From: Paul S. Dixon (dixonps@juno.com)
Date: Mon Jan 12 1998 - 16:15:46 EST
On Mon, 12 Jan 1998 15:42:19 +1300 Chris and Julie Kavanagh
<kavanagh@xtra.co.nz> writes:
>Dear All,
> Greetings from sunny, warm, windy New Zealand.
>
> I am taking the liberty of commenting off list on the thread of 1 Peter
>3.18-22, because some comments will be of interpretation, rather than on
>the Greek, and my Greek is probably not up to the intricacies of Peter's
>( SILOUANOS'?- but that is another story). It's just that I preached on
>this passage yesterday evening (11th Jan), as part of a series in 1
>Peter 3.13 to end of letter, and so spent some time last week reading up
>the various interpretations.
Don't you just love preaching the Word? I certainly do. What one my
greatest joys is studying it, and to think I get paid for it.
>
>Martin Luther commented that it was 'A more obscure passage than any
>other in the New Testament, so I do not know for a certainty just what
>Peter means', and Calvin said, in his 1 Peter commentary that the
>obscurity of the passage has produced a variety of interpretations - he
>was surely not wrong here.
>
>It seems to me that the action of Christ's preaching happened post
>resurrection. Selwyn's theory that EN hWi of v19 ruled this out seems
>fairly well demolished by Grudem
>(Tyndale NT Commentary, in loc). So this would seem to rule out any
>idea of 'Harrowing of Hell' by Christ, between death and resurrection.
>PNEUMATI, being taken to be Spirit with capital S, the antecedant of
>EN hWi.
I certainly agree with everything you say, except for the above
paragraph. Surely you meant something else in the first sentence. Since
I am still snow and ice bound at home (Portland, Oregon, though normally
a rather mild and pleasant place to live, really is virtually paralyzed
now) and the above mentioned authors are all at my office elsewhere and
since I don't remember what they said, and since the above paragraph
seems to contradict everything else you say, then I will assume you
either made a radical change enroute, or that there is a typo, or that I
simply don't understand. At any rate, I will take your following
paragraphs as more of a reflection of what you believe.
>
>I plumped for the interpretation of Christ, in the Spirit (ie Holy
>Spirt) preaching to the disobedient (APEIQHSASIN)people of Noah's day,
>through Noah, - who were 'now' in prison ie when Peter was writing. The
>NASB actually supplies the word 'now'.
>
>If I said to someone:'John Wesley preached to many who are in hell' - it
>would be understood he did it when he was alive, and they able to hear
>him in this world.
>
>Peter speaks of the prophets of the OT (1.11): TO EN AUTOIS PNEUMA
>CRISTOU PROMARTUROMENON TA EIS CRISTOU PAQHAMATA KAI TAS >META TAUTA
DOXAS - - the Spirit of Christ within them indicating the >sufferings of
Christ and the later glories , and although Noah is not called a
>prophet, he functions as one, being a preacher of righteousness, (2 Pet
>2.5), and condemning the world (Hebs 11.7).
>
>The point of the pericope 3.18-22 being that of the example to Noah to
>the people Peter was writing to - in context they were few in number,
>threatened, surrounded on all sides by a Godless world, and perhaps
>feeling afraid and uncertain of the future. Christ preached to the
>pre-flood world, through Noah; he speaks to the ungodly world today
>through believers. The world was condemned, Noah was saved, etc..
>
>A post-resurrection visit of Christ to the spiritual underworld seems to
>rely too much on 1 Enoch. Would the people Peter was writing to have
>read it (they were mostly Gentiles)? Would they be able to pick up on
>the imagery without direct reference to it?
>(Jude at least says he is quoting Enoch). The evidence in favour of this
>view is given by France in ' New Testament Interpretation' ed
IHMarshall.
>
>It is fascinating to read the various EVV and paraphrases of the
>pericope to see the translators' ideas being brought to the text.
>(Again, another story).
>
>Sorry for the long post, it's Monday, and my head is still buzzing
>with it.
I have read Carl's and Jonathan's responses and agree that probably not
much more can be added Greek-wise. But, it has jogged my curiosity
afresh.
Monday already, huh? Hmm, you guys always seem to be one step ahead of
us here in the States.
Paul Dixon
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:53 EDT