Ethelbert W. Bullinger’s study of the word pneumata in 1 Peter 3:19
(Ethelbert W. Bullinger,
Word Studies on the Holy Spirit. 1979. Kregel. Pp: 188-193, 213.
1 Peter
(disobedient as they
once were (Gen. 6) when the longsuffering of God was waiting in Noah’s days,
while an ark was preparing, into which [having gone], a few, that is eight
souls (i.e., persons) were brought
safely through1 water;
which [water], the antitype [of that], now saves you also,2 [even] baptism: - not the putting away of [the] filth
of [the] flesh (i.e., fleshly
filth) [with water], but [the] answer of
a good conscience toward God, by [the] resurrection of Jesus Christ).
- who is at the right hand of God, having gone into heaven, angels, and
authorities, and powers having been made subject to Him.”
1. The Greek here, diasozein,
is always used of bodily saving, in all its eight occurrences: - Matt. 14:36,
Luke 7:3, Acts 23:24, 27:43-44, 28:1, 4, and 1 Peter 3:20. It thus differs from
the simple sozein,
to save, in the next verse.
2. So all the Critical Greek Texts.
Here the
word “spirits” refers to angels. Man
is never called or spoken of as a pneuma. In all these 385 passages not one can be found where
man, in any condition (past, present or future), is called “a spirit”: not one:
for a spirit “hath not flesh and bones.” Angels are so called, but not man. In
resurrection, man will be raised with “a spiritual body” (2 Cor.
5:2)3 like that with
which the Lord Jesus rose (Phil.
3. The word oiketerion
is used of a spiritual body only in 2 Cor. 5:2 and
Jude 6.
Angels are
called in the Old Testament “sons of God.” In every place where this expression
occurs,4
it means angels: i.e.: angelic or spiritual beings. No one can give us
authority to take the words in Gen. 6:1, in a different sense from that which
they have in every other place, in the Old Testament.
4. Gen. 6:2, 4; Job 1:6, 2:1, 38:7; Ps. 29:1, 89:6; Dan. 3:25 (Hos. 1:10 is a different expression altogether).
The “fall
of the angels” is a historical fact: and spoken of as distinctly, though not
described so fully as is “the fall of man.”
In Jude 6
we are told that “they kept not their first estate, but left5 their own habitation6.” What this means, or what it involves, we cannot tell;
and no one can tell us. Whatever it was it made their sin possible; which,
otherwise, with our present knowledge, seems to us impossible.7
5. apoleipo: to
leave completely, or, leave behind. Compare 2 Tim. 4:13, 20.
6. oiketerion used only here and 2 Cor.
5:2 of a spirit-body.
7. In Luke
That it was
thus possible for them to sin as recorded in Gen. 6:1-4 is clearly implied in
Jude 7, where their sin is compared to the sin of “Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them IN LIKE MANNER, giving
themselves over to fornication, and going after strange8 flesh, are set forth as an example suffering the vengeance
of eternal fire.”
Gen. 6:1-4
further describes their sin, and tells us that their progeny was called nephilim or fallen ones.9 so awful was this progeny, and so monstrous in every
sense of the word, that it doubtless became the basis of the heathen mythology.
That mythology did not have its origin in the imagination of man, but it had
its historical basis in fact; and that fact the Scripture thus explains to us.
So terrible
were the results of this fall of the angels, that no
judgment short of the Flood would serve to destroy them.
So
universal was it, that only one family was found
untainted. Of Noah, it says, “These are the generations (i.e., the family pedigree) of Noah: Noah was a just man, and
perfect (i.e., without blemish)10 in (or among) his generations”11 (i.e., among his contemporaries), Gen. 6:9. Hence, all mankind had
to be destroyed, except the family of Noah.
10. tamim means without
physical defect. It is the word used of sacrifices, &c., being without blemish.
11. This is a different word from that rendered “generations” in the
former part of the verse. The former word toledoth: family pedigree. The latter word is dor: contemporaries.
There was
another irruption of fallen angels “AFTER THAT.” This is expressly stated in
Gen. 6:4, as being after the Flood.
Their progeny was called (nephilim) fallen ones.
See Gen. 6:4. They are so called also in Numbers
This second
irruption was evidently not so extensive as the first; though they were
numerous enough to populate the land of Canaan, but could be dealt with and
destroyed with the Sword, and did not necessitate another Flood.
It was the
special mission of
It was the
sight of these horrible creatures that so frightened the twelve spies (Num.
As to the
angels themselves, as they were spirit-beings they could not be thus destroyed,
like their monstrous progeny; but they were put “in prison” (1 Pet.
The context
of 1 Pet. 3:18-22 shows that the passage is the continuation of what precedes,
as it commences with the word “For.”
The scope
of the passage shows that those to whom Peter was inspired to write, were
suffering great and heavy trials,12 and needed encouragement to enable them to
endure their suffering for well-doing. Verse 17 (of ch.
3) tells them that “it is better, if the will of God be so, that ye suffer for
well doing than for evil doing.”
12. See 1 Pet. 1:7,
Then the argument goes on:
FOR Christ
also suffered. He was even put to death as to His flesh; and that was for well
doing, indeed.
But he was
raised again from the dead: and thus had a glorious triumph. And His triumph
was so great that He went and proclaimed13
His victory, so that it reached even to the imprisoned spirits.14 Then, ye may well suffer;
for ye suffer for “well doing,” and ye shall have a like glorious triumph. Ye
may “suffer” now; but “the glory” will surely follow, in your case, (ch.
13. The word is not euangelizo:
to preach the Gospel; but it is kerusso: to make proclamation as a herald (from kerux: a herald). It does not mean to preach in any sense of the word, but to herald that which is determined or
defined by the context.
14. In 2 Pet. 2:4 this prison is Tartaros not Hades,
or Gekenna.
Not “hell” as in A.V. and R.V. The noun tartaros does not
occur at all in the New Testament; and the verb tartaroo only here: and should be
rendered: “but having cast them to the deepest abyss, delivered them to pits of
darkness to be reserved for judgment.”
This is the
scope of the passage – and no other explanation of the “in-prison-spirits” will
satisfy the whole context, of which this verse is only a part; being introduced
by the word “for,” which connects it indissolubly with what precedes.
-------------------------------
ANGELS OR SPIRIT-BEINGS (Heb. 1:7, 14, Acts
Pneumata: spirits, when standing alone (without
any qualifying words, as it does here), is never used of men in any form, state
or condition. These are spiritual beings. He “maketh
His angels spirits” (Heb. 1:7, 14, Ps. 104:4). The angels who sinned in Gen.
6:2, 4, see 2 Pet. 2:4-9 and Jude 6, 7. The term “sons of God” (Gen. 6:2, 4) is
always used of angels (see Job 2:1, 38:7; Ps. 29:1, 89:6; Dan.
Tasters of the Word (YouTube), videos recientes: "Astronomía y Nacimiento de Jesucristo: Once de Septiembre Año Tres A.C.", "Estudio sobre Sanidades" (en 20 episodios), "Jesus Christ, Son or God?" and "We've the Power to Heal":
Tasters of the Word (the blog, with: "Astronomy and the Birth of Jesus Christ"):