Evidence for God from Science

Can anyone explain who the "spirits in prison" are in 1st Peter 3:18-21? Why and what is he preaching to them? Whoa...and what is this about baptism saving me? If this is the case than I really have it made as I was baptised twice.




18 For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit;

19 in which also He went and made proclamation to the spirits now in prison,

20 who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water.

21 Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you--not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience--through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

You've picked a hard passage, FFC. Let's walk through it:

• For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit; in which also He went and made proclamation to the spirits now in prison, who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water. Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you--not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience--through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

The particular context for this passage is the wrongful suffering of Christians. Peter now makes an appeal to why they should suffer, which is Jesus' own suffering, in that he died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust. Dying in the flesh, Christ was made alive in the Spirit . . . this spirit is the Holy Spirit.

We then come to the first tricky passage: "in which also He went and made proclamation to the spirits now in prison." Prison here is a reference to Sheol. We can technically say that Christ "descended into Hell", so long as we understand that there was a difference between Abraham's bosom and the abode of the unrighteous. Both were held in Sheol.

So, Christ, by the Spirit, went and made proclamation to those in sheol. There are three basic possibilities here:

1. The spirits refer to the righteous dead. It is supported by the idea that Christ did not descend into the place of mourning with the unrighteous, but with the righteous.

2. The spirits refer to the unrighteous dead, whom Jesus proclaimed His victory. This is supported by the idea that Christ "became sin", and thus, could have descended into the place for the unrighteous. Some maintain that, at this point, Christ gave them the chance to believe on Him, but this assertion is speculative and not supported by the text specifically.

3. The spirits refer to angels who "left their abode" in the time of Noah. This would be supported by the rendering that they are "now" in prison. Against this is the fact that the "now" does not appear in the Greek, but seems to be implied.

Regarding these spirits, Peter says they were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah. This seems to exclude the first possibility. Since Christ was in the Spirit, the second seems unlikely as well, so by process of elimation, the third option seems to fit best. This, of course, would be based on the idea that angels actually impregnated women in the Noahic days, which many people have serious problems with, but I've not found the arguments against that position convincing.

The next phase "during the construction of the ark," could either modify the disobedience of the spirits (thus, placing their disobedience during the construction of the ark, bringing us back to the second option above), or it could modify the patience of God. As this passage holds the context of patience in suffering the latter of these seems better. Thus, we see that God did not execute immediate judgment, but was patient for one hundred twenty years, the time it took to build the ark.

The "ark" is then modified by the phrase "in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water." There is little to question here. The ark became a type of salvation.

We then come to the next part of the text, which is decidely more difficult. Peter tells us that Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you. There are those who, naturally, take this to mean that water baptism saves. But there are several reasons in the text to reject this view. First, the Noahic Flood was clearly a judgment on mankind. Baptism is directly corresponded to the ark. Those not IN the ark were taken away in judgment. Thus, it seems best that those not IN baptism will also be taken away in judgment. Peter confirms this thought process, telling us that this does not save by the removal of dirt from the flesh, that is, a physical washing, but rather by an appeal to God for a good conscience--through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Baptism, then, is an appeal to God for a good conscience. That is, it recognizes the reality of the resurrection. We are reminded of Paul's words that we are baptized into the death and resurrection of Christ. Being "in Christ", we will no longer undergo condemnation.

It is seen, then, that the baptism refered to here is the baptism into the body of Christ, a thing done in the Spirit, represented by water baptism.

I wish I could go into a bit more detail, but I'm off for dinner. I hope this helps.

God bless

Thank you, Jac, that certainly is a lot to take in. I appreciate the time you took to explain it. My only question(s)...at this time anyway, is what could Christ have had to preach to the these disobedient angels and why? Any ideas?

Thanks
FFC

Eh, that would be a matter of pure speculation. The word "preach" really just means "proclaim," so it is likely He was proclaiming victory. These would have been angels that chose to rebel against God.

Actually, this may interest you:

We know that Adam was created in a state of unconfirmed righteousness. God had to test him so that righteousness could be confirmed, which He administered through the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Now, it seems reasonable to assume that angels were also created in a state of unconfirmed righteousness. God obviously didn't make Satan with sin in him, but the Bible tells us that sin was discovered in him. All of the angels would be in the same boat. So, here's some speculation, but it makes a lot of sense to me . . .

Suppose that God created the angels first, with Satan being the first of them. They are in a state of unconfirmed righteousness, so they need a test. This works out well, because God has a greater plan to create a creature called Man, also in a state of unconfirmed righteousness, which will itself need testing. If Man passes the test, he will be exalted above the angels, as per Hebrews. God tells the angels of His plan. Implicit in this is a test on them. Will they bow to the will of God, allowing Man to be exalted over them, or will they become possessive and jealous?

Satan, the second most powerful being, falls into the second catagory. He would not submit to such a thing as a "Man", so he decides to overthrow God. At the same time, he takes a third of the angels down with him. These angels failed their test, but what of those who passed? They remained loyal, and are now in a state of confirmed righteousness. But, did God not tell them that the Man would be exalted over them? And how will this happen, considering that Man himself has fallen?

So God begins the plan of redemption. The angels watch in awe and wonder, longing to look into the salvation of men, to use biblical language. When Christ died, He went and proclaimed to those in prison that very victory, proving to them that His plan would not in fact fail!

Again . . . it's speculation, but it makes a lot of sense of a lot of Scriptures, don't you think?

Yes, Jac, that is interesting, and it does make sense. Thank you.

Has any of you seen The Prophecy movies? It's a series with at least six movies, the first half staring Christopher Walken as Gabriel, and all of them with Viggo Mortensen as Lucifer. I found them pretty interesting, despite how it was a near constant stream of action and gore. It would be more fitting to put this with the books and movies, but the subject matter here makes it appropriate in my eyes.

The plot (though I warn you, the movies are best watched with no prior knowledge of the plot): War in heaven. The angels divide once again, but out of jealousy over man being the apple of God's eye. Gabriel heads this band of rebellious angels who are trying to keep the souls of men in the ground with their dead bodies and out of heaven. To do this he must, well, I'm not quite sure yet. It was a bit hard to keep track of all that was going on plot-wise, and it's all spread out over all of the many movies. But, what I find most interesting about it is the interaction between the angels, and especially of those with Lucifer, who's actually a likable character. You've got Lucifer, Gabriel, Micheal, Simon a seraphim, Daniel, who, like the angels in Genesis, impregnate a woman, who then gives birth to a half angel, half woman, (nephalim, or whatever they're called.) There's angels fighting and destroying angels, and angels using living dead humans to do the dirty work they can't do on earth without a body. But like I said, mostly action and gore. Not exactly Christian-appropriate in any way, but the theories I found intiguing.

Just thought I'd put it out there for further contemplation along the same lines.

Oh, I was sitting on a review that confirms my inability to firmly grasp all that was going on plot-wise:

"Editorial Reviews
Amazon.com
A prime candidate for cult status (it even spawned a sequel), this apocalyptic 1995 horror flick belongs in the darker corners of the comedy-horror sub-genre that includes Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Mimic, and Phantoms--and like those movies it's a mixed blessing with some highlights worth savoring.

This one's got Christopher Walken in its favor, starring as the Angel Gabriel, who's really mad at God for allowing humans into heaven (because, you see, humans have souls and angels don't, and God plays favorites). Gabriel takes his anger out on the human race, coming to Earth to capture the soul of the most evil human alive in an effort to defeat the "good" angels that remain in God's good graces. One of the good angels is played by Eric Stoltz, who captures the evil soul before Walken does and transfers it into the body of a little girl. Are you with us so far? Don't worry if you're not, because writer-director Gregory Widen filled The Prophecy with so many wild ideas that he didn't bother to connect them to a coherent plot.

Add Viggo Mortensen as the devil and Elias Koteas as a priest-turned detective who's tracking Walken and it's clear that Widen was attempting something ambitious here. He nearly succeeded, since The Prophecy jumpstarts its heaven-and-hell rivalry with enough action, humor, and intelligence to make the movie sufficiently entertaining. It was enjoyable enough to entice Walken back for the sequel, so if you're into this kind of thing, this one's a keeper. --Jeff Shannon"

Humor - Off Topic Point-

Well, I know a few spirits who need to be in prison:

Jack Daniels, Jim Beam, Old Grand Dad, Jose Creuveu, etc...

these all made a wild turkey out of me and ruined a many of lives - these should be in prison.

Sad, we cannot do this as the 1920's era proved

On topic Point-

Yes there were Souls in a prison and Jesus proclaimed redemption to them there during His three days - like Jac spelled out....

Makes sense to me.