is enough support from the New Testament and from intertestamental literature that fallen angels are bound and confined in “the depths of the earth” (Jubilees 5.6), in a place characterized by darkness (1 Enoch 10.4, 5; compare Rev 20.3, where Satan is thrown into the pit). Those who prefer this position would also favor the position that it was between his death and resurrection that Christ preached to these spirits in prison.
2. In the upper regions, which is the logical preference for those who hold that Christ preached to the spirits during his ascension. For discussion of this point, see above.

Most translations, either unconsciously or deliberately, leave this matter ambiguous, by translating the verb went as a neutral term, without indicating either the direction of the movement or the actual place where Jesus preached.

D. What did Jesus preach?
1. He preached judgment. If “the spirits in prison” are taken to be the fallen angels who in turn are prototypes of the rulers of the heathen, then the effect of the preaching would be to declare that their power for evil has come to an end. This would give quite an encouragement to the Christians who were being persecuted by their pagan neighbors, for they would come to realize that ultimately the powers of evil have no dominion over them, that in fact they are the real victors even though at the moment they are an insignificant and persecuted group.
2. He preached salvation. The linguistic argument for this position is that while the word for preached is a neutral term for any proclamation or pronouncement, yet in the New Testament, it is almost always used in the sense of the proclamation of the Good News. If the spirits in prison are taken to be the generation of Noah who in turn are prototypes of the vilest and most desperate human beings, then the very fact that the gospel was proclaimed to them would give the greatest encouragement to Christians to proclaim also the Good News to the heathen around them, for they too can be touched by the love of God and the message of salvation.

As shown above, either interpretation is relevant to the context and the purpose of the letter in general. Again, we might note that most all translations leave this particular verb ambiguous. Those who make adjustments do it in favor of the second alternative (for example, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch “proclaimed the good news to them”).

In his spiritual existence may perhaps be best translated as “as a spirit” or “as one who is a spirit.”

While it is true that in some languages one can use a rather neutral term for preached, for example, “spoke to” or “told about,” it is frequently necessary to indicate the nature of the content. Therefore, one may choose either “spoke about how God would judge people” or “… how people would be judged” or “told the Good News to” or “told how God would save people.”

The imprisoned spirits may be rendered as “those spirits who were being guarded.” Since the majority of scholars seem to assume that the imprisoned spirits are the disembodied spirits of people, it may be legitimate to be somewhat more specific in identifying the imprisoned spirits, for example, “the spirits of those people who are being kept for judgment.”

Quoted with permission from Arichea, Daniel C. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The First Letter from Peter. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1980. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The section fittingly ends with a doxology. Power is literally “dominion” (Revised Standard Version, New American Bible, New English Bible), but dominion itself includes the elements of power, rule, and sovereignty. Amen usually closes prayers and doxologies in the New Testament; it denotes the hope that what is said may be true and will be fulfilled. It can usually be rendered dynamically as “So be it” or “May it be so.”

The pronoun him in verse 11 refers, of course, to God, but it is very difficult in some languages to render satisfactorily this type of so-called “third person imperative.” The closest equivalent may be “may God rule forever.” In some languages, however, the equivalent may only be “God rules forever.”

Quoted with permission from Arichea, Daniel C. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The First Letter from Peter. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1980. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The reason for the footnote in the Good News Translation is that the Greek text is ambiguous. Translated literally, the Greek is: They inquired into which (or into whom) and what kind of time was indicated by the spirit of Christ in them when they were predicting the sufferings of (or into) Christ and the glories afterward. The Greek expression eis tina may be understood either as referring to a time (with tina understood as a neuter pronoun) or as referring to a person (with tina understood as a masculine pronoun). Some translations reflect this latter understanding (for example, Barclay, Biblia Dios Habla Hoy “they tried to discover who this person was and when this would occur”). Most commentaries and translations, however, understand it the way Good News Translation does. The verse is still talking about the salvation which is the subject of the prophets’ search and investigation. When the time would be refers to the time when this salvation is made known, and how it would come refers to the circumstances connected with the revelation of this salvation.

