“For this reason the gospel was preached also to those who are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.”
This verse is one of the most difficult verses in the Bible to interpret. The rules of interpretation that we should keep in mind is that we interpret unclear verses with the clear verses, and the minority of texts with the majority of texts. Neither is this verse clear, nor the majority of texts dealing with this subject.
For this reason
“For” is a term of explanation. Peter is explaining that everyone must give account to God (v.5).
“This reason” means unto this end. For what purpose was the gospel preached? There is a twofold purpose found in this verse:
1. that non-Christians will evaluate Christians as people in the flesh, and
2. that those who accept the gospel will live forever according to God’s norms
the gospel was preached also
The tense in the verb “was preached” is most important (aorist tense [one point], indicative mood [actually happened]). Peter deals here with the historic past. He is not saying that the gospel is in the process of being preached to the dead. The preaching took place when these “dead ones” were still amid the living. This is the only time when preaching is effective — when we are alive physically on earth.
to those who are dead,
There is no verb “are” in this verse. Literally, this phrase would read “to dead ones.” They are dead from the viewpoint of the remaining Christians on earth. The dead Christians of verse six had the gospel preached to them while alive on earth (aorist tense; indicative mood). They became Christians while on earth and are now dead. They heard the gospel while alive and have now passed into eternity before the writing of this epistle. This statement encourages Christians that they have something for which to live beyond this present life.
What is the difference between the “dead” of verse five and verse six? The dead of verse five “will give account” (future tense). Therefore, these persons are spiritually dead, dead in sin. They are eternally out of fellowship with God (Romans 5:12; 6:23; Ephesians 2:1; Colossians 2:13). The dead of this verse are Christians who have come to Christ and have their sins eternally paid for by the sufferings of Jesus on the cross.
Principle:
Christians face an altogether different future than the lost.
Application:
Is there a gospel of the second chance? According to this verse–no! There is no second chance. The only time we can come to Christ is when we are alive on earth.
The Bible says that those without Christ are dead while still physically living. They are dead spiritually.
“Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned” (Romans 5:12).
“For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 6:23).
“And you He made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins” (Ephesians 2:1).
Are you dead spiritually? Would you like to come alive spiritually? All it takes is trust in Christ’s death for your sins to give you eternal life.
“Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life” (John 5:24).
Note that the above passage says that you immediately pass from death (spiritual) into life (eternal) at the moment of belief. Will you now trust what Christ has done for you?
For more information, note this URL: http://www.4laws.com/laws/englishkgp/
Hi,
There were a lot of people who died before “This Gospel,” or “The glad tidings from God” was preached to anyone. It wasn’t preached until after Jesus died on the cross and rose again. Don’t you think that is obvious to most people?
Terry, I am not sure about the point you make.
Grant
I thought are was a verb and it is in the verse ? “There is no verb “are” in this verse”
Would you be able to clarify this somewhat?
1 Peter was originally written in Greek–the Greek has no word for “are.” It is in the English but not in the Greek.
Isn’t this related in someway to what Peter wrote in 3:19? Christ through the Spirit went to preach to those in prison- those who had disobeyed long ago. Isn’t 4:6 probably referring to the same idea?
That is probably what Terry means. I think Terry is saying that it seems Peter is referring not to those who died already having received the gospel, but those who had died before the gospel had been preached- meaning Jesus preached to them after they had died.
But keeping it in the overall context, this passage is about how a Christian should live. How we are made different and strange from other people, and how we are to serve and speak differently. Peter is setting apart those who believe from those who don’t. This makes Dr. Richison’s interpretation seem more plausible- with verse five referred to those who died apart from the gospel, and verse six referring to those who died after accepting the gospel.
The article “Did Jesus descend into hell?” at the below link gives a good explanation of the relationship (or non-relationship) of these verses- with what I think is a similar line of thought to Dr. Richison.
http://sundoulos.com/biblical.aspx?in=1
Ryan, thanks for your good comments.
