1 Peter 3:21

‘Which water after a true likeness (or ‘echo') also now saves you, (even baptism, which is not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the interrogation (or ‘answer' or ‘consultation') of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,'

The thought of the ark brought safely ‘through water' brings his mind to the way in which Christians are brought safely through to God ‘through the resurrection of Jesus Christ'. Just as the water lifted up the ark in which the elect were held safe, so does the resurrection of Jesus Christ lift up ‘in Christ' (compare 1 Peter 5:10; 1 Peter 5:14) all who are His. The thought of water also links the idea with baptism, although only by way of a parenthesis. He sees in baptism, which he pictures as illustrating the resurrection, an ‘echo of', or a ‘likeness to', the water that bore up Noah and his companions. Through the response of their consciences illustrated in baptism (the baptism of repentance), His people unite with Christ in His resurrection. They experience renewal of life (Romans 6:4; Titus 3:5). They are as it were saved through water, just as Noah had been, not by it washing them or cleansing them, but by it lifting them up to God in the ark of the risen Jesus Christ so that the response of their consciences can be examined in order to ensure their genuineness (compare 1 Peter 3:16 where it has in mind responsive obedience). And as a result they are saved through His resurrection power as they rise with Him and are seated with Him in heavenly places (Ephesians 1:19 to Ephesians 2:6).

In the interests of sound exegesis it must be stressed firstly that this is the first mention of baptism in the letter, which strongly counts against interpreting the whole letter in that light, (as is done by some interpreters), secondly that it is merely introduced as a parenthesis brought to Peter's mind by the thought of water, which counts against it as having been already in his mind, and thirdly that it does away with the idea that baptism is a means of washing and cleansing from sin. Rather is it to be seen as a picture of being raised out of death into new life in Jesus Christ (Romans 6:3). For apart from the possible exception of Acts 22:16 that is what baptism always signifies in the New Testament, ‘dying and rising with Christ' or being ‘born from above'. It should also be noted in passing that as it is connected with the presentation of a good conscience towards God, baptism at an age of accountability is in mind.

‘Interrogation of a good conscience towards God.' The word translated ‘interrogation' can mean ‘response' or ‘consultation'. Some have more tentatively argued for ‘pledge'. But, however we translate it, it clearly indicates a true response to God which passes examination (contrast- John 2:23). By being baptised we are pledged to God, and it indicates our response to Him in our consciences. But it is effective through the resurrection.

Brief Note on Acts 22:16.

Even Acts 22:16 does not necessarily see baptism as directly washing away sin, for in the Greek the verse is clearly divided into two sections, firstly ‘having arisen be baptised', and secondly, as a distinct activity, ‘and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord Jesus'. It will be noted that the first half refers to what you have done to you (be baptised), the second to what you must yourself do (wash away your sins). No man ever baptised himself.

But how do you wash away your own sins? (The word is apolouow, not louow. Thus it is not the ritual washing. In LXX it only occurs in Job 9:30). Ananias probably had Isaiah 1:15 in mind, where there is the same command to ‘wash yourselves', accompanied by the confidence that response to that command (repentance) by calling on the name of the Lord Jesus Christ would ‘wash' their lives and make them new. Note how in Isaiah 1 the emphasis is away from ritual (which has been put firmly in its place) to positive action. It would have debased Isaiah for Ananias to have suggested that a ritual would accomplish what he is demanding. It required a changed life.

Besides Ananias would have been well aware as a Jew that the washing (louow) with water in the Old Testament never cleansed, it only prepared the way for men to wait on God in order to be cleansed. It was the waiting on God that cleansed (you shall not be clean until the evening). In Isaiah's terminology how a man did wash himself was by a changed life in response to God's call. Thus his point is that by being baptised Paul will be expressing his repentance and his determination to begin a new life, and is then to put it into practise by ‘washing himself' in a positive way, in the way that Isaiah describes, by living a new life under the Lord. This will then result in his sins becoming white as snow (Isaiah 1:18). But the idea that it results from a ritual act of cleansing is contrary to Isaiah's whole thought. This is emphasised further by the fact that washing is not a concept directly connected with baptism elsewhere in the New Testament. In the New Testament washing is with the renewing word (Ephesians 5:26; compare 1 Peter 1:23), and results in the washing of regeneration (Titus 3:5) with the latter thought probably having spiritual rain in mind (Isaiah 32:15; Isaiah 44:1; Isaiah 55:10). That baptism symbolised the whole process of renewal by the Holy Spirit we do not doubt. That it represented washing and cleansing we doubt very much, however useful a picture it might make. It is not used in that way anywhere else in the New Testament.

End of note.