1Peter4

[Jason]

We were talking about the afterlife in another thread, and subsequently I
was thinking about this verse, 1 Peter 4:6,

"For this is the reason the gospel was preached even to those who are
[now] dead".

NIV, but [] mine.

A quick side-by-side comparison of the verse in different translations,
such as:

https://biblehub.com/1_peter/4-6.htm

shows that some translations have 'now' and others do not. I guess the
implication of the 'now' is that it they were not dead when it was
preached, but are now (at the time of writing) deceased. This seems to
me a bit odd though, when read together with "...even to those...": this
to me suggests that there was something 'unusual' going on. For example,
if someone said that the Gospel was preached "even to those on the number
37 bus" you would think that there was something unusual going on in that
particular case.

I know you can pick apart verb tenses and so on, but I know virtually no
ancient Greek, and in any case I wouldn't know how to apply that
knowledge even if I did know how to parse the verbs correctly.

I also note it was in the passive voice, so "the Gospel was preached..."
and not "I preached the Gospel..." might hint that something else is
going on here.

All in all, I don't really know how this should properly be understood....

[Kendall K. Down]

On 16/12/2021 11:37, Jason wrote:

> We were talking about the afterlife in another thread, and subsequently I
> was thinking about this verse, 1 Peter 4:6,

As it stands, the verse seems to state that the gospel was preached to
those who perished in the Flood. The problem with that understanding is
that it appears to give a second chance to those who would not listen to
Noah - an idea which is not supported by any Christian denomination. As
Hebrews says, "It is given unto men once to die and after that the
judgement" - in other words, if you do not repent in this life, you pass
straight to judgement, no second chances.

One of the most creative solutions was advanced by Moffat in his New
Testament translation, who suggests that the verse is a victim of
haplography[1].

εν ω και τοις εν φυλακη πνευμασιν
by which even to-the in prison spirits

The Greek would have been written in capitals and without word spacing
or punctuation and looked like this. Notice how the first three letters
are repeated in Moffat's suggested version.

ΕΝΩΚΑΙΤΟΙΣΕΝΦΥΛΑΚΗΠΝΕΥΜΑΣΙΝ

ΕΝΩΕΝΩΧΚΑΙΤΟΙΣΕΝΦΥΛΑΚΗΠΝΕΥΜΑΣΙΝ
by which Enoch even to-the in prison spirits

God bless,
Kendall K. Down

Note 1: Hapolgraphy is when a string of letters is repeated in the
original, but the eye of the copyist leaps from the first to the second,
leaving out the repetition. Thus

The war warmed up on March 17
The warmed up on March 17

If you write all in capitals and without word spaces, it becomes even
easier to make this mistake

THEWARWARMEDUPONMARCH17
THEWARMEDUPONMARCH17

Imagine yourself a tired scribe, working in poor light and needing to
finish in a hurry ...

[John]

On 16/12/2021 11:37, Jason wrote:

Is it not an extension of 1 Peter 3:19-20, when Jesus preached to the
spirits in prison from Noah's day?

Another thought is that the dead are those spiritually dead, who have to
hear the Gospel so there is no excuse come Judgment day.

[Kendall K. Down]

On 16/12/2021 11:37, Jason wrote:

> We were talking about the afterlife in another thread, and subsequently I
> was thinking about this verse, 1 Peter 4:6,
> "For this is the reason the gospel was preached even to those who are
> [now] dead".

Your emendation is, I believe, the correct interpretation of the
passage. The underlying problem is hinted at in 1 Thess 4:13, where Paul
addresses the problem of those who have become Christians, hoping for
the soon return of Jesus, but have died before that event (either from
natural causes or from persecution).

Given Greek ideas regarding death - descent into Hades from which no
return was possible, impossibility of bodily resurrection - the death of
these people was a catastrophe. What was the point of them accepting
Christ, enduring persecution, if they were now dead and unable to
participate in the brave new world Christianity hoped for?