I don’t think this verse refers to those in 3:19 because Jesus did not preach the gospel but made an “official proclamation” to those in hades (not hell). The official proclamation had to do with making an announcement about the fact that they did not have to fall. Jesus proved in time on earth that man could succeed as a theocratic king without falling. See commentary on 3:19. This was no attempt at evangelism. At least, that is how I see it at the moment.
Grant
Dr. Richison,
Thank you for your good work. And also ‘thanks’ to those who take the time to comment. Please tell me what or where is hades?
“Hades” is the abode of the dead. It is the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew word Sheol (cf Ps. 6:5). “Hades, (????,)” which is a transliteration, not a translation, of the Greek word. When we transliterate a word we take the spelling of that word over into another language in the respective letter equivalents, whereas when we translate a word, we take the meaning over into that language. The word itself means “The Unseen.” This was the technical Greek religious term used to designate the world of those who departed this life. The Septuagint, namely, the Greek translation of the Old Testament, uses this word to translate the Hebrew “Sheol, (?????,)” which has a similar general meaning. The “Hades (????)” of the pagan Greeks was the invisible land, the realm of shadow, where all Greeks went, the virtuous, to that part called Elysium (???????), the wicked, to the other part called Tartarus (????????).
The difference between the pagan and Biblical conceptions of Hades is that the former conceives of Hades as the final abode of the dead, whereas the latter teaches that it is the temporary place of confinement until the Great White Throne Judgment in the case of the wicked dead, and until the resurrection of Christ, in the case of the righteous dead, the latter since that event going at once to heaven at death (Phil. 1:23).
In Revelation 6:8, Death and Hades follow in the wake of war and famine, Hades ready to receive the dead of the Great Tribulation period. In Revelation 20:13, 14, Death itself, and Hades with all the wicked dead are cast into the lake of fire.
There is no indication of where Hades is except that it is “down.”
Dr. Grant,
It seems as if this verse can be taken a little differently if you apply what you say about there being no verb ‘are’ in the verse.
The verse could then read, “… the gospel was preached also to the dead, ..”
You could also apply what you mentioned earlier under ‘Application:’, namely, “The Bible says that those without Christ are dead while still physically living. They are dead spiritually.”
Taking these ideas into account, this verse could be speaking of people who were spiritually dead and who came to life spiritually as a result of accepting the gospel.
-see Eph. 2:1-7 for a reference
What is the meaning of 1 Peter 4:6? “In fact, for this purpose the good news was declared also to the dead, that they might be judged as to the flesh from the standpoint of men but might live as to the spirit from the standpoint of God.” (Were these “dead” the people who had died prior to the death of Christ? As already shown, the dead are not “the spirits in prison.” Those spirits were disobedient angels. And preaching would not have benefited physically dead humans because, as Ecclesiastes 9:5 says, they “are conscious of nothing at all,” and Psalm 146:4 adds that at death a person’s “thoughts do perish.” But Ephesians 2:1-7, 17 does refer to persons who were spiritually dead and who came to life spiritually as a result of accepting the good news.)
Bo, in answer to your question about who are the dead, please read 4:6b.
Ephesians 2:1f clearly deals with those who are “dead in trespasses and sin” and then become believers by grace. They were physically alive but spiritually dead.
Chris, yes, that is what I believe about the principle of verse six, however, Peter refers to those who heard and accepted the gospel when they were still alive but were dead when Peter wrote 1 Peter.
The point of this verse is that those who heard and believed the gospel faced a different future than those without Christ (4:1f). For Christians, physical death does not lead to judgment but to eternal life.
I am just curious…is it possible that 1 Peter 4:6 is in no way connected with verse five?
Des, the difficulty with disassociating verse 6 from verse 5 is the phrase “for this reason (or purpose).” The Greek word for “for” means explanation (explanation of verse 5). Peter is explaining what he just said.
