Understanding
1 Peter 3:19-20
For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit, in which he went and proclaimed to the spirits in prison, because they formerly did not obey, when God's patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water.
[1 Peter 3: 18-20]
1)
INTRODUCTION
1 Peter 3:19-20 are two of the most contentious verses in scripture; it is always good to start with a big bold statement! What
is Peter saying here? One of the challenges of reading all the way through a book
of the Bible verse by verse is we have to deal with those passages which, if it
were down to us, we would prefer to gloss over or ignore. This passage is all
the more challenging because we have no problems with verse 18; it is a wonderful
verse and in that verse we have the whole power and simplicity of the gospel: Christ
died for us and through his death we are made alive and bought into relationship
with the Father. How easy, how simple it would be to end there, but Peter does not,
he carries on talking about Jesus proclaiming to spirits in prison that did not
obey God’s word. ‘Prison’ here means hell, and so we have all these questions
about who is Jesus preaching to? Why is he preaching, and how does that square
with our wider theology of Christ’s death and resurrection.
Well let’s start with a couple of principles that we should hold in mind as we explore this passage.
2) FOUR GUIDING PRINCIPLES
1) The central truths of salvation are not being questioned here
Different people may have different interpretations
on this passage, and you may not ultimately agree with my interpretation, and
that is fine. No one he is doubting that Jesus died a real death was buried,
was rose again, and through that act secured our eternal salvation. That is a
truth that defend against any other message. Our salvation does not depend on
verses 19 and 20, but it does depend on verse 18, and so whilst all the Bible
is important and vital for our growth…
“All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness.”
[
2Timothy 3:16]
…some verses do carry more weight and so it is ok to discuss and maybe even have different views on verses 19 & 20:
2)
We do not build our theology on one verse
A basic principle of understanding and interpreting scripture is that scripture will affirm scripture, and that means that an idea or doctrine will not be confined to a single verse but will be expressed in many other places. What makes these two verses challenging is that they seem to express an idea that we do not really find expressed elsewhere is scripture. That does not make Peter wrong, but it means we must tread carefully and interpret the verse in the light of what we find elsewhere in scripture.
3)
Not everyone sees a difficulty in the passage
Many people don’t see any problem with these verses; they are just part of the wider narrative of Peter’s letter, but as a church that believes in the centrality of God’s word we should teach into every passage, not just the ones we are comfortable to familiar with.
4)
Verses must be taken in context
It is dangerous to take a verse, even verses, and interpret them with no reference to the occasion and circumstance they were written. Some verses, particularly those concerning our salvation are timeless and do not need further ‘grounding’ in the context of where they were written. Take John 3:16 for example
“For God so loved the world, that
he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but
have eternal life.
We do not need to know the circumstances
under which John wrote his gospel, or who his intended readers were, or even to
closely examine the verses either side of this (although that is still a good
exercise to engage in) to appreciate and understand the verse. For many other
verses and passages, this passage in 1 Peter for example, the context does help
tremendously in understanding the verse, and this is an idea we will come back
to later.
5)
FOUR POSSIBILITIES
Well, let’s start to explore this verse. There
are probably four main ways to interpret the passage, although I am sure there
are many more. We’ll list them first and then examine them each in more detail:
·
Jesus
is in hell, proclaiming his victory to demonic forces
·
Jesus is preaching to men and women in a conscious
intermediary state
·
Jesus
is preaching to men and women in an unconscious intermediary state
·
Jesus
is proclaiming the truths of God in are more timeless way
A literal reading of the passage suggests that
between his death and resurrection Jesus was in hell preaching:
he went and proclaimed to the
spirits in prison
In the first option it is to demonic forces, in the second and third it is to men and women (which raises all sorts of other questions -as we will see). However, there is a fourth option where Peter is talking in a more metaphorical or timeless way, and so Jesus is not literally in hell or preaching in hell.
So, let’s look at these different ideas in turn.
4a) Jesus is in hell, proclaiming
his victory to demonic forces
An initial reading of this passage will tend to
lead us to this conclusion. It does seem to be the simpler and more logical
idea. After his death Jesus descends to hell where he proclaims his victory. He
declares the truth to those evil forces that believe they have triumphed by killing
the Son of God, but he rises on the third day, declaring his victory and showing
that death has no hold.
