Original Meaning

IN THE CENTRAL section of 1 Peter, extending from 2:11–4, Peter covers several topics, including his general principles (2:11–12), the specific application of these principles for special groups (2:13–3:12), guidelines for those who are enduring suffering (3:13–4:6), and advice for the family of God (4:7–11). Our present section (4:1–6) is the second piece of advice Peter gives to those who face suffering for their Christian faith. In the first piece (3:13–22), Peter encouraged the Christians to remain faithful to their tasks in light of the coming vindication of God. Now he focuses on the effects of suffering on the Christian life.

After giving his exhortation to be like Christ (4:1a), Peter gives a reason for suffering like Christ: “because he who has suffered in his body is done with sin” (4:1b). This point is carried on in 4:2 as Peter shows the meaning of “done with sin.” He then gives another reason for learning to suffer like Christ: “For you have spent enough time in the past doing what pagans choose to do” (4:3). Not only have they “spent enough time,” but those with whom they had lived are themselves surprised at their conversions, to the point that they are abusing them (4:4). Peter warns that such people will have to answer to God for their abuse (4:5; cf. 2:12). In verse 6, Peter appends a comment on an issue raised in 4:5, that the opponents of the gospel will have to answer for their behavior to the God will “judge the living and the dead.” He observes that this is “the reason the gospel was preached even to those who are now dead.” In other words, the odd expression about preaching to the dead must be understood as a comment on verse 5.

The Exhortation (4:1a). In 3:18, Peter started to talk about the suffering of Jesus but went hurriedly to the end of his life, a vindication (3:22). He now begins again at the same point (suffering),1 but this time contends with his readers that suffering is good for the Christian life. His strategy is for the mental dimension of life. To survive persecution in an obedient manner, Christians must have proper mental preparation (cf. 1:13): “Arm yourselves also with the same attitude” that Christ had. In the context of Peter’s letter, the proper attitude includes a steadfast hope for vindication (1:13; 3:18–22), a fear of God (3:15), and a commitment to live (including suffering) in such a way that outsiders see the grace of God (cf. 2:18–25; 3:1–2, 15–16). But the fundamental attitude is that Christ surrendered himself to the God whom he knew would judge justly and save (2:23).

Reason Number One: It Helps Your Obedience (4:1b–2). Christians ought to have the same mental approach as Jesus had “because he who has suffered in his body is done with sin.” This verse has generated several explanations, and it is worth our while, because of the importance of this verse in the overall point of the paragraph, to consider the views and the evidence called in for each, and then to consider which option is the strongest.2

Some argue that Peter has in mind only the inevitable transfer (seen here as a suffering death) from a sinful to a saved state that takes place at conversion (or baptism), as can be seen in Paul (cf. Rom. 6:1–12) and John (1 John 5:18–19).3 Others contend that Peter is dealing more generically: The one who suffers physically learns from such experiences not to sin but to value the obedient life.4 A variation of this second view is that the one who suffers has chosen to break definitively from sin.5 A final view particularizes the phrase “he who has suffered” so that it refers only to the suffering Christ. That is, “he who has suffered” is Christ, and he is the example to whom Peter is appealing. In this context, “is done with sin” means that Christ did away with sin.6

It is hard to decide what evidence counts the most in deciding among these options. I would eliminate the third option (the variation of the second view) because it seems to be little more than a nuancing of the first and second views. Since the first two views are similar except on the precise meaning of “suffer,” it is best to decide between them by examining what “suffer” means in 1 Peter. Clearly, the term refers too consistently to “physical suffering” to expect readers to read this as a conversion term.7 Thus, the options reduce themselves down to who is suffering. Is it Christ? Or is it the Christians?

In my judgment, since Peter has moved in this verse from Christ (“since Christ suffered in his body”) to Christians (“arm yourselves also with the same attitude”), it makes more sense to think he is still speaking of Christians in the next clause (“because he who has suffered in his body is done with sin”). Furthermore, the use of “is done with sin” for describing the work of Christ is unusual and inconsistent with Peter’s other expressions for the achievements of the cross (cf. 1:18; 2:21, 24; 3:18). Finally, 4:2 goes on to explain the Christian’s subsequent life; this suggests Peter has the Christian (not Christ) in mind at 4:1b. Thus, the most likely interpretation of this difficult expression is that it refers to Christians who are suffering and that they learn not to sin by undergoing persecution.

