T.B. Williams, «Reading Social Conflict through Greek Grammar: Reconciling the Difficulties of the Fourth-Class Condition in 1 Pet 3,14.», Vol. 26 (2013) 109-126
For the most part, it is assumed that in the Koine period the fourth-class condition indicated a future contingency with a possible or, in many cases, only a remote chance of fulfillment (e.g., “if this could happen”). If this meaning is applied to the condition in 1 Pet 3,14, it seems to imply not the reality of suffering, but merely the remote possibility, which is at odds with the popular understanding of the epistle’s social situation. This study is an attempt to examine the meaning of the fourth-class condition in 1 Pet 3,14 and its function(s) within the larger Petrine argument, a task which not only sheds light on the interpretation of 1 Pet 3,13-17, but also provides the unity of the epistle with some much-needed substantiation.
Reading Social Conflict through Greek Grammar 125
discussion in this direction. The question then is, why does he make such
a deduction? Does he actually believe that divine protection will prevent
any and all affliction from touching these Christians?
In order to understand this perceived optimism and, ultimately the
function of the fourth-class condition, we must realize how this positive
sentiment is tied to the letter’s ethic. Throughout the epistle, the author
goes to great lengths to demonstrate the need for good works in the
life of a believer. The ultimate purpose behind this initiative is to lead
them towards the kinds of behavior that is pleasing to God. This is why
the rhetorical question in 3,13 is so all-encompassing and (seemingly)
without exception. By doing so, he is able to assign a greater value to the
prospect of good works. If he had said, “you are going to suffer regardless
of whether you do good or evil”, the scriptural citation in 3,10-12 would
have been clearly contradicted, and the nerve of his ethic would have
thereby been severed.
This is where v. 14a (and in particular the fourth-class condition)
comes into play. The purpose of the condition is to allow 1 Peter to
maintain the idea that suffering for righteousness is more of a remote
prospect and to thereby establish the need for righteous behavior. In
essence, this statement serves to draw out the implications of v. 13’s
contradiction, showing that the author has not turned a blind eye to their
situation. According to the optimistic rhetorical situation which has
been constructed, it is unlikely that God’s economy of retribution will be
disrupted (v. 13). But if it does occur, things still turn out positively (v.
14a). As such, the verse provides a worst-case scenario that is actually
not so bad.
This is a very important part of the author’s paraenetic strategy. Such
a technique is designed to lead the readers to embrace the lifestyle to
which they have being called, viz., a life of good works43. But the effects
are much more far-reaching. By removing the sting of persecution,
he also eliminates the one thing standing between his audience and a
Christ-like existence: fear of persecution and death (3,14b). This is the
intended outcome that the argument has been driving toward all along.
If the Christian life—whether lived out in suffering or in peace—is
comprehensively more rewarding than a life lived in sin, then there is no
reason to fear those who wish to do believers harm. Regardless of their
experience, Christians find themselves in a privileged position. Knowing
this, the readers are free to live out their lives under the lordship of Christ,
despite the trials that may result (3,15-16).
43
Cf. Richard, Reading 1 Peter, 144-47; and Michaels, 1 Peter, 184-86.