It is an idea that ingrained and out thinking
and reinforced by so much of what we read and sing, but for that reason we must
be careful to build our theology on God’s words alone and not men’s words however
well-intentioned they may be. As we have already said the idea of Jesus descending to hell
for three days is not something we see expressed elsewhere in scripture.
Yes, Christ conquered death, yes, he showed that
death has no hold on him and therefore no hold on us, but did he need to descend
to hell to show that?
This idea is found very clearly expressed in the
Apostles Creed, which was an early (4th or 5th century confession
of basic Christian truth). It states there, talking of Jesus:
“Who
suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried, descended
into hell, rose again from the dead on the third day”
But the Apostles Creed, as powerful, and true,
a declaration of faith as it is, is man’s words and therefore not infallible as scripture
itself is. This idea comes to us with the weight of history and tradition more
than it does through clear biblical interpretation, and like any document an inaccurate or incomplete translation can lead to errors.
And the same idea is expressed in Philippians 2 as Christ's descent being linked with his suffering and humiliation rather than a destination.
And just as an aside, we must still affirm the power of such confessions. I personally have no problem in declaring this out loud and affirming ever sentence, even if I believe there is something more here.
Perhaps the question we should ask is “Where
was Jesus in the three days between his death and resurrection. One option is of
course that he was ‘asleep’, ‘unconscious’, ‘unable to partake in any activity’
until he rose on the third day (but that really invalidates 1 Peter 3:19-20
which suggests, no matter what we finally decide on, that Jesus was doing
something.
This first option answers this question by saying
Jesus was in hell, preaching to demons, but where does Jesus himself say he
will be?
Jesus was crucified with two thieves. One mocked
him but the other acted differently:
And he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” And he [Jesus] said to him, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in paradise.”
[Luke 23:43-44]
At such a poignant moment Christ is not going to
talk in metaphors, here is a simple statement from the King of Kings that on
that moment of death they would both be in heaven.
Jesus does not need to preach this to demons,
it is demonstrated by the fact of his resurrection.
We can say, at least in a poetic sense, that
‘death could not hold him’ or ‘up from the grave he arose’, or even:
God raised him up, losing the pangs of death, because it was not possible for him to be held by it.
[Acts 2:24]
but to say ‘Hell’ could not hold him conveys, apart from in the most symbolic or metaphorical of ways, may be a step to far.
So what other options are there?
4b & c) Jesus is hell preaching
to men and women in an intermediary state
Perhaps our options would be easier if Peter had simply his sentence with,
in which he went
and proclaimed to the spirits in prison…
If Peter had ended there, we could more easily
imagine that he was talking literally of evil spirits, of demons, but Peter goes
on to talk of Noah:
…because they formerly did not
obey, when God's patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark
was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought
safely through water.
There is something here about the message
coming not to demons, but to men and women, and also to men and women of a far
earlier age and are now dead. And so, there are ways to interpret this passage
along the lines of Jesus speaking to men and women. There is a clear
description of those who were disobedient to the word and so the idea here is
that men are women who were unrepentant in their lives and are now in hell, and
now releasing the error of their ways as Jesus declared the truth to them
again, this time in victory
There were two ideas mentioned earlier and I want
to take these two together, because whilst there are differences, they are perhaps
two options we can dismiss more easily (although
I am sure there are some who would want to hold to this definition). When I
talk of an ‘intermediate’ state I refer to an idea that we would not really
accept with our reformed theology, but others, particularly those of the Catholic
faith would hold to a ‘middle ground’ where souls go upon death to await final
judgement. The Catholic term is purgatory, and the key idea here is that the
soul’s final destination for all eternity is not yet decided; heaven and hell
are still in the balance. As so whilst we, with our more protestant theology would
not offer up prays for those that have died, Catholics would – seeing it as a
way of ‘tipping the scales’ in the direction of heaven being the final verdict.