“This reason” is literally “with a view to this,” that is, that everyone must give account to God. Some non-Christians reading 1 Peter knew that dead saints were martyrs. “Was preached” is a past event (aorist tense; passive voice; indicative mood).
Verse 5 mentions the judgment that awaits both the living and the dead. Peter takes up the issue of judgment in verse 6. Understanding of verse 6 depends on verse 5.
Dr. Grant,
Thank you for your reply. I was just a little confused about the verse. I was confused because I thought that the purpose for the gosple being preached to those who had died was so that they would live according to God in the Spirit.
Des, go to my studies in 3:18 to the end of the chapter. The event of chapter 3 is different than the event of chapter 4. Also, go to the study for the last 1/2 of this verse in 4:6b.
I believe that it is wrong to violate the simple rendering of a passage in the Scriptures regardless how indigestible that passage may be. We may need to widen our theological scope to include that very passage, or admit our limitation to grasp it. Peter had used many terms (disobedient 2:9, Gentiles 2:12 , unreasonnable2:18 [pagan])to refer to the living unsaved. The first reference of the dead in 3:19 also tie us with the context as far as (who, when, why, and how). This reference in 1Pet 4:6 is lined up with what Peter had already mentioned 3:19, only this time to widen the circle to include all dead who had not been exposed to the Gospel and who could not have been exposed to Gospel. I believe that God made some general rules, as far as “It is appointed for man once to die after that the judgment.” God in His sovereignty my choose to make an exception. For, at the end, He will also be a just God.
Marc, as you say, all of us have to admit our limitations in determining the meaning of this verse. That is why the 1) the argument of the book of 1 Peter and 2) the immediate context are so important to understand a passage like this.
I want to encourage you Dr Grant in this great work that you are doing to equip the body of Christ. Added to this massive work that you put together, you also make time to respond to your readers’ comments. As a pastor/teacher, I know the sacrifice involved. Although I was still perplexed about the verse after reading your comment on it; I must tell you what a blessing you have been to me, for I’ve been looking for a site like this where I can trust the orthodoxy, and where the author is still alive. You are both, and this is not the last time you will hear from me.
God bless!
Marc
Thanks Marc. In terms of the discipline to study the Word–it takes one to know one! I value your concern for authenticity in Bible exposition.
The NIV translates this verse slightly differently: using the word even instead of also. What is your opinion on this translation?
The problem with the NIV is that it is a dynamic translation. It is, therefore, not as accurate as translations such as NKJV, NASV, ESV, among others. There has been much criticism of the NIV by scholars in recent years.
I read Dr. Grants explanation and the comments that several people left. This particular verse cought my attention when I was reading through First Peter. I understand That Dr. Grant is saying that basicaly, the dead referred to in verse 6, are those who have not received new life in Christ and are NOT the souls of unrightous people who died before Jesus came to earth and died on the cross. Is that correct?
Jasmine,
That is not correct. “To dead ones” of verse six refers to believers who are dead from the viewpoint of Christians living during the time of the writing of First Peter. These people became Christians at some previous point (at that time the gospel was preached to them).
Grant
hi, As MR.Grant’s comment about the dead in verse six, I also believe that those dead are spiritual dead but physically alive,then they heard the gospel before they died,and their sin are paid eternally. Is this correct? i have a question this statement ”that they might be judged according to men in the flesh”. May I have your complete explanation of this statement?
Shemer, did you go to 4:6b to see my comments on that phrase? You may not have noticed that I continue on with the study.
Friends its extremely important to maintain these verses within context..truth be told.
For the sake of the advancement of the Gospel we all live by.
Be blessed!