Both Paul and Peter show that preaching the gospel to those now dead was
not a futile waste of time, because there will be a resurrection, there
will be a judgement, and those on the right side will receive eternal
life, whether or not they are physically alive when Jesus returns.

[Jason]

That may well be the case, but that's not really the point I was thinking
of. I guess it comes down to this, were the people ("imprisoned spirits"
that Jesus was talking about alive or dead at the time he was preaching
to them? This is what I was trying to get at by talking about the word
"now". Does Jesus preach to the dead? If so, was it a one off, or does
he do it to this day? And if he does preach to the dead, what is the
purpose of this (either now or in Noah's day)?

> Another thought is that the dead are those spiritually dead, who have to
> hear the Gospel so there is no excuse come Judgment day.

I'm not sure about that, as presumably the Gospel would be preached by-
and-large to those who were "spiritually dead" (the healthy have no need
of a doctor)...

[Kendall K. Down]

On 19/12/2021 19:31, Jason wrote:

> That may well be the case, but that's not really the point I was thinking
> of. I guess it comes down to this, were the people ("imprisoned spirits"
> that Jesus was talking about alive or dead at the time he was preaching
> to them?

Alive.

> I'm not sure about that, as presumably the Gospel would be preached by-
> and-large to those who were "spiritually dead" (the healthy have no need
> of a doctor)...

Indeed. And those who are dead are too late for a doctor ...

[Mike Davis]

On 20/12/2021 07:14, Kendall K. Down wrote:
> On 19/12/2021 19:31, Jason wrote:
>
>> That may well be the case, but that's not really the point I was thinking
>> of.  I guess it comes down to this, were the people ("imprisoned spirits"
>> that Jesus was talking about alive or dead at the time he was preaching
>> to them?
>
> Alive.

Spiritually alive?

>> I'm not sure about that, as presumably the Gospel would be preached by-
>> and-large to those who were "spiritually dead" (the healthy have no need
>> of a doctor)...
>
> Indeed. And those who are dead are too late for a doctor ...

Presumably.

Mike
--
Mike Davis

[Jason]

On Mon, 20 Dec 2021 07:14:38 +0000, Kendall K. Down wrote:

> On 19/12/2021 19:31, Jason wrote:
>
>> That may well be the case, but that's not really the point I was
>> thinking of. I guess it comes down to this, were the people
>> ("imprisoned spirits"
>> that Jesus was talking about alive or dead at the time he was preaching
>> to them?
>
> Alive.

If you are talking about the time of the Flood, where are you arguing
that these 'imprisoned spirits' were when they were being preached
(alive) to?

What is your Biblical basis for arguing that this is not about Christ
preaching to those already dead (e.g. when he 'descended to the dead'.)?

>
>> I'm not sure about that, as presumably the Gospel would be preached by-
>> and-large to those who were "spiritually dead" (the healthy have no
>> need of a doctor)...
>
> Indeed. And those who are dead are too late for a doctor ...

With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.

[Kendall K. Down]

On 20/12/2021 16:16, Jason wrote:

> If you are talking about the time of the Flood, where are you arguing
> that these 'imprisoned spirits' were when they were being preached
> (alive) to?

They were inside the bodies of the antediluvians. They are at present
(when Peter was writing) imprisoned in Hades; they were, when being
preached to, not imprisoned.

> What is your Biblical basis for arguing that this is not about Christ
> preaching to those already dead (e.g. when he 'descended to the dead'.)?

Because they are the spirits of the disobedient - and "it is given unto
men once to die and after this the judgement". In other words, this life
is your time to accept God, you don't get a second chance in the afterlife.

> With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.

Actually, no. God wants those who choose Him and choose Good because
they desire to be good, not because they have been scared witless by a
whiff of sulphur.

As I have previously remarked, everyone is punctilious about keeping the
speed limit when there is a police car behind them or one of those radar
vans has them in its sights - but that tells you nothing about whether
these same people are law-abiding when the police car has turned off or
when they are past the van.