Now, those souls can either be conscious (aware
of their surroundings and awaiting that final decision) or unconscious (asleep)
as they await the final judgement. I do not want to dwell too much on this idea
or the distinction between them as it is an option we should dismiss:
Just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment
[Hebrews 9:27]
The whole weight of scripture suggests there is
no ‘second chance’ or to still repent after death. The parable of the Rich Man
and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31) is allegorical in many ways; The rich man is
unlikely to have ‘seen’ Abraham and Lazarus; nor would Abraham have been able
to speak to the Rich Man in hell. Rather the parable is told to illustrate the
clear truth that there is one chance for repentance, and that come in this
life. The crystal-clear truth of what Jesus is explaining is summed up in verse
26:
And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been set in place, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.
[Luke 16:26]
If we hold, as we must, to the truth that there is no ‘second chance’ for repentance then Jesus doing so would at best be pointless and at worse, declaring a truth to people who now had no ability to respond, and therefore, whilst not explicitly mentioned, we must dismiss the idea that Jesus is preaching to lost souls in hell, where hell as their final destination and they are beyond all hope of redemption.
What then of this fourth option?
4d) Jesus is proclaiming the truths
of God in are more timeless way
This paper came in response to a preaching series
on 1 Peter and we came to this passage as part of studying the letter as a whole.
This is what I meant earlier by understanding a verse in its context. And so
rather than just ask what does 1 Peter 3:19-20 mean, we should be asking what
is the message Peter is conveying through all five chapters of his letter?
Peter is writing to Christians who are
suffering persecution and have been scattered to various locations as a result.
He is, in part, writing to assure them they are still part God’s plan and
purpose and their share with Christ as strongly as those from the generation
before than that might have physically walked with Jesus or literally heard his
teaching.
Peter is assuring his readers that they have
not ‘missed out’ on being with Jesus by being born a mere generation after his death.
The message is timeless, as Jesus did not just speak for the three-year period
of his ministry but has been speaking through all time. He speaks to us today,
and he spoke to Noah’s generation. Jesus speaks through the Holy Spirit to
every generation proclaiming this same
message. The 1 Peter passage speaks of Jesus being alive in the Spirit and in the
spirit preaching to all generations. Peter is not saying the people of Noah’s generation
who did not repent are now in hell and haring the gospel again, rather he is saying
the people of Noah’s generation heard the same gospel you have heard, whilst they
were alive and able to repent, preached through the Holy Spirit. The tragedy is
of course that not all responded to that most powerful of words, indeed only
eight were saved, but those who did not respond still heard that same gospel
and none could say “but we did not know, or we did not hear."
We can even say Noah was bringing Christ's message to his generation as he preached in the power of the Spirit. Peter seems to almost start his letter with this idea that there is a timeless declaration of the gospel through the prophets:
Concerning this salvation, the prophets who prophesied about the grace that was to be yours searched and inquired carefully, inquiring what person or time the Spirit of Christ in them was indicating when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glories.
[1 Peter 1:10-11]
Peter’s encouragement to his readers is the
message of Jesus is both timeless – touching all generations, and that it is
something they too have been called to participate in as prophets to their generation:
but in your hearts honour Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks
you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect.
[1
Peter 3:15]
5) SUMMARY
In summary can I remind you of a couple of things
that were mentioned earlier. Firstly, this is my personal understanding of the
passage in as far as I have sought God on this subject and understood it, but I
could be wrong. I am open to other explanations and am happy to discuss this further,
in person or you can aways add comments below in response. Our salvation does not
depend on how we interpret these verses, and for that reason we do have scope
to explore different interpretations and long as we do that with openness and
humility.
Secondly, I said earlier, and want to affirm
again, this was not written primarily to start a debate on the nature of heaven
and hell, or the final judgement of those who do not respond to the gospel. These
are in themselves really important and serious questions, and if you do want to
discuss more about these or other topics in the Christian faith then do reach
out to us. Those truths are taken here as given so that we can explore 1 Peter
3:19-20.
And then lastly. It would been so easy to have
not opened up the passage and possibly start a debate or discussion, but if we
want to be Christians who declare the primacy of the word of God then we must do
this with any and all passages that cause us to stop and ask; “what is being
said here, what does this really mean?” Only in this way can we grow in our understanding
of God’s word.
God bless you all
Ken
No comments:
Post a Comment