Dr Richison, There’s been some comments about the difference between the ‘physically’ dead, and the ‘spiritually’ dead. I have always read this verse with the understanding of a physical death because: …. the Good News (JC) was (past tense) preached to those who WERE dead, killed by the flood …. that to me is a physical death … and then goes onto to say that although their bodies were punished with death (again past tense), they could STILL LIVE in their spirits as God lives. How can ‘being killed by the flood’ refer to a spiritual death? Am I just reading this too simply? On the other hand, I’ve always believed the way to eternal life is through Jesus Christ, whom you believe in as the Son of God and have faith in, WHILE YOU ARE STILL PHYSICALLY ALIVE, here on earth. No second chances. No wonder there’s confusion with this one!! But THANK YOU, THANK YOU for your explanations and comments (and to everyone for all your input) … I hope it’s OK with you, but for now, I just accept that I’m probably never going to have a full and complete understanding until I get to heaven.
Christine, You are certainly right in that none of us will fully understand this passage until the eternal state. Having said that, I don’t want to minimize God’s revelation. He wants us to try to understand it otherwise he would not have revealed it. With that said, we need (as you said) to realize our limitations.
Phil, context, as you said, is our best hope of understanding this passage.
This is not a hard verse to understand. It is merely a very controversial verse.
Many evangelicals think that only while being encased in flesh is there the possibility of salvation. Therefore Peter’s stance that Jesus preached to people not in their flesh …wow, this really really opens a can a worms.
Their overly literal but ironically quite shallow take of verses like ‘It is appointed unto man once to die, and then the judgement’
well,
What about situations like Lazareth having been dead to the point his sister said he now stinketh. His body is already decaying (now that’s really dead if you ask me), but Jesus resurrected him back from the dead. So, it was appointed unto Lazareth to die twice? Also the event of Christ being crucified and risen had caused many saints of old to be brought back from the dead at that time, as reported in the gospel.
Mark, thanks for your contribution to this blog.
Your comment that this passage is not that difficult to understand contradicts commentaries from the liberal to the most conservative. Most commentaries indicate that this section of 1 Peter is the most difficult to understand.
The difference between Lazarus’s death and a permanent death is that his was resuscitation only to die permanently later.
Dr Richison, I have to completely agree with you on this one. It was only yesterday that my Pastor was preaching on this and completely twisted 4:6 and 3:19 to make it sound as though Christ went to Hades on a Evangelical, good-will mission to “save” the ones that did not hear of Him. He dangerously applies this to the ones (here today) that do not get a chance to know Christ, and will most likely be shared the Gospel with Jesus Himself. To back up his claim further he brought up in his sermons, Matthew 25:34-35,37-40 (if you could help further explain this that would be helpful),going to the same sermon the next day – this Sunday morning, I later get a chance to show him what you (and a lot of others) have said concerning First Peter. Of course he dismisses them all as being misinterpreted and incorrect. But no shocker there right? If its a matter of a harmless opinion, like “will there be animals in Heaven?” I see no big deal. but as something as serious as “Don’t bother sharing the Gospel to those folks in that part of the world, Jesus will do it because its shown He would..” I don’t know about you, but I would think the Son of God would read the book of John way better then I ever could so why bother… Just my thoughts. Thanks again for the support, look forward to your response.
and no, this is not a Mormon church by the way -At least its not suppose to be..
- Justin
Justin, did you go my study on Mt 25? That is a passage that needs the entire context–Mt 24-25.
Thank you for helping me understand this confusing verse. While debating with a Latter Day Saint, I asked, “If the Bible speaks completely of the Truth in Jesus and the grace of God, then why was the truth withheld from those people who lived within 400-1820 AD? How was God then gracious to them?” (for those of you who don’t know, the Book of Mormon was claimed to be written in 400 AD and only presented to Joseph Smith by an angel Moroni in 1820 AD)
He then brought up this verse, saying that those who did not have the chance to hear the gospel would be preached to in the spiritual world. I was confused like crazy. Now I can respond accurately, instead of merely saying, “That’s an interesting verse…I’ll look into that…”
Thanks to everyone.I have a preoccupation with Dr Grant`s commentary on 1pet 3:19.Dr grant,you talk about Jesus not preaching to those in Hades; I dont really get you.Did Peter originally wrote “proclamtion“ in Greek?.Could you throw more light on this issue,becasue the context of the verse doesn`t seem to me to be a proclamation.
