122 Travis B. Williams 4. The Function of the Fourth-Class Condition So far we have been able to determine the semantics of the fourth-class condition in 1 Pet 3,14a. Both the common meaning of the form in the Koine period as well as its function within the immediate context suggests that the condition describes a future contingency whose fulfillment is considered unlikely. However, what this does not tell us is why such a form would be employed34. Therefore, we are still left to answer the question, what function does the fourth-class condition serve in the larger context of the Petrine argument? 4.1. Previous Approaches Various proposals have been made with regard to the function of the fourth-class condition in 1 Pet 3,14a. Symptomatic of most treatments (as mentioned above) has been the tendency to explain its usage within the larger discussion of the reality of persecution. Most explanations have been attempts to reconcile (what many have considered to be) the remote prospect of suffering described here with the present conflict depicted elsewhere in the epistle. One approach has been to explain the condition’s function in light of the unpredictability that results from an encyclical readership35. Since the addressees were spread over a large geographical area, it is said that one group might not find itself in the exact same circumstances as another. Furthermore, the suffering faced by these Christians was not of a continual nature. In this situation, the optative is thought to express the fact that they “live in an environment charged with suspicion and hostility, which has erupted and can erupt into violence and persecution at any time”36. Consequently, the fourth-class condition 34 T.S. Green, A Treatise on the Grammar of the New Testament, Embracing Observations on the Literal Interpretation of Numerous Passages (2nd ed.; London 1862) 162, cites 1 Pet 3,14 and 17 as “two instances [which] illustrate the preference given to the construction when the hypothetical circumstance is of an unwelcome sort.” The question of desirability, however, is immaterial when it comes to the use of the fourth-class condition. Consequently, our search for the construction’s function must focus on probability not preferability. 35 E.g., Kelly, Epistles of Peter, 141; Brox, Der erste Petrusbrief, 158; Osborne, “Christian Suffering”, 135; R.L. Omanson, “Suffering for Righteousness’ Sake (1 Pet 3:13-4:11)”, RevExp 79 (1982) 439; Grudem, 1 Peter, 176-78; S. Légasse, “La Soumission aux Autorités d’après 1 Pierre 2.13-17: Version Spécifique d’une Parénèse Traditionelle”, NTS 34 (1988) 395 n. 2; T.W. Martin, Metaphor and Composition in 1 Peter (SBLDS 131; Atlanta 1992) 217 n. 281; M. Dubis, Messianic Woes in 1 Peter: Suffering and Eschatology in 1 Peter 4:12-19 (SBL 33; New York 2002) 74-75; Schreiner, 1, 2 Peter, 171; Jobes, 1 Peter, 227-28; Green, 1 Peter, 114; Witherington III, 1-2 Peter, 177-78. 36 Achtemeier, 1 Peter, 230-31. Cf. Boring, 1 Peter, 131; J. Schlosser, La première épître de Pierre (Commentaire biblique, Nouveau Testament 21; Paris 2011) 201.