God is going to let the redeemed loose in a perfect world; He needs to
be sure that they will not corrupt it again and He could not be sure of
that if the only reason why they are being good is because they can feel
His eye on them.

[John]

On 20/12/2021 19:41, Kendall K. Down wrote:
> On 20/12/2021 16:16, Jason wrote:
>
>> If you are talking about the time of the Flood, where are you arguing
>> that these 'imprisoned spirits' were when they were being preached
>> (alive) to?
>
> They were inside the bodies of the antediluvians. They are at present
> (when Peter was writing) imprisoned in Hades; they were, when being
> preached to, not imprisoned.

Oh, what happened to them between AD32 ish and when Peter wrote his
first epistle (AD65 ish?) I've always understood it to mean they were
imprisoned when Jesus preached to them.

>> What is your Biblical basis for arguing that this is not about Christ
>> preaching to those already dead (e.g. when he 'descended to the dead'.)?
>
> Because they are the spirits of the disobedient - and "it is given unto
> men once to die and after this the judgement". In other words, this life
> is your time to accept God, you don't get a second chance in the afterlife.

So they weren't the actual people then but the devil's angels?

>> With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.
>
> Actually, no. God wants those who choose Him and choose Good because
> they desire to be good, not because they have been scared witless by a
> whiff of sulphur.

I actually believe it's a lot more than that. Passing from darkness to
light and all that. Anyone can desire to be good, and I've encountered
countless people who do tremendous good but aren't Christian.

[Madhu]

* John <spqunr$ego$1...@dont-email.me> :
Wrote on Mon, 20 Dec 2021 22:05:46 +0000:

> On 20/12/2021 19:41, Kendall K. Down wrote:
>> On 20/12/2021 16:16, Jason wrote:
>>
>>> If you are talking about the time of the Flood, where are you arguing
>>> that these 'imprisoned spirits' were when they were being preached
>>> (alive) to?
>> They were inside the bodies of the antediluvians. They are at
>> present (when Peter was writing) imprisoned in Hades; they were,
>> when being preached to, not imprisoned.
>
> Oh, what happened to them between AD32 ish and when Peter wrote his
> first epistle (AD65 ish?) I've always understood it to mean they were
> imprisoned when Jesus preached to them.
>
>>> What is your Biblical basis for arguing that this is not about Christ
>>> preaching to those already dead (e.g. when he 'descended to the dead'.)?
>> Because they are the spirits of the disobedient - and "it is given
>> unto men once to die and after this the judgement". In other words,
>> this life is your time to accept God, you don't get a second chance
>> in the afterlife.
>
> So they weren't the actual people then but the devil's angels?

2Peter talks about thsoe angels (2Pet.2:4) but it is an apocryphal
quotation of dubious "literal-truth"-value. In that context it would
seem also that he believed in the dictum

"there is NO PLACE for CORRECTION or REPENTANCE to be found for Satan
and his Angels incarnated in Physical Bodies"

So 1Per 3-4 is not about angelic disobedience but human
disobedience. The whole world was under judgment. If only 8 were saved
(1Pet. 3:20), all the rest perished for disobedience and should be
accounted to be those addressed by the preaching (if you take Jason's
point of view. I don't think this sort of literal interpretation works
in this passage of Peter either)

I conclusion which I can draw is that christ did not preach to the
spirits of the dead. Noah preached to his co-dwellers in the generation
of the flood. It was the spirit of Christ that was preaching
(unsuccessfully) through Noah that Peter is alluding to.

I've posted this a few times on ukrc i think

http://www.waynegrudem.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Christ-Preaching-Through-Noah-I-Peter-3-19-20-in-the-Light-of-Dominant-Themes-in-Jewish-Literature.pdf

>>> With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.

(1Cor. 6:12) "Everything is permissible for me" -- but not everything
is beneficial. "Everything is permissible for me" -- but I will not be
mastered by anything. (NIV 1984)

>> Actually, no. God wants those who choose Him and choose Good because
>> they desire to be good, not because they have been scared witless by
>> a whiff of sulphur.
>
> I actually believe it's a lot more than that. Passing from darkness
> to light and all that. Anyone can desire to be good, and I've
> encountered countless people who do tremendous good but aren't
> Christian.