Peace,
Mosi
Mosi, Thanks for your question. Note Baker’s New Testament Commentary on your point: “The gospel was preached.” By means of the impersonal verb in the Greek (“it was preached”), Peter specifies that he is not interested in the content of the proclamation or even in the persons who preach the gospel. He is interested only in the fact that preaching occurred. Observe that Peter writes the past tense of the verb to preach to show that he is speaking of an event that happened in the past. The choice of the past tense is significant because of the next phrase.
Kistemaker, S. J., & Hendriksen, W. (1953-2001). Vol. 16: New Testament commentary : Exposition of the Epistles of Peter and the Epistle of Jude. New Testament Commentary (163). Grand Rapids: Baker Book House.
Mosi, one further point about the word for “preach” in 1 Peter 3:19: The word translated “preached” there is kerusso. The word was used in secular Greek of an official announcement or proclamation made by a representative of a government. The word in itself does not indicate the content of the message. A qualifying phrase must be used for that purpose. In the New Testament, the word is used either with a qualifying phrase such as “the gospel” (Mark 16:15), or the contents of the proclamation are given as in Revelation 5:2, or it is used alone without the contents of the message being given as in Romans 10:15. Thus, one cannot say that our Lord preached the gospel to these fallen angels. There is a distinct word used in the Greek New Testament which means “to preach the gospel,” euaggelizomai. In Luke 4:18 we have, “to preach the gospel to the poor,” where the words, “preach the gospel” are the translation of the one word euaggelizomai. The word is made up of aggello “to bring a message,” and eu “well” or “good,” thus, “a message of good,” thus, “to bring good news.” The word “gospel” means “good news.” But this word is not used here. Our Lord made an official proclamation to these fallen angels. It was not the gospel.
Wow, I am a Charis Bible College student and our assignment is to do an Exegesis study on a New Testament verse. I picked 1Peter 4:6 because I had written “interesting” in the margin next to that verse! I had NO idea the verse was this contraversial! When I first read the verse I thought Peter was talking about the physically dead who had died before they heard about the Good News of Jesus Christ but after reading it over and over again, I am totally confused! It looks like he may have been talking to the spiritually dead and the spiritually alive in Christ will all be judged in their flesh by men before or after they die And ALL men will be judged by God. Is this close to being “on-target”? You seem to have wisdom in the Lord.
Hi Grant,Another thought I just had was one that Doddridge had also. Maybe Peter was referring to the Gentiles who may have been considered “dead” to the Jews,even the newly converted Jews. I’ve cut and pasted Doddridges views for your consideration. Thanks, Karen1 Peter 4:6 1Pe 4:6
For it was to this purpose that the gospel was preached also to the dissolute Gentiles, who might truly be said to be dead in trespasses and sins, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh; that they might be brought to such a state of life, as their carnal neighbours will look upon as a kind of condemnation and death; but might live according to God in the Spirit, might be brought to a truly spiritual and divine life: and if when men hear of the gospel, they will not receive and improve it for this important purpose, they must expect to render to God an impartial and severe account for their abuse of it, and must stand by all the terrible consequences of their folly.
Karen, the gospel was preached in the past (aorist tense) and it was real that it was being preached (indicative mood) to those who were once alive when they heard and accepted the gospel. To Peter’s current readers, they were dead at the time of writing.
Regarding Gentiles: it seems to me that to introduce Gentiles in this passage is to bring in something extraneous to the passage, that is, there is no context that demands this unless we take “Gentiles” as those who do not know Christ. Peter uses the word “Gentiles” in v.3 but that does not justify the context dealing with the issue.
I was wondering if there are any verses that say what happens to people who have never heard the Gospel before. Someone else’s commentary pointed me to this verse, but your commentary makes much more sense.
This is the question someone asked me and I was searching to find an answer:
“If God has power to transform evil, to end poverty, to reveal to us his power and love then what stops him? What keeps him from conveying the holy spirit to everyone where then they can have the choice in following him?”