However, to be fair to all sides, we do recognize another possibility: that Peter is summing the Christian’s entire life on earth as a life of suffering. In this case, “is done with sin” describes not some state on earth (post-conversion/suffering holiness) but their eternal reward. Just as Christ got to sit down at his Father’s right hand and enjoy his victory, so also will the Christians.8 While there is some contextual analogy (3:18–22) for this view, 4:2–5 leads the reader to think not in terms of the eternal reward for obedience, but rather in terms of a kind of life on earth—a life not so much of sinlessness, but of obedience.9 Thus, the theme of 4:2 follows naturally from our interpretation of 4:1b: “As a result, he does not live the rest of his earthly life for evil human desires, but rather for the will of God.”

Reason Number Two: You Have Done Enough Sin (4:3). That suffering can work obedience into a Christian’s life is an early Christian theme (James 1:2–4), but Peter’s next idea is not so common: “After all,” he says in essence, “you have sinned enough”10 (4:3). While it is difficult to know what to infer from such a comment (e.g., did Peter think everyone was appointed to a certain amount of sin?), it is clear that his pragmatism takes over again: Just as good behavior will help get Christians out of tough situations, and just as suffering purges the Christian from sin, so also these same Christians have sinned more than enough for a lifetime,11 and it is time for them to get on with a life of obedience.

Explanation of the Former Crowd (4:4–5). The very sins that once characterized the Christians’ patterns of behavior have now been abandoned, partly because of the healing effects of suffering. But those behaviors continued among their old friends, who, Peter tells us, “think it strange that you do not plunge with them into the same flood of dissipation, and they heap abuse on you” (cf. 1:18). These surprised former friends, who now abuse them verbally, are ultimately blasphemers (cf. 2:12; 3:16).12 Accordingly, Peter informs the Christians of Asia Minor that “they will have to give account to him13 who is ready to judge the living and the dead” (4:5). As at 2:12, so here the idea is less one of hopeful expectation of final reward than a threat of judgment on those who sin.

An Added Note (4:6). Almost as an afterthought Peter adds, “For this is the reason the gospel was preached14 even to those who are now15 dead, so that they might be judged according to men in regard to the body, but live according to God in regard to the spirit.” This afterthought has spirited a great discussion. Are the “dead” those to whom Christ preached after his crucifixion (3:19), the spiritually dead who are now alive, or the Christians of Peter’s churches who have already died?16 The vast majority of commentators today argue that Peter is referring to Christians in Asia Minor who heard the gospel while alive but are now physically dead.

Because this life is only a prelude to life after death, the gospel was preached to those who are (now) dead. And because those people will have to give an account to God for their life, everyone must hear the gospel. Finally, Peter expresses the ultimate purpose of preaching, that people, regardless of what happens to them in this life, might be able to live eternally (i.e., in “spirit”) with God.17 The gospel is preached to all, including the (now) dead, because ultimately this life is only a prelude to a greater and endless world beyond. Those who hear the gospel and respond, even if they are killed for their faith, will be vindicated ultimately before God.

Bridging Contexts

INTERPRETING ANCIENT TEXTS that touch on expressions and ideas that are more than a little problematic makes it doubly difficult to move the same texts into our modern world. In my nearly three decades of sitting in Sunday school and listening to sermons, both in a house of worship and in a seminary chapel, I have never heard a sermon on this passage, nor I have ever preached on this passage myself. However, I have often heard messages about the positive effects of suffering, and I have heard many sermons rooted in the idea of needing to preach to all people because someday we will have to answer to God.

One of the reasons expository preaching18 is healthy for the church is because it does what has not been done in my experience: expose the church to every passage in the Bible, whether they are simple and transparent (like Matt. 5–7) or exceedingly difficult (like Heb. 6:4–6). In moving this text into our world, I begin with the observation that we must do this simply because it is there and is the Word of God. I am not denying that there are some difficult things to interpret and apply in this text; I am saying that we need to struggle to bring all of the text into our world.

To be sure, some things are readily transparent and valuable—for instance, that suffering improves the moral life of the believer. Most Christians have experienced some kind of opposition because of their faith, whether it is a blank stare at a suggestion they make or outright physical persecution. And those who have endured that can readily testify that such an experience has strengthened their faith (even if they failed in some way). I remember as a high schooler being laughed at for being a Christian; I remember that it hurt, but I also remember that such opposition aided in confirming my faith and strengthening my trust in God. But what we ought to admit even here is that our kind of suffering is still strikingly unlike the persecution the Christians in Asia Minor endured, for their suffering could end up quickly in death. So even here, when we have struggled to find something relevant, we may still be considerably different in our orientation than the ancient world.