[But it is also more than just doing good works, and more than Ken's
reasoning that God wants is choosing those who will conform to a certain
behavioural pattern in the satan-free new heaven and new earth to come.]

[Kendall K. Down]

On 20/12/2021 22:05, John wrote:

> Oh, what happened to them between AD32 ish and when Peter wrote his
> first epistle (AD65 ish?) I've always understood it to mean they were
> imprisoned when Jesus preached to them.

I agree that the verse is confusing and, as I have often pointed out,
not just to me but to Christians in general.

> So they weren't the actual people then but the devil's angels?

I don't see how you reach that conclusion.

> I actually believe it's a lot more than that.  Passing from darkness to
> light and all that.  Anyone can desire to be good, and I've encountered
> countless people who do tremendous good but aren't Christian.

Someone can be good in general but, when presented with a specific duty,
can refuse to do it. Thus someone can be kind to kittens and his elderly
neighbour, but on Christmas Eve, as he walks past a church, God
impresses him to go in but he refuses and rejects any thought of
accepting God. As this was the culmination of many attempts by God to
reach out to him and as he was run over by the proverbial steam roller
in the next street, he is lost, despite being generally good.

Obviously that is a made-up situation, but I hope it illustrates how a)
God is constantly trying to reach people, b) how someone can be
apparently good but refusese the most important goodness. After all,
perhaps he is kind to kittens because they are cute and to his neighbour
because he has hopes of being in her will.

[Kendall K. Down]

On 21/12/2021 02:11, Madhu wrote:

> The conclusion which I can draw is that christ did not preach to the

> spirits of the dead. Noah preached to his co-dwellers in the generation
> of the flood. It was the spirit of Christ that was preaching
> (unsuccessfully) through Noah that Peter is alluding to.

I agree with you.

> [But it is also more than just doing good works, and more than Ken's
> reasoning that God wants is choosing those who will conform to a certain
> behavioural pattern in the satan-free new heaven and new earth to come.]

It is standard Christian teaching that we are not saved by good works,
but by faith. However I would argue that "faith" is not believing a set
of doctrinal propositions (divinity of Christ, penal substitutionary
atonement, etc) but is responding to the promptings of God's Spirit.

Thus if the Spirit prompts a Hindu to distribute charity and he does so,
he is showing that he is fit for salvation, not because he handed out a
few bowls of rice, but because he responded positively to the Spirit.[1]

It is not conforming to certain behaviours which is important - though I
have no doubt that the redeemed will indeed behave in certain ways - but
the person's relationship to God. Those who are open to God's leading
are safe to save whereas there may be many Christians who are
doctrinally orthodox and attend church regularly and outwardly conform
to Christian behaviour, but who will not allow God to interfere in their
selfish behaviours and will be lost.

God bless,
Kendall K. Down

Note 1: Of course, I expect that the Spirit would continue to prompt him
and he would continue to respond. Eventually he would be prompted to go
to church and accept Christ but, if he lived 200 years before the first
missionaries or currently lives in some remote part of the Himalayas, he
might not live long enough for the opportunity to arrive!

[John]

On 21/12/2021 02:11, Madhu wrote:
>

> * John <spqunr$ego$1...@dont-email.me> :
> Wrote on Mon, 20 Dec 2021 22:05:46 +0000:

i will have to give some thought to your theory on Moah and the Spirit
of Christ, interesting as I've always taken it literally as written.

>> I actually believe it's a lot more than that. Passing from darkness
>> to light and all that. Anyone can desire to be good, and I've
>> encountered countless people who do tremendous good but aren't
>> Christian.
>
> [But it is also more than just doing good works, and more than Ken's
> reasoning that God wants is choosing those who will conform to a certain
> behavioural pattern in the satan-free new heaven and new earth to come.]

I agree.