Any help would be awesome! Thanks
Josh, Go to Romans 1:18 and following. That verse and those following deal with the issue “What about those who have never heard the gospel?”
God has the power to overrule man’s rebellion against Him but He chose to give man freedom to sin. He has never promised to right all the wrongs of earth until His Son comes to reign in the Millennium.
I think it’s good to keep in mind that starting in verse 3 Peter puts his focus on “they” (persecuting unbelievers). He describes their behavior(v.3) then their ridicule towards Christians who turn from that behavior(v.4) “they” will then give an account to God(v.5) “They” judge now in the flesh(alive in the flesh). The Christians at the time were facing judgment from men in the flesh. In the end, the tables will turn and “in the spirit” believers will be made alive while “they”(unbelievers) will be judged by the God who “stands ready”.
Dr. Grant, Peter is telling these believers to have the same mind as Christ or to “arm yourselves with the same mind of Christ”. He is comparing these Christian’s lives to the life of Christ and what He endured. ???Is it possible??? that The first 6 verses in chapter 4 are similar to the last few verses of chapter 3 (not concerning the spirits in prison) but the vindication of Christ over the spirits imprisoned (which I believe are the sons of God from Gen.) Just like these persecuted Christians will ultimately be vindicated over their persecutions during judgment?
Jasper, thanks for that contextualized argument (the best argument of all).
I believe the argument at the end of 1 Peter 3 is an official proclamation (Greek term) to fallen angels that they did not have to fall. Your statement about “vindication,” therefore, is on target. This chapter argues for vindication of believers during suffering.
I just noticed that 4:6b was a duplication of 4:6. I corrected that so now you can see my commentary on the remainder of the verse.
Sincerely sorry for having had so many spelling mistakes, herewith the corrected comment.
George I Abraham
February 28, 2011 at 6:39 pm
Sir,
This is no simple verse and is not the only verse that it contains so much that it can and does lead to the belief that the whole Scriptures is condensed in one sentence. Who but God has the ability to leave His signature scattered in the pages of His Book. Truly, the more I think of this the more I am convinced that nothing in the Word of God is one dimensional, absolutely nothing. Millennia have passed and we are still writing thesis and commentaries, studies and publishing material to such an extent that we have diluted so much of the good intent of the word of God that we have cults in our midst and are totally unaware of the monster in the midst. From my perspective if there is such a thing and not the perspective of God this verse takes us all the way to the Spiritual realm, the fall, the law, the prophets, the coming of the Son of God, His death and His resurrection the apostles and to present day. And, finally that the gospel be taken/preached to the entire world. Praise God that the founding fathers of the church of Jesus Christ be from the East, South or West were led by the spirit to include the letters of the apostles in the Holy Canon, which has made so much difference to our understanding of the Scripture both the old and the new without distinction. But just contemplate a simple and yet profound truth that the epistles of Paul and John may not have been in circulation yet, and the church was growing by leaps and bounds because of the Gospels and the reliance of man on the leading &/or prompting of the Holy spirit. The more we have humanised the word of God, the more distant we have grown from Him. Simply because the more self-sufficient we have automatically become. Every tendency in man has a causative. The more distant we are from God, the more we are closer to the world and the vagaries of the evil that is in the world and not in the sublime teaching of the one and only true God. I think I should stop here and suffice me to say that there is absolutely nothing wrong with having the Greek spirit of adventure and exploration and seeking new horizons of physical achievement, and when it comes to the spiritual realm remember He wants us to be His people and His Holy nation and at the heart of that is a pedestal upon which our spirituality rests that is we be Obedient, Reliant, Trusting, Seeking and referring all things to Him. Totally dependent on and upon Him for all our needs. Seeking not the glory of self but His ALWAYS. ?Just a simple man’s faith that is it “Abraham” remember. One Sanhedrin was totally annihilated and we have been so successful and effective in resurrecting many.
