A Lexical Analysis of 1 Peter 3:21

This is a research paper submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the course DR30060, Integrating Christian Faith and Practice at Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary (Kansas City, MO) on June 17, 2023.

Introduction

In-depth study of any passage of Scripture would be incomplete without some lexical analyses to better understand the terminology within the passage itself. In the case of 1 Peter 3:21, while there are some terms that have different meanings that are ultimately inconsequential, there are also multiple terms utilized within the passage that can change the meaning of the text depending on the term’s definition. In this essay, seven words utilized in 1 Peter 3:21 are analyzed with the purpose of determining the correct gloss, which will then be utilized to determine the meaning of the text itself. Ultimately, this study will provide a comprehensive understanding of the main words in 1 Peter 3:21, which can then be utilized to develop a comprehensive interpretation of the text.

Antitupos

Antitupos is the first word worth analysis given in 1 Peter 3:21. It is translated as corresponds to (CSB, ESV), corresponding to (NASB), a picture of (NLT), symbolizes (NIV), and a like figure (KJV). The word itself carries a meaning of figuring or representing something else and the relationship of the objects being compared in this manner can be seen like the relationship of a stamp and a die.[1] In biblical literature, this term is utilized in only one other passage and in it the author of Hebrews describes the holy places made of hands as mere copies of the true things found in heaven (Heb 9:24). In non-biblical literature, the term is utilized to describe the idea of something “striking back” or “the throwing back of a sound as an echo.”[2]

Overall, the implication is that the term does not equate baptism with the ark of Noah, but rather that baptism and Noah’s ark share similarities in that through the salvation that is represented in baptism, the person is saved just like Noah and his family were saved through the ark. The NLT has the best translation for antitupos by stating that baptism is “a picture of” the flood and the flood is “a picture of” baptism. Peter is utilizing the term antitupos to compare baptism and the flood, but he is not necessarily intending for the two ideas to be equated in every way.

Sozo

Sozo is the next word worth analysis in 1 Peter 3:21. It is translated as saves (ESV, NASB, KJV, NIV, NLT, CSB) in almost every modern translation of Scripture and it is defined as to save or deliver.[3] Werner Foerster writes that sozo means “to deliver from a direct threat” or “to bring safe and sound out of a difficult situation.”[4] Peter utilizes the word sozo twice in his writings with the first being 1 Peter 3:21 and the second being 1 Peter 4:18, which quotes Proverbs 11:31, “If the righteous is scarcely saved, what will become of the ungodly and the sinner?”[5] In 1 Peter 4:18, Peter makes the argument that obedience to the Gospel is needed for salvation even for those who seem righteous. Throughout the New Testament, sozo is utilized to speak of salvation, the object of salvation, and the actor of salvation; and it is utilized in more general ways to speak of the saving of someone’s life. In non-biblical literature sozo was utilized to speak of the gods, physicians, philosophers, and in pagan worship to describe salvation through these individuals granted to mankind.[6]

In conjunction with the biblical use of sozo, 1 Peter 3:21 makes the argument that baptism carries some salvific nature, which is a significant issue because salvation is by faith alone (Eph 2:8-9). And yet, 1 Peter 3:21 emphatically makes the argument that baptism, which corresponds to the flood now saves. However, it is always important to keep the text in its own context and in this situation, salvation is definitely theme here, but baptism is not what saves. Karen Jobes makes the argument that it is not baptism that is salvific, but instead the qualifying statements in 1 Peter 3:21 that Peter utilizes as he speaks of salvation and baptism is what actually saves.[7] Something in 1 Peter 3:21 brings the person out of a dangerous and direct threat in a spiritually salvific manner.

Baptisma

Tied closely with the word sozo is the word baptisma. It is transliterated as baptism in almost every translation of Scripture, and it is defined as being dipped in or under water.[8] In a New Testament context, it typically refers to the rite or ordinance of baptism and Peter only utilizes it in this instance to speak of the rite or ordinance of baptism; and in speaking of the rite of baptism, Peter writes in a way that compares Christian baptism with the flood narrative of the Old Testament. Throughout the New Testament, baptisma is utilized to speak of the Christian rite of baptism (Eph 4:5 1 Pet 3:21), of the baptism of John (Mark 1:4; Luke 3:3), and the baptism to which Jesus was to experience in His death, burial, and resurrection (Mark 10:38-39; Luke 12:50). There are no instances of baptisma outside of the New Testament from the first century.[9]

With this in mind, it is clear that Peter has Christian baptism in mind when he writes that “baptism now saves” because he compares it to another event in Scripture in which the individuals were physically saved from disaster. In addition, it is clear that Christian baptism is in mind because Peter contrasts the baptism that he is speaking of what could be ritual cleansing while stating that one baptism saves while the other does not.