Sometimes passages raise issues that are distant from our modern world, even though there are invariably other ideas in that passage that are relevant to our lives. It is my belief that the most important applications of Scripture can only be made when the central thrust of the passage is the central thrust of the application. But what if the central thrust of the text is completely at variance with one’s life and one’s culture? It is important, then, that the interpreter and reader find applications that are meaningful, even if not central to the passage. In other words, sometimes a secondary meaning or a secondary application has to be made. While I find this kind of application taking place regularly in sermons and Bible studies (and sometimes I am disappointed that more struggle did not take place to find a more central application), such a procedure is necessary at times and becomes a regular part of applying the Bible. Applications like this express the fundamental belief that the whole Bible is valuable for Christian living (2 Tim. 3:16–17). Even here, however, the meaning and application must be taken from the text and not from ideas not in the text.

In the present passage, the main thrust is the moral value of suffering, a thrust that is largely outside the normal experience of the vast majority of Western Christians today. I have, in several instances, attempted to show how Peter’s teaching addressed to sufferers can be made relevant in our world, applying such teachings to those in the business world and those in school (especially secular university) settings. I do not want to minimize either of these contexts, nor am I suggesting that there are not other areas where applications could be made. However, we do want to have applications for as broad a reach of our audience as is possible, and thus we may at times need to move to less central ideas in a passage.19

What are some examples of this kind of procedure? One thing Peter does here is to contrast Christian morality and non-Christian lifestyles. Thus, some interpreters may choose to focus on this contrast even though it is less central to the passage than the value of suffering. Thus, we can explore the nature of Christian morality in various environments (business, neighborhood relations, social practices, or parties). Or we can explore this theme in more than one culture, insofar as each culture has its own set of mores that dominate the ethical values of that society. Contrasts can made because Christian morality constructs a different lifestyle. Still another example, one that we will look at briefly in our next section, is the example of Jesus. Peter begins our section on the note of Jesus’ suffering as a paradigm for Christian suffering, even though he does not develop this theme here. Interpreters could choose to look at this theme more closely by placing 4:1a into the larger context of 1 Peter, taking special note of 2:18–25 and 3:18.

Another final path for bringing this word into our world is to focus on the judgment of God because this is a transcultural feature of Peter’s message. We may face different cultures (e.g., a massively pluralistic one or a massively unified, Buddhist one), but we must all be prepared to give an account of our lives to God at the end of history. While I may not stare suffering in the face every day and you may, each of us will be judged by God. This permits an application that is as easy as it is universal. Focusing on the common, broader elements of a passage can often lead to penetrating applications. To this we can now turn.

Contemporary Significance

IT IS NOT difficult to extend the principle of 4:5–6 into our world by observing that we need to live in light of the Judgment Day. The threat of judgment is healthy to the Christian life, however unpopular it might be in our world. Recently at a gathering I attended, a young lady began to speak up about her church. She informed us that “when she grew up,” the entire emphasis was on “hell, the devil, and the judgment;” but now, she continued, “all we are permitted to talk about is love. Love is all that matters now.” She said this with considerable approval, and it is this kind of mental outlook that deserves careful analysis.

It may be the case that this woman’s upbringing was in some kind of Christian church that did (over)emphasize judgment and hell (she called it, rather humorously, “fire and brinestone”). We find ourselves at the opposite extreme today: no threat of judgment—anywhere. We do find no threat of judgment in theology or morals, in our legal system (where a good lawyer seems able to get anyone off the hook), or in our social world. But what makes a moral life healthy is the threat of judgment that derives from an appreciation of the holiness of God. To be sure, it can be overdone, just as love or anything else can be overdone. But the solution to an overemphasis is not its neglect; rather, it is to bring the emphasized idea back into its biblical and realistic perspective. I do not want to go to bed at night worrying about whether I will be damned by God, but neither do I want a God who is so soft that I do not have to fear him or stand in awe of his judgment if I live in sin. In the word of John Stott: “To live, work and witness in conscious anticipation of Christ’s parousia and judgment is a wholesome stimulus to faithfulness.”20

Consequences for our behavior, then, is an important theme for our world. The threat of judgment here is part of Peter’s encouragement to live faithfully in the context of persecution. But that threat can be removed, for the moment, from its context and treated separately because it is a fundamental principle that transcends its context. Judgment is, after all, the foundation for all kinds of ethical exhortations. So even if we separate this theme from that of suffering, we are still in conformity to the text’s concern for us to live in light of God’s judgment.