Let us go back to God, give Him rest that we may be in His.
We need to take into consideration, the immediate context of Romans 5:12, “Therefore, just as through ONE man [Adam's] sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to ALL men, because ALL sinned” (Romans 5:12). If we read further (5:18), the picture completely changes: “Consequently, just as the result of ONE [Adam's] trespass was condemnation for ALL men, so also the result of ONE [Jesus'] act of righteousness was justification that brings life for ALL men” (Romans 5:18). And, accordingly, verse 23 is clearly understood in light of verse 18, “For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 6:23). I think interpretation needs to be done in light of a bigger picture. Thanks.
Dr. Grant,
Your view is certainly a good one, but can I suggest a few minor adjustments and perhaps a different approach to the passage?
1. Someone earlier asked about the word “even” in the NIV and you brushed it off on account of the NIV’s dynamic translation. The trouble with that is that there is a kai in the Greek right before tois nekrois, so your translation should reflect that kai.
This is significant because it basically eliminates the reading of “the dead” as those who are spiritually dead. Why would the gospel be preached to EVEN the spiritually dead? It is, after all preached ESPECIALLY to the spiritually dead.
2. On the heels of #1, your view actually turns out to be more dynamic than it is literal. There is no way that tois nekrois can be translated as “those who are dead.” The verse should literally read “the gospel was preached even to the dead.” Now, I agree with your interpretation, but before you can call the NIV dynamic, you need to check yourself on your Greek. There is no relative pronoun (hois) in the Greek, which is necessary for your translation. Even if you take tois as “the ones” (which would be inaccurate), your translation should read, “the gospel was preached even to the ones are dead.” That’s nonsensical. A main verb is already present in that clause — euaggelizo.
You landed in the right place because I do think, in light of the complication of this verse, that your interpretation is correct, but your justification of it is all off.
3. One commenter noted that you divorce the meaning of “the dead” in v. 5 from “the dead” in v. 6. This is a valid critique, and one for which your particular view has trouble accounting. In v. 5 “the dead” is part of a merism which comprises all people, so the dead are the literal dead, NOT the spiritual dead. Everyone faces the final judgment, not just unbelievers. Regardless, even the spiritual dead is a big semantic jump from v. 5 to v. 6. In v. 6 you argue that “the dead” are dead Christians, but in v. 5 they’re simply dead people. To make such an abrupt change in word meaning almost in the same breath is a bit strange.
An alternative suggestion to your exegesis here would be that “the dead” refer to all dead people, believing and unbelieving. After all the purpose of preaching the gospel is that men would live by God’s standard (i.e. have eternal life). Now, that purpose is not always accomplished; otherwise, everyone would be saved, and they’re not. So there is no problem with taking “the dead” in the exact same way that it is meant in v. 5, namely the physically dead. Furthermore, I would argue that this fits the contexts well. After all, the Christians in Asia Minor are obviously undergoing severe persecution because they’re preaching the gospel. Peter here is assuring them that their efforts simply mirror those of all the Christians in the past (yes there were “Christians” before Christ) who preached the gospel in the midst of mockery. Noah, for example is a perfect example, for he is called a “preacher of righteousness” in 2 Pet 2:5. Did anyone convert when he preached in light of upcoming judgment (the Flood)? No. They all perished and even mocked him, no doubt. Yet God brought him safely through said judgment. In the same way, Christians in Peter’s time and all ages preach the gospel that men might be saved in view of a coming judgment (the Day of the Lord) — regardless of men’s responses — knowing that God will carry them safely through.
Trey
Trey, thank you for your careful exegesis. You present a very powerful and possible interpretation. I appreciate your thoughtfulness about this passage. Your use of Greek is very good.
1. Just a reminder—this is a difficult passage for any viewpoint to understand; it is always dangerous to be dogmatic on passages that do not have unquestioned perspicuity. That is certainty the case in this passage in my view.