Sarkos

Peter utilizes the Greek term sarkos, which is translated as flesh (KJV, CSB, LSB, NASB) and body (ESV, NLT, NIV) to contrast Christian baptism with what could be physical washing or spiritual washing. Sarkos can refer to the physical body, the whole being, a living creature, or immoral desire[10] and it is utilized throughout Scripture in all these different ways. Peter utilizes sarkos nine times in different ways. He speaks of the physical body (1 Pet 1:24; 4:1-2, 6;), immoral desire (1 Pet 2:11; 2 Pet 2:10, 18), and the individual’s being (1 Pet 3:18). Because Peter utilizes the term sarkosin different ways throughout his writings, the only way to determine his meaning in 1 Peter 3:21 is to deduce its meaning from the context itself. In context, Peter is speaking of Christian baptism, which is often connected with the idea of cleansing and removing sin; and because Christian baptism is often connected with the idea of cleansing and removing sin, it is unusual that Peter would then claim that baptism does not cleanse in a spiritual manner. In conjunction with the ritual cleansing culture of the first century, it does make sense that Peter would be confronting the issue of physical cleansing, which means the better translation for sarkos would be body rather than flesh because body typically refers to the physical person whereas flesh typically refers to moral behavior.

Ultimately, what this means in light of the direct context is that Christian baptism does not provide any sort of physical cleansing that can be seen, but rather, it does provide a cleansing spiritually that is part of the individual’s salvation. Thomas Schreiner explains that while water does remove dirt from skin, baptism does not save simply because a person has been submerged under water; rather, there is a spiritual or moralistic cleansing that is part of their salvation.[11] 

Rupou

Rupou is the word that is translated as filth (KJV, CSB) and dirt (ESV, NLT, NIV, NASB) in 1 Peter 3:21. Rupou is defined as dirt or grime.[12] This is the only use of rupou by Peter in the New Testament, but it is also utilized in James 1, James 2, and Revelation 22 to speak in terms of moral depravity that ought to be put away or removed from the individual’s life (James 1:21), a poor man’s clothing (James 2:2) and evil people being filthy (Rev 22:11). In non-biblical resources during the first century, rupou typically refers to moral stains.[13] In the case of 1 Peter, because sarkos refers to a physical body, rupou would then refer to physical filth. With this in mind and remembering that filth typically refers to a spiritual filth, 1 Peter 3:21 is better translated by the ESV, NLT, NIV, and the NASB. This passage utilized rupou to speak of dirt rather than the KJV and CSB’s translation of filth.

What this means in context of 1 Peter is that baptism does not cleanse anyone of physical dirt or filth, but it is only representative of a spiritual cleansing. In conjunction with the idea of baptism, the primary idea in mind would that inward moral cleansing ought to be presupposed before baptism. Baptism does not cleanse physically, but it does assume that the baptized has been spiritually or inwardly cleansed.[14]

Suneidesis

Suneidesis is translated into at least three different words. Glosses include conscience (KJV, ESV, CSB, LSB, NASB, NIV, NLT) and occasionally words such as heart and sense are utilized to try to give the meaning of the word conscience. The definition of the word conscience starts with the idea of self-awareness, but then expands to the idea of knowing right from wrong.[15] Peter utilized suneidesis three times. The first instance refers to the believer being mindful of God (1 Pet 2:19), whereas the other two uses of suneidesis focuses on the idea of not having guilt because of a clear understanding of right from wrong. Contextually, the idea of genuine Christian believers having a clean conscience is seen throughout the New Testament. Because the idea at hand includes the concept of knowing right from wrong, the only proper translation for suneidesis is conscience.

In light of the more direct context of 1 Peter, what this means is that the salvation already given to those who do get baptized is a result of this good or clear conscience. The idea is that the actual salvation is not in the baptism itself, but rather the clear conscience that is given to those who follow in obedience through baptism. This provides the understanding that salvation is a prerequisite for baptism and baptism is not the prerequisite for salvation.

