BLOG

First Peter, part 16

Peter’s first letter was addressed to some groups of ex-Israelites whose ancestors had been exiled by the Assyrians (745-721 B.C.) and resettled in the territory south of the Caucasus Mountains between the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea. On the Black Obelisk of Shalmanezer, the Assyrians called them Gomri (or Khumri), and their territory itself was known as the land of Gamir. This was how the Israelites lost their name and their identity, as God stripped them of this Covenant Name after divorcing Israel (Jeremiah 3:8; Hosea 2:2).

The western border of Gamir were the mountains of Ararat (Genesis 8:4), located in the ancient kingdom of Urartu. Today it is near the border of Turkey, Armenia, and Iran. This was, of course, the place where Noah’s ark came to rest after the flood subsided. The flood itself was divine judgment against the angels that sinned by cohabiting with the daughters of men and begetting Nephilim, translated “giants” in the KJV (Genesis 6:4).

Peter’s audience no doubt were familiar with this history, having lived for centuries in the vicinity of the two main peaks, Greater Ararat and Lesser Ararat. So it is hardly surprising that Peter would expound on the biblical circumstances of Noah’s flood. Tertullian was the only early church writer who believed that demons were the offspring of these Nephilim. Although these were destroyed by the flood, a second outbreak of Nephilim occurred afterward, for Genesis 6:4 says,

⁴ The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men, and they bore children to them.

This explains why there were Nephilim years later, which Moses and David killed. The Bible makes it quite clear that the giants such as King Og of Bashan, King Sihon of Heshbon, and Goliath of Gath were Nephilim. They were physical giants. They were not demons. Nonetheless, we might ask what happened to them when they were killed. Were they too imprisoned along with the others? We are not told directly.

However, it should be noted that most scholars understand Nephilim as a noun derived from the root נָפַל (nephil), “fallen one.” A less common view says it means “those who cause others to fall.” Either way, it is likely the origin of the idea of “fallen angels.” The Septuagint translates nephilim as γίγαντες (gigantes), “giants.” The KJV goes along with this translation, while the NASB leaves it as Nephilim.

Sinai and Hermon

Peter himself was drawing a parallel (opposite) by reminding his readers that Christ, the true Son of God, had been “put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit” (1 Peter 3:18). In His spiritual state, “He went and made proclamation to the spirits now in prison” (vs. 19), not only to proclaim victory but to do so in a spiritual body that could relate to other spiritual beings.

In Genesis 6:4 these fallen ones were called “sons of God,” and the place where they “fell” was at Mount Hermon. 1 Enoch 6:6 says,

“And they were in all two hundred; who descended in the days of Jared on the summit of Mount Hermon, and they called it Mount Hermon, because they had sworn and bound themselves by mutual imprecations upon it.”

The name Hermon derives from the Hebrew root: חרם (ḥerem), “ban, oath, devoted, cursed.” So Mount Hermon becomes the place of an oath-bound rebellion. These fallen angels considered themselves to be “sons of God,” and perhaps they had been at one time—at least in a general sense. The term was applied to the stars in heaven (Job 38:7), who, in ancient cosmology, were said to be “sons of God.”

The point is that these “sons of God” apparently knew that Mount Hermon was the place where the sons of God were to gather around the Son of God, who was transfigured on Mount Hermon and there proclaimed to be “My beloved Son, with whom I am well-pleased” (Matthew 17:5). Mount Hermon was situated north of Caesarea Philippi, where Jesus took His disciples just before climbing the Mount with Peter, James, and John (Matthew 16:13.)

The lesson of this field trip was to teach them that even as Israel had gathered around Mount Sinai to establish the Old Covenant, so also were believers of “the general assembly and church of the firstborn” (Hebrews 12:23) to gather around Jesus Christ at Mount Sion (that is, Hermon, Deuteronomy 4:48). Mount Sinai, Paul says, is Hagar, the Old Covenant, and also “the present Jerusalem” that “is in slavery with her children” (Galatians 4:25). Zion represents the seat of government for the earthly Jerusalem; Sion represents the seat of government for the heavenly Jerusalem. The children of the flesh are Zionists; the heirs of the promise are Sionists.

The fallen ones apparently thought that they could attain positions of Sonship by preempting Jesus Himself. But biblical sonship is an honor given, not to angels, but to mankind, begotten by heaven and birthed in earth. and so the angels believed that to attain that position, they had to intermarry with the daughters of men to produce offspring with physical bodies.

Hence, Mount Hermon in Genesis 6:4 became the place where heaven and earth were illicitly joined, resulting in a prison camp called Tartarus; but in Matthew 17 the same mount was the place where heaven and earth were lawfully joined in the manifestation of Jesus Christ.

The illicit “sons of God” sinned, because “they did not keep their own domain, but abandoned their proper abode” (Jude 6). In other words, they were not called to be “sons of God” in the same way that Adam was a son of God (Luke 3:38). They coveted the dominion that Adam was given (Genesis 1:26), and they coveted the dominion given to the last Adam (1 Corinthians 15:27).

The Captivity

Peter’s primary focus is upon Christ’s proclamation of victory over “the spirits now in prison.” Though it is not the final judgment, it is a declaration of their defeat through His resurrection. Note that the flood was their first judgment, but not the final judgment, for they were merely imprisoned to await a later judgment.

Peter then quickly shifts his attention to the victorious ones who have been delivered by the same flood by means of Noah’s ark. Those who are delivered are the focus of Paul’s attention in Ephesians 4:8-12, for these are given “gifts” from the spoils of war. They are not the captives; they are the captors. The idea that Jesus took saints out of a compartment of hell called “paradise” and brought them to heaven is, I believe, a misidentification of the captives.

1 Peter 3:20 speaks of “the ark, wherein a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water.” These represent not only a new beginning (8) but are also a type and shadow of the true sons of God who have been begotten by the Spirit. They are protected when the children of the flesh are judged.

Deliverance in the Flood

1 Peter 3:21 continues,

²¹ Corresponding to that, baptism now saves (sōzei) you—not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience—through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

This is one of the main texts used by some to claim that baptism saves people, that faith without baptism is inadequate. But Peter was referring to Noah’s family being delivered through the flood on account of their faith. The Greek verb sōzei is from the root sozo, “to save, deliver, or rescue.” For example, when the disciples were caught in a storm on the lake, they called out, “Save us, Lord; we are perishing!” (Matthew 8:25). Again, when Peter found himself sinking in the lake after walking on the water toward Jesus, He called out to Jesus, “Lord, save me!” (Matthew 14:30).

In neither occasion were they being converted to Christ. They were asking to be rescued from drowning. In the same sense, Peter speaks of the earth’s baptism (Noah’s flood) as a type of deliverance from the judgment upon the unbelievers. Noah’s flood, then, was the type; Christian baptism is the antitype. Just as Noah and his family exhibited faith by entering the ark prior to the flood, so also those who have faith enter into the body of Christ (the Ark) and are delivered from judgment.

Baptism is an outward expression of faith, not faith itself. So also in the law of baptism, relating to the cleansing of lepers (i.e., mortals) in Leviticus 14:1-7, a leper is not expected to show himself to the priest unless he knew that he had been healed by God. The priest had to inspect him and confirm (bear witness) to his healing, and if he did confirm this, then he was to sprinkle the healed leper seven times with water (Leviticus 14:7).

In other words, the priest baptized him only because he bore witness that the leper had been healed prior to coming for inspection. The priest simply bore witness to what God had done. The priest did not do the healing, nor did his baptism heal him. Baptism was a public ceremony proclaiming that the leper was now qualified to rejoin the congregation and be in fellowship with other believers.

The Law of Baptism

An interesting sidenote is this: The law of baptism sets forth sprinkling in Leviticus 14 and in Exodus 40:30, a laver with spickets to pour water over the hands and feet in the tabernacle. Does this indicate that Noah’s flood was local, as opposed to universal? In other words, if sprinkling water on the head cleansed the entire man without the necessity of being immersed in water, then this may be an argument for a local flood, where God pours water upon one part of the earth representing the whole.

We know from Genesis 1:2 that after an initial creation, the earth (literally) became “formless and void… and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters.” This appears to indicate a universal flood long before the flood in Noah’s day. So there is no doubt that the earth was, at one time, flooded with water, and that land began to rise up from the ocean on the third day of creation in Genesis 1:9, 10,

⁹ Then God said, “Let the waters below the heavens be gathered into one place, and let the dry land appear” and it was so. ¹⁰ God called the dry land earth, and the gathering of the waters He called seas; and God saw that it was good.

1 Peter 3:22 concludes about Jesus’ resurrection and ascension:

²² who is at the right hand of God, having gone into heaven, after angels and authorities and powers had been subjected to Him.

Christ’s resurrection was the basis of His proclamation of victory, taking authority over the conquered foes. This was a legal act, making it a certainty that by the end of time, He would subject all things under His feet in actual events on earth. Those who fail to understand the difference between legal imputation and actual experience can easily be unrealistic in this. They need to balance 1 Peter 3:22 with Hebrews 2:8,

⁸ “You have put all things in subjection under His feet.” For in subjecting all things to Him, He left nothing that is not subject to Him. But now we do not yet see all things subjected to Him.

God often speaks of future things as though they were in the past. This is because God sees the end from the beginning, and because He is sovereign, He has the power to accomplish His will. Nonetheless, He has subjected His own will to the process of time. Because He created time, we too ought to respect it and remain subject to time unless He directly intervenes on our behalf.