At the same time, it is best to treat the theme of judgment in its fuller context (preserving its connection to suffering) because (1) it forces us to treat the text as it is rather than as we would like it to be, and (2) it gives the “threat of judgment theme” its special context. That is, people who are being persecuted find special comfort in knowing that God is Judge because they are experiencing an unjust judgment from other humans. When the context of the interpreter is analogous to the context of the original text, then special resonances can be found.

A suggestive direction in applying this passage begins with the importance of the example of Christ for Christian living. Verse 1 begins with the example of Christ and roots its exhortation in that example: Just as Christ suffered, so we should be prepared to follow his example, regardless of our situation and our context. If we are following him, learning to live the way he lived, and seeking to shape our lives after his life, then it is natural for us to encounter any kind of persecution with a proper mindset. Maybe Peter mentions the example of Christ because of what he thinks will happen more than what he knows is already happening, though I tend to think he knows that suffering is already happening. He exhorts his churches to assume the stance of Jesus as they live in an unbelieving world.

I know of no better way to put this into practice than to learn to ask ourselves, “What would Jesus do here?”21 Clearly there are many things about the life of Jesus that cannot be imitated. We cannot die a substitutionary death or be raised for others, nor can we do stupendous things like walking on water. But in the general patterns of life we can live in such a way that we can constantly ask ourselves how Jesus would act in a given situation. Peter’s concern is with responding the way Jesus did when he was persecuted (2:21–25; 3:18–19; 4:1), and the exemplary nature of Jesus’ life is still in force.

We see here the Christocentric nature of early Christian theology, which I contrast with the moralistic nature of much of modern Christian theology. It is not uncommon to hear today that Gandhi was Christian in much of what he did, especially in his pacifistic and gentle wisdom; but if we say this, we lose the Christocentric anchor of our faith. To be sure, Gandhi was a wonderful, pious man, but behavior is only Christian when it is consciously obedient to Jesus Christ. There are clear parallels, particularly at the moral level, among various religions in our world; but if Jesus Christ is eliminated from the picture, a moral practice is not Christian. Peter anchors his moral practice (suffering unjustly) in the example of Jesus, thus giving it a different basis and motivation. Christians are to suffer, not because suffering makes them better people (which it can do), nor because it makes them conscious of a higher world (which it can also do), but because Jesus himself suffered—and they are his followers.

In his excellent book The Contemporary Christian, John Stott gets to the heart of this issue when he surveys the Christian idea of mission.22

Each aspect of this theme is anchored in Christology, permitting him to expound mission in a truly Christocentric form. The model for mission is the incarnation of Christ, the cost of mission finds its parallel in the cross of Christ, the mandate for mission is founded on the authority granted to Jesus as a result of his resurrection, the incentive for mission is the exaltation of Christ, the power for mission comes from the “Spirit-gift” of Christ, and the urgency for mission is the parousia of Christ. Each aspect of the church’s mission is anchored in the ministry of Jesus Christ, permitting Stott to title his chapter the “Christology of Mission.” When Christians learn to think Christocentrically, they begin to think and act in a fully Christian manner. Peter was like this: He anchored his exhortation to suffer in the life of Jesus and gave to his exhortation an indelible Christian stamp.

A final consideration is the change of life that Christians in Asia Minor had experienced. Peter’s words in 4:3 reveal a group of converts whose former lives were anything but virtuous; they did more than their share of sexual sins and alcoholic excesses. Now, however, their former “comrades in sin” are shocked at their newly formed holy lifestyles (4:4). Such changes are normal in the stories of Christians of all ages. The fundamental feature is the radical change of life that occurs in those who become Christians and begin to follow Jesus. Mental habits, sexual behaviors, social interactions—each of these areas reveal serious changes on the part of many Christians. And it is not at all unusual to find that believers speak of “former friends,” not because they no longer like their former “comrades in sin,” but because they have found their new lifestyle of following Jesus makes them uncomfortable with those people,23 and, more importantly, because those former friends no longer find any “common bond” with Christians.

One of my friends has told me how he had to leave his “B. C. Group” (Before Christ Group) when he became a Christian because all they did together was drink to the point of drunkenness or take drugs until they were high. He missed them and longed for their conversion (and he shared the gospel with them frequently), but he knew he had to restrict his times with them because he was, due to his carnal nature, tempted to drink and do drugs. By the time he was “cured” of his desire for mind-altering substances, he had graduated from college and moved on to better things. His story is but one example of countless Christians who have experienced, as a result of their conversion, a complete change of social groups. Peter’s churches had gone through that kind of change. They therefore provide an early example of what happens when people establish a lifestyle that follows Jesus.