2. It is important to remember that that the overall argument of First Peter is to vindicate those who suffer for preaching the gospel. Verse 5 is a footnote to verse 6. In other words, why even mention the dead in any sense after referring to both the “living and dead?” Verse 6 draws attention to “the dead” in particular, that is, to the believing physically dead. Yes, these words could indeed refer simply to anyone who died, however, verse 6 is a particularization of those who died.
3. Regarding kai, kai is fundamentally a copulative, not primarily intensive, as you use it. Albeit, it very well could be intensively as NIV and ESV translate it. My translation uses it as a copulative: “also.” Your use of kai, a valid use and is a valid interpretation, however, it requires more justification exegetically to come to your conclusion since it is not the customary use of the word. My interpretation of “spiritually” dead is the believing physically dead, i.e., those who died physically previously to the writing of 1 Peter came to Christ.
4. The phrase tois nekrois is literally “those dead ones.” There is no verb so the translation could be “was preached also to the dead ones.” The aorist passive indicative indicates that the preaching occurred at one point in the past. The “also” in this case would be a different classification than those in verse 5.
5. As an aside, I do not believe “everyone” faces the “final judgment” for there is a distinction between the Judgment Seat of Christ for believers and the Great White Throne Judgment for unbelievers.
i listen to everyone that talks about Peter 4:6 i was to believe from the message that god is still speaking to spirits even while dead. i teach bible studies at my home and i feel the present of God is with me but the passage that i believe is that God is still working in the dead he is still saving souls by the spirit and preaching i know on earth he use his different vessels to preach the gospel but he knows that the living vessels cant speak to the dead. so God is still doing miraculous work in the dead to if they choose to accept christ the bible talks about how we can live and obey and follow his commands to live longer lives happier lives but God is a just God and he have mercy an compassion on who he believes. the bible talks about all the different ways you can make it to christ so i know that everything belongs to him so everything even the spirits will return back to him so it just to say that he has the last say so and just believe can get you to eternal life the thief on the cross believe and he was saved by mercy and grace i do believe God is still working even in the grave.
nit, expressing an opinion is not the same as Bible exposition. I think you missed the point of the passage and the discussion above.
Dr. Richison, Thank you for your explanation of this verse. I can see the meaning now and it makes good sense. I knew that it could not be taken at face value, but I didn’t see the scripture in the angle that you presented until I found your website on the search engine. Thank you again, and keep up the good work.
Thank you as well Richard.
I am going to a Bible study at church and have home work to do. One of the questions is does the word dead in 1 Pt 4: 6 mean spiritually dead or physically dead. I didn't understand the question so that is why I came to this blog. I was so surprised to see so many different opinions. I am even more confused now. Dr. Richison, you say that it means Christians that have died physically. Now my question is, what does the phrase "that they might be judged according to men in the flesh" mean. Can you put it in a simpler term that can be understood? Also, what about the people that were born and died before Christ came? I know the Bible says that we can only be saved thru our faith in Jesus Christ, but what about all the people that died before his birth that didn't know of his coming? I know in the old testament the people had to offer lambs as a sacrifice for sin or the best of their crops. Was this the way God forgave them of their sins so they could have eternal life? There are just so many questions that I have never heard any sermons on and have been going to church every since I was born. I know that we will never know everything until we go to our eternal homes but just curious as to how the experts interpret the Bible. Thanks so much for your input and God Bless You!
Elaine,
About your question, “judged according to men in the flesh,” did you go to the next study? http://versebyversecommentary.com/1-peter/1-peter-46b/
Your question about people before Christ is an issue of “progression of revelation.” That means all people have to do to become a believer is believe what God revealed to them at the time. All Adam and Eve needed to believe was that God would provide a “seed,” all that the Israelites needed to believe was that God would in the future provide a Redeemer as illustrated by a type—blood sacrifice.
Dr. Richison, Thanks for your response about the people born and died before Christ came. Even though I have never heard a sermon on this, I have always believed exactly as you stated, that as long as they believed what God revealed to them at that time. Thanks again!