They tried to find out is perhaps best rendered as “they tried to determine” or “… decide.” In the rendering of to find out it is important to avoid an expression which might suggest “inquiring of other persons,” for one would not wish to communicate or suggest the idea that “they were trying to find out from someone….”

It is of course possible to connect the pronominal expressions “into which” and “what kind of time” with what follows, namely, the sufferings that Christ would have to endure and the glories that would follow. This is reflected in some translations (for example, Jerusalem Bible “The Spirit of Christ which was in them foretold the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would come after them, and they tried to find out at what time and in what circumstances all this was to be expected”; also Phillips, Knox). It is, however, much better to take the pronominal expressions not as pointing forward but backward, that is, referring to the salvation mentioned in verse 10 (compare Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch). Time here is the same as in 1.5, namely, time for a specific purpose.

A completely literal rendering of when the time would be and how it would come could be misunderstood and obscure. For example, when the time would be might be understood as merely “what time of day it would be,” and how it would come might be particularly obscure in view of the fact that it might not refer to salvation. Accordingly, it may be useful to translate when the time would be and how it would come as “when this salvation would take place and how it would come about” or “… how it would happen.”

The rendering of This was the time may be better expressed in some languages as “this was the occasion” or even “this was the day,” especially if a receptor-language term for “day” indicates not just a period of 24 hours but a particular occasion.

In their search, the prophets were not without help, for they were aided by Christ’s Spirit. This expression occurs only here and in Romans 8.9. It was common belief among the Jews that prophets were inspired by the Spirit of God; this belief naturally was taken over by the Christians, but here the Spirit of God is now substituted by the Spirit of Christ. It is possible that Peter here is referring to the activity of Christ before the incarnation, and that it is his Spirit who inspired the Old Testament prophets. But it is more likely that he is here reflecting the common understanding among the early Christians, in which the expressions “the Spirit of God,” “the Spirit of the Lord,” and the “Spirit of Christ” are regarded as having identical meanings (for “the Spirit of the Lord,” see Phil 1.19; Gal 4.6; and Acts 16.7).

Christ’s Spirit in them may be rendered as “Christ’s Spirit which lives in them.” It may be difficult to speak of “a time to which something was pointing.” One may, however, often use an expression such as “the occasion to which Christ’s Spirit was referring.”

The time of salvation is associated with the sufferings that Christ would have to endure and the glory that would follow. These, probably, are the events through which salvation comes, and the Spirit pointed to the time of salvation when he predicted the coming of these events. (For pointed, see Phillips “was referring”; for predicted, see Barclay “declared beforehand”; compare Gal 3.1.) The sufferings that Christ would have to endure is literally “the sufferings into Christ.” Some have taken this to mean the sufferings of Christians for the cause of Christ (for example, Knox “the sufferings which Christ’s cause brings with it”), although most interpreters understand it as referring to the sufferings of Christ himself (compare New American Bible “sufferings destined for Christ”; Barclay, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, Biblia Dios Habla Hoy). Glory is plural in the Greek, referring probably to a series of events. For those who understand “the sufferings of Christ” as sufferings of Christians in behalf of Christ, “glories” is understood as triumphs, or victory instead of defeat. If, however, “sufferings into Christ” refers to the sufferings that Christ himself experienced, that is, his death on the cross, then “glories” would refer to the events following that: his resurrection, his exaltation, the gift of the Spirit to the Church, the winning of both Jews and Gentiles to the Christian faith, and finally Christ’s return in victory.

It may be important to specify clearly the agent of predicting, so that the final part of verse 11 may be rendered as “when Christ’s Spirit predicted the sufferings that Christ would endure and the glory that would follow.”

The sufferings that Christ would have to endure may be rendered as “the way in which Christ would have to suffer” or “the manner in which Christ must suffer.”

A literal rendering of the glory that would follow might be particularly confusing, especially since in many languages one can not speak of an abstract such as glory actually “following.” A more satisfactory equivalent may be “the later glorious events” or “the wonderful things that later happen.”

Quoted with permission from Arichea, Daniel C. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The First Letter from Peter. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1980. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .