1 Peter 3 and 4

[David_McQueen]

Was having a discussion with a fellow Christian about the concept about Jesus preaching to the dead. She was using 1 Pet 4:6 to sharre her idea about Jesus descending to hell when he died to preach to those in hell.

After restraining myself from asking "what the hecky peck theology is that" we got into a disciplined conversation. My basic response was that Peter was conveying that the gospel in the past was preached to those who are NOW dead, through ceremony and as Heb 11 suggest those who lived before Christ were saved by faith. That Hell was a concept more of Gods judgement than a physical place of torment and that the buring flame references were with regards to Gehenna outside of Jerusalem as a metaphor of that judgement.

Thoughts

[David_McQueen]

[]http://www.texastumbleweedfarm.com/tumbleweed.gif[/]

[Robert]

Quote:

---

Was having a discussion with a fellow Christian about the concept about Jesus preaching to the dead. She was using 1 Pet 4:6 to share her idea about Jesus descending to hell when he died to preach to those in hell.

---

"For the gospel has for this purpose been preached [past tense] even to those who are dead, that though they are judged in the flesh as men [sinners], they may live [future tense] in the spirit according to the will of God."

The law demands the death of the sinner....If Christ's humanity didn't die then the law has not been satisfied and therefore we are still under its curse.

As far as Christ going to hell when He died, the NIV translates it correctly:

Acts 2:26 Therefore my heart is glad and my tongue rejoices; my body also will live in hope, 27 because you will not abandon me to the grave, nor will you let your Holy One see decay.

[jasd]

What do you make of the prepositional phrase…

1Pe 3:19 By which also…?

Do you consider it contrastive or conjunctive? Also, what do you make of the bolded also --as James Strong puts it, ‘a copulative particle’. Would Christ have needed the ‘quickening Spirit’ to go to those ‘in the prison of sin’ during the time when the ark was abuilding, as some propose…? or does the copulative also tie the passage being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: to/with the passage he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; --meaning, the two passages were temporally coincident.

[Robert]

For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing. [Ecc 9:5]

If something in you is immortal - then something in you is naturally sinless. The teaching that man has an immortal soul denies man's sinfulness. It is legalistic!

[LifeHiscost]

Quote:

---

As far as Christ going to hell when He died, the NIV translates it correctly:

---

Seems to me 1 Pet 3:19,20 defines the time when the preaching was done for those in prison, spirits referring to those left outside the safety of the ark. (captives behind the bars of unbelief)

[:"red"] "...by whom also He went and preached to the spirits in prison, who formerly were disobedient, when once the Divine longsuffering waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared" [/] 1 Pet 3:19,20

[jasd]

>>For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing. [Ecc 9:5]<<

It is probably safe to say that Solomon wrote Ecclesiastes; which begs the question, --before, during, or after his apostasy?

Notice the topical expression…

Eccl 1:2 Vanity of vanities, saith the Preacher, vanity of vanities; all [is] vanity. v3 What profit hath a man of all his labour which he taketh under the sun?

(Notice the very important phrase in the topical ‘under the sun’.)

and the reprise of ‘Vanity of vanities’ upon completion of his declamation.

Eccl 12:8 Vanity of vanities, saith the preacher; all [is] vanity.

This Ecclesiastical declamation is situated between the ensample Gd provides as parameter in Genesis 15:17 and the [terminus a quo] parameter of the absolute declaratives of Jesus, to wit…

Jn 6:49 Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead. v50 This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die.

Jn 8:51 Verily, verily, I say unto you, If a man keep my saying, he shall never see death. v52 Then said the Jews unto him, Now we know that thou hast a devil. Abraham is dead, and the prophets; and thou sayest, If a man keep my saying, he shall never taste of death.

Jn 11:25 Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: v26 And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?

>>If something in you is immortal - then something in you is naturally sinless.<<

That isn’t a non sequitur, is it?

>>The teaching that man has an immortal soul denies man's sinfulness. It is legalistic!<<

Well, I’m hardly the one to proffer myself-as-last-word, neither do I know from “legalistic”, nor have I forwarded a soul that Gd could not destroy. Having said that, and given the parameters above of Genesis 15:17 and the declaratives of Jesus’ in the gospel of St John, I note --that Ecclesiastes 9:6 might bear noting…

Eccl 9:6 Also their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished; neither have they any more a portion for ever in any [thing] that is done under the sun.

Under the sun.

[jasd]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

As far as Christ going to hell when He died, the NIV translates it correctly:

---

Acts 2:26 Therefore my heart is glad and my tongue rejoices; my body also will live in hope, 27 because you will not abandon me to the grave, nor will you let your Holy One see decay.

---

I confess that I’m failing to grasp the intended point being put forward. I’m certain there is something very relative and/or very pregnant in the bolded above; for this reason, help me out, why is it relative?

