Sermon Tone Analysis

The Point of a Passage - 1 Peter 3:18-22

Studying problem passages without missing the point… What is clear in the passage?

What is less clear?

What do we do on the places we are less certain, and how do we make sure to not miss the overall point?

A Clear Context

Suffering while doing good…

Unjust treatment in the very hands of those for whose sake you continue to live and bear witness by faith…

An Essential Doctrine

Christ suffered once for sins,

- suffered (died) - term used deliberately to connect with the experience of the believers in their hostile environment… notice “also” suffered

- hapax, meaning once for all time (in contrast to sacrifices offered every year for sin, particularly on the day of Atonement)

I’m the proud owner of a home… no wait, of a mortgage.

And I make payments on my debt faithfully; otherwise, I’d be in jeopardy of losing it to the bank.

So I pay it regularly.

But if someone had sufficient funds to pay off the whole thing at once, there would no longer be a need for anything else to be paid.

- and he suffered for sins… the reason he suffered was to make payment for our sins

It wasn’t his debt; it is ours.

- Which means that apart from receiving Christ’s payment on our behalf, then our debt (our penalty) because of sin remains.

This is NOT a debt that we can eventually pay off in this life.

The only way to pay it is in our ultimate destiny of eternal separation from God.

the righteous for the unrighteous

- this is at the heart of the important doctrine of substitutionary atonement - the righteous one (singular) for (on behalf of) the unrighteous people (plural) - He paid this debt with his life, the value of which is in his being perfectly righteous.

Some may recall the last time we talked about substitutionary atonement from this letter, that we gave the illustration of us having people in our lives who might say, “I never asked anyone to die for me.” - That may be that they haven’t asked, but it doesn’t mean that they don’t need him to.

… When we rightly understand our state because of sin and what Christ has done on our behalf, then we DO acknowledge that Christ is Lord, that he is the only means of our rescue, and we do acknowledge that our sin is the problem that needs payment.

And in our repentance of that sin, we DO ask him by faith to save us and make us his own.

That he might bring us to God (reconciliation, restoration - relationship)

- In our understanding and communication of the gospel, we have rightly emphasized eternal life (spiritual life in Christ that is both qualitatively better and which lasts forever… AND which allows us to relate rightly to God).

It’s this 2nd part of the truth of eternal life that can be sometimes (perhaps often?) neglected.

Again… Christ brings us to God… to right relationship with God.

Being put to death in the flesh

- That is to say, that his physical body literally suffered a horrible execution.

But made a live in the spirit

And the difference in interpretation begins right here, with “made alive in the spirit” OR “made alive by the Spirit” … [Were you aware that in the Greek there is no capitalization for pneuma (spirit)?

So the burden is on translators to determine from context whether or not it is a reference to human spirit (spiritual part of a being) or the Holy Spirit.] - Since it is determined by context, the next section has bearing on how you one translates pneuma here.

A Disputed Passage

3 possibilities are somewhat satisfactory (I somewhat bc each has it’s strengths and weaknesses, and they’re actually fairly different): [Within these main views there are subdivisions postulated, some possible while others are not consistent with a plain reading of other biblical texts… in other words, because of this, they don’t mesh with orthodoxy.]

Three questions that need answering: (1) To whom did Christ bear this witness?

(2) What did Christ proclaim?

(3) When did Christ bear this witness?

In the first view, Christ descended to the realm of the dead between his death and resurrection and preached to those from Noah’s time.

- This group is subdivided into those who say that Christ gave a second offer of salvation to those who perished in the flood; those who say that He announced judgment to them; and, those who say that He announced salvation to those already saved.

—> a.

The NT does not indicate that there are second chances after death.

(Heb.

9:27 “man is appointed to die once, and after that to face judgment”) b.

I’m pretty sure judgment was loudly announced when the whole earth was flooded.

c.

Why should the saved be called “spirits in prison”?

And how in the world does that relate to verse 20 and those who were disobedient in the days of Noah?

Pre-incarnate Christ as one with Father and Spirit, by the Spirit preached through Noah during Noah’s own time to those who disobediently refused to listen and repent.

In 2 Pet.

2:5, Peter calls Noah a “herald” of righteousness (noun form of the verb in our passage for preach/proclaim/herald). - In context this would mean that even as Peter’s contemporaries suffer (as Christ obediently did for the good of others and as Noah did while obeying God), they are bearing witness to the truth of God’s judgment and his offer of salvation.

Those who refuse to listen are justly condemned, as in the days of Noah.

- Admittedly, navigating the timing in the passage is a bit awkward, not to mention that most often “spirits” refers to angelic beings.

The most popular interpretation these days, among conservative (eg.

orthodox) scholars at least, is to see this as meaning that Christ proclaimed his victory (his triumph) over fallen angels.

This is largely based on an interpretation of Gen 6:1-4 which views the “sons of God” in that passage to be demons who cohabited with women.

That understanding can theoretically also be supported from Jude 5-7 - This group is subdivided into those who say that this took place between His death and resurrection (through a descent into Hades/hell/realm of the dead) and those who say that He made this proclamation in His ascension.

- This last option would connect directly to v. 22 in its declaration of Christ’s victory.

So, which of the last two do I prefer?

Today, I think the second… that Christ preached in spirit through Noah in Noah’s own time.

But I won’t die on that hill, and reserve the right to change my mind if I find anything else in scripture that encourages me to see things differently.

You can see, it isn’t super simple to say the least!

:-)

[But lest we drown in this point, let’s continue to wade through the text to be sure we don’t miss Peter’s overall point.

- Yes, both water puns intended.

See what I did there?]

Eight souls were brought safely through water.

- That’s a comfort to us.

Noah’s perseverance for so many years (perhaps 120) through suffering led to his vindication when God did as he promised.

A Controversial Text

Now, as if it weren’t enough to have one heavily disputed passage, we have yet another controversial text here.

Not that this one is as hard to comprehend and offer a reasonable explanation, but it’s controversial because it has been and can be misunderstood.

How does baptism correspond to the type Peter indicates in the example of Noah’s family being saved “through water”?

Does water baptism cause our salvation or does it display our salvation from judgment?

The type or pattern is Noah’s family being saved through water.

It is both the means of judgment and what provides their rescue (in an ark, of course).

The flood is the means of judgment, but it is that very judgment from which these eight are saved by faith as their ark remained above water and prevented their drowning with the rest of creation.

Baptism represents a similar concept in the sense that it symbolizes a death (the part of submersion under water… anyone who remains submersed under water dies)… so it symbolizes death, a judgment of sin, but it also then pictures, as one is brought up out of the water, a salvation and new life through the resurrection of Jesus Christ (which Peter explicitly states: “through the resurrection of Jesus Christ”).

Again…

The waters of baptism, like the waters of the flood, demonstrate that destruction is at hand, but believers are rescued from these waters in that they are baptized with Christ, who has also emerged from the waters of death through his resurrection.

Just as Noah was delivered through the stormy waters of the flood, believers have been saved through the stormy waters of baptism by virtue of Christ’s triumph over death.

But what does Peter mean by saying that baptism … now saves you?

It saves you not as a removal of dirt from the body (i.e.

not as an outward, physical act which washes dirt from the body—that is not the part which saves you), but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience (i.e. as an inward, spiritual transaction between God and the individual, a transaction symbolized by the outward ceremony of baptism).

We could paraphrase, ‘Baptism now saves you—not the outward physical ceremony of baptism but the inward spiritual reality which baptism represents.’

Thus Peter guards against any ‘magical’ view of baptism which would attribute saving power to the physical ceremony itself.

Peter makes it clear that the point he is making here is a spiritual one.

An appeal to God for a clear conscience is a request to God for forgiveness of sins and right standing with him through faith in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus.

The act of faith indicated in baptism, rather than the physical cleansing, was what was significant; baptism was an act of conversion in ancient Judaism, but Judaism insisted on the sincerity of repentance for it to be efficacious.

You can see how people can understand this to mean that water baptism is part of your salvation.

And it IS an important part of your conversion, it is our public declaration of repentance and identification with Christ, and is commanded by our Lord.

Thus the preponderance of evidence in the NT, taken with Peter’s own indication here that his point is NOT about the physical act but a spiritual one, leads us to the following conclusion:

Peter did not succumb to a mechanical view of baptism, as if the rite itself contains an inherent saving power.

Such a sacramental view was far from his mind.

The saving power of baptism is rooted in the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

And it is in this emphasis on the resurrection of Christ that Peter also turns back to an overall point on the triumphant vindication of Christ’s suffering, leading to his victory over his enemies.

See v. 22...

He ascended into heaven, is glorified to the highest place of authority (at the right hand of the Father), and all beings, including angels, authorities and powers (demonic influence) are subjected to him.

Now, it’s important to note again, that the overall pattern, the comfort and the challenge that Peter sets before us is not as unclear or uncertain as our lack of perfect clarity on the details of v. 19!

A Clear Point