Eperotema

The final word to analyze from 1 Peter 3:21 is eperotema and it is translated in at least four different glosses. The primary translations include pledge (CSB, NIV), appeal (ESV, LSB, NASB, NET), answer (KJV), and response (NLT). While answer and response share similarities in meaning, both pledge and appeal carry completely different meanings, which completely change the meaning of the passage itself. Part of the difficulty in defining eperotema is that 1 Peter 3:21 is the only instance of the word throughout the Bible and many commentators have posited different suggestions as to the meaning of the word itself. Those who think that this refers to an appeal or a request base their thinking on the cognate of eperotema, which is eperotao. Eperotao means to ask or request and thus, the assumption is that Peter is referring to a request between the baptized believer and God concerning a good conscience. In addition, some have argued that eperotema refers to a declaration, answer, or response to who God is, but the evidence for this view does not appear within the context of the text itself. Ultimately, the issue with both of these ideas is that they ignore the fact that eperotema has been found on papyri with the meaning of a pledge between two individuals or a contractual agreement between two people.[16] And with this understanding of eperotema, the believer understand that baptism includes a component in which the believer vows or promises to live in such a way that his conscience is clear—Peter is essentially reminding the believers suffering persecution of their baptisms and the pledge that they made to God during their baptisms.[17] This means that the CSB and the NIV both utilize the best gloss for this word.

What this means in the context of 1 Peter 3:21 is that Christian baptism must include a vow or a promise in which the believer being baptized recognizes the requirement to continue in their Christian walk after baptism—baptism is not the end of the faith journey, but rather part of the initiation into their faith journey. This also implies that Christian baptism is more than just a symbolic act done simply to obey the command of Jesus; but rather, baptism requires the believer to actively make decisions in how they are going to live their lives and it requires their decision to desire living as a Christian ought to live after their baptism.

Conclusion

Through this essay, seven different terms were analyzed with the intent of developing a fuller and more accurate understanding of 1 Peter 3:21. After analyzing the various words in question, it is clear that Peter’s understanding of Christian baptism is that it is a Christian rite or ordinance done not just to obey Jesus’ Great Commission, but to act as a spiritual initiation for Christians into their faith journeys. In this initiation, the believer is required to make a pledge that they will live in such a way that they will have a clear conscience and it is this pledge that results in the salvation that is then visually represented in their water baptism. This rite provides the believers a figurative milestone that reminds them of their pledge in a way that ought to motivate them and encourage them despite the great persecution that they were facing. This is the interpretation of 1 Peter 3:21 developed from this lexical analysis of 1 Peter 3:21.


[1] A Greek-English Lexicon (1996), s.v. “ἀντίτῠπος.”

[2] Leonhard Goppelt, “ἀντίτυπος,” The Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1964), 8:247-248.

[3] Lexham Research Lexicon of the Greek New Testament (2020), s.v., “σώζω.”

[4] Werner Foerster, “σῴζω,” The Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1964), 7:965.

[5] Unless otherwise specified, all Bible references in this paper are to the English Standard Version (ESV) (Wheaton: Crossway Bibles, 2016).

[6] Foerster, 1004-1012.

[7] Karen Jobes, 1 Peter, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2022), 252.

[8] A Greek-English Lexicon (1996), s.v. “βάπτισμα.”

[9] Albrecht Oepke, “βαπτισμός, βαπτισμα,” The Theological dictionary of the New Testament, (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1964), 1, 545. 529–546.

[10] Joseph Henry Thayer, “σάρξ,” A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: being Grimm’s Wilke’s Clavis Novi Testamenti (1889), 569-570.

[11] Thomas R. Schreiner, 1, 2 Peter, Jude, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2003), 195.

[12] James Swanson, “ῥύπος,” Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains: Greek (New Testament), (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997).

[13] Ceslas Spicq and James D. Ernest, “ῥυπαρία, ῥυπαρός, ῥύπος,” Theological Lexicon of the New Testament, (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1994), 3:225-226.

[14] J. Ramsay Michaels, 1 Peter, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1988), 49.

[15] Swanson, “συνείδησις,”

[16] Jobes, 254.

[17] Ibid., 253-254.

Daniel L. Arter

Daniel L. Arter serves as Teaching Pastor of Grace Reformed Baptist Church in Ramey, Pennsylvania and Corporate Chaplain in Central Pennsylvania. He is pursuing a PhD in Applied Theology with an emphasis in Apologetics at Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. His research interests include Systematic Theology, Apologetics, and Philosophy. Learn more at www.danielarter.com.

https://www.danielarter.com
Previous
Previous

An Interpretation of 1 Peter 3:21

Next
Next

A Literary Analysis of 1 Peter 3:21