Sermon Tone Analysis

Overall tone of the sermon

This automated analysis scores the text on the likely presence of emotional, language, and social tones. There are no right or wrong scores; this is just an indication of tones readers or listeners may pick up from the text.
A score of 0.5 or higher indicates the tone is likely present.
Emotion Tone
Anger
0.12UNLIKELY
Disgust
0.07UNLIKELY
Fear
0.1UNLIKELY
Joy
0.59LIKELY
Sadness
0.61LIKELY
Language Tone
Analytical
0.4UNLIKELY
Confident
0UNLIKELY
Tentative
0.11UNLIKELY
Social Tone
Openness
0.95LIKELY
Conscientiousness
0.7LIKELY
Extraversion
0.14UNLIKELY
Agreeableness
0.65LIKELY
Emotional Range
0.74LIKELY

Tone of specific sentences

Tones
Emotion
Anger
Disgust
Fear
Joy
Sadness
Language
Analytical
Confident
Tentative
Social Tendencies
Openness
Conscientiousness
Extraversion
Agreeableness
Emotional Range
Anger
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9
INTRODUCTION
We are just one week away from celebrating the resurrection of Jesus Christ (and)
It is only by God’s providence that we find ourselves where we are today in 1 Peter chapter 3
Please take God’s Word and turn to 1 Peter chapter 3
In this last section of chapter 3, Peter gives us the consequences of Christ’s suffering
He uses this to identify their suffering with Christ’s
Just as they suffered unjustly for righteousness sake