>>Seems to me 1 Pet 3:19,20 defines the time when the preaching was done for those in prison, spirits referring to those left outside the safety of the ark. (captives behind the bars of unbelief)<<

I gather, from the above, that your position on the matter under discussion is that --prison is a metaphor, not an actual place of literal constraint, am I right? Would your position also depict the ‘bottomless pit’ and ‘prison’ of Revelation 20 to be metaphors?

>>[:"red"]"...by whom also He went and preached to the spirits in prison, who formerly were disobedient, when once the Divine longsuffering waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared"[/] 1 Pet 3:19,20<<

So, was it Christ who preached, before the flood, to the “captives behind the bars of unbelief”? or was it Noah per,

2 Pet 2:5 And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth [person] , a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly;

or was it Both, or… Was It Neither, who preached?

Can one infer from reading 2 Peter 2:5 that Noah preached to those ‘disobedient spirits’, after having been given the commission to build an ark, [:"red"]“while the ark was being prepared”[/]? Writ states that Gd purposed to destroy man “…both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.” (Gen 6:7) One asks,

might the 120 years of Genesis 6:3 be type, finding its antitype in Revelation as --the ‘end of probation’? which some purport. What did Gd mean when He said…

Gen 6:3 …My spirit shall not always strive {1777} with man,

for that he also [is] flesh; yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

Strong’s Bible Dictionary -- 1777

or (Gen. 6:3) duwn doon; a primitive roy a straight course, i.e. sail direct:--(come) with a straight course.

…sounds to me that Gd ceased striving (dealing directly or straightforwardly?) with man for the 120 years leading to the flood.

Therefor, 1 Peter 3:19,20; that those spirits might receive (by special visitation) the ‘gospel preached…’

1Pe 4:6 For this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead,…

[Robert]

Quote:

---

Jn 11:25 Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he

[:"red"]were dead[/]

,

yet

shall he live

: v26 And whosoever

liveth and believeth in me shall never die

. Believest thou this?

---

There are two deaths. The first death is called, metaphorically, a sleep death:

• John 11:12 Our Friend Lazarus has fallen asleep; but I am going there to wake him up.” 12 His disciples replied, “Lord, if he sleeps, he will get better.” 13 Jesus had been speaking of his death, but his disciples thought he meant natural sleep. 14 So then he told them plainly, “Lazarus is dead"....

Which death did Lazarus die:

a] The first death that all mankind dies, or

b] The 2nd death - the curse of the law death that Christ came to save us from?

Yes, "a"! The 2nd death is not called a "sleep" death because there's no resurrection. It is goodbye to life forever. That's the death the believer will never face.

[LifeHiscost]

Quote:

---

>>Seems to me 1 Pet 3:19,20 defines the time when the preaching was done for those in prison, spirits referring to those left outside the safety of the ark. (captives behind the bars of unbelief)<<

I gather, from the above, that your position on the matter under discussion is that --prison is a metaphor, not an actual place of literal constraint, am I right? Would your position also depict the ‘bottomless pit’ and ‘prison’ of Revelation 20 to be metaphors?

>>[:"red"]"...by whom also He went and preached to the spirits in prison, who formerly were disobedient, when once the Divine longsuffering waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared"[/] 1 Pet 3:19,20<<

---

Sorry I haven't got the time or the energy to answer all the questions you have posed, Jasd, But you do seem to have a good handle on my personal beliefs re: to the metaphors.

As far as the preaching and by whom, it is my understanding that if Noah were the one designated as preacher during the hundred twenty years of building the ark, it would still have been Jesus speaking through a servant (Noah) by the power of the Holy Spirit.

Whenever the message of salvation is promoted I believe the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are present to do the presenting.

[:"red"] "I and My Father are One." [/] John 10:30

KJV

BTW I also believe that is why Christ died on the cross. It was the only time in the history of eternity that Diety was separated.

[:"red"] "Let your conversation be without covetousness; and be content with such things as ye have: for he hath said, I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee."[/] Hebrews 13:5 KJV

[bevin]

Discussion around this section of text is not new. 25 years ago I went to the Avondale College library in Australia to look up what knowlegeable Bible translators and commentators had said about it.

Their conclusion: Even fully understanding the original language did not help. It is confusing in the original and in the translation.

Don't use obscure texts that don't make a great deal of sense - and especially which, as other people here point out - and which contradict clear texts to make doctrine.

Instead use them to refine your understanding of the origins of all the material. Such texts are great examples of why you can't use one or two texts to prove anything, and that the Bible, at the text-by-text level, is not inerrant.

/Bevin

[jasd]

>>Jn 11:25 Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he [:"red"]were dead[/],…<<

As [:"red"]were dead[/] --as Adam, Eve, Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, Rebecca, and others having died ‘in the promise’ --per the words of Christ Jesus, following…

yet shall he live:

Note: Jesus employed verse 25 as segue to the oppositional verse 26; a rather neat device to advance the emphatic double negative ‘shall never, never’ {#3364} -- die.

v26 And whosoever [:"red"]liveth and believeth[/] in me [:"red"]shall never {#3364} die[/]. Believest thou this?

(3364 ou me oo may i.e. 3756 and 3361; a double negative strengthening the denial; not at all:--any more, at all, by any (no) means, neither, never, no (at all), in no case (wise), nor ever, not (at all, in any wise). Compare 3378.)

Paraphrased, verse 25 states that “were one dead, he shall yet live”. Likewise, verse 26 contrasts with “he who is not dead, that is, he who is alive and believeth, --shall never, never die”; moreover, than contrastive, it expresses the substantive monad --die. There is only die. No first die, no second die, no sort of die, no die by degrees, no die in the constructive.

The NT might be thought, if you will, the eponymy of New: New Gdhead, new covenant, new and better sacrifice, new promises, new blessings, new creatures, new insights concerning the last enemy, etc (The NT era even gave the Jews a new calendar --as the old had been lost {removed}). It encourages the Xtian to explore the differences between ‘perishing’ euphemisms and the substantial as regard our understanding of New Testament death. I mean, were one to use the fusty euphemism “He bought the farm”, it wouldn’t be expected that the deceased traveled to that far country clutching a facsimile deed; likewise, sleep-as-polite-expression of death does not necessarily connote a Biblically dream(less) state per se,

Job 19:25 For I know [that] my redeemer liveth, and [that] he shall stand at the latter [day] upon the earth: v26 And [though] after my skin [worms] destroy this [body] , yet in my flesh shall I see God:

Job notwithstanding. Gd had not yet, at Job’s time, fulfilled that, which was required of Him --to provide that Job should not…, as Jesus put it, “Shall never die.”

Gal 4:4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son,…

(The catalog of texts in NT Writ substantiating the sentient spirit apart from its corporeal tabernacle is not exhausted by the proffered Johannine texts in the above, this thread.)

[jasd]

>>Sorry I haven't got the time or the energy to answer all the questions you have posed,…<<

Don’t worry about all the questions; it’s my style. Besides, they’re mostly rhetorical statements (kinda like filaments in bulbs, either resistance to them provides light, or they just dangle). One has the option to expound upon them, refute them, or to ignore them; nothing demanded.

>>…But you do seem to have a good handle on my personal beliefs re: to the metaphors.<<

Be that as it may, might I be correct to suppose then, that you believe in a millennial sojourn in the heavenlies, leaving this earth itself abandoned of life, excepting Satan’s; hence, the metaphorical prison earth?

>>As far as the preaching and by whom, it is my understanding that if Noah were the one designated as preacher during the hundred twenty years of building the ark, it would still have been Jesus speaking through a servant (Noah) by the power of the Holy Spirit.<< [ed.]

Interesting choice of words. Let us assume that Noah was not, conditionally, “…the one designated as preacher…”, is it your position then, that in lieu of Noah’s ‘preaching’ --it was Christ Himself, in a special dispensation, who preached to the antediluvians? He, together with the HS…

>>Whenever the message of salvation is promoted I believe the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are present to do the presenting.<<

That may be, but consider;

Gen 6:12 And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corupted his way upon the earth. v13 And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; … and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth. … v18 But with thee will I establish my covenant; … thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and thy sons’ wives with thee.

Well, there’s more but… Does it appear that Gd desired ‘they’ should come to repentance? No, it does not. Why not? because they had corrupted their flesh. So? So, what does Writ mean by stating that only Noah was perfect in his “generations”? (-- note the plural use in generations; what is the text really saying?)

Is the use of the term ‘violence’ in the text limited to a battery of sort? or does it imply another sort of violence? a violence against nature, for example?

Perhaps, there is no apology needed --to excuse EGW’s ‘embarrassing lapse’ in using the term ‘amalgamate’ when referring to the pre-flood epoch.

>>[:"red"]"I and My Father are One."[/] John 10:30KJV<<

Indeed.

>>BTW I also believe that is why Christ died on the cross. It was the only time in the history of eternity that Diety was separated.<<

That’s interesting. I’ve never approached that thought before.

I believe Christ ‘died’ on the cross; however, I also believe it turns upon an epistemological definition of “died” --on the cross. It is hubris to assume that we know the whys and wherefores of that, which Gd with-holds [hidden] from man. Christ was Gd-devine, saying, “I lay down my life of myself … and have power to take it up again”, etc., --you know.

(Why was there confusion, as to the words Jesus uttered at dying?) It is purported that those words are Mayan. Isn’t that a hoot? If so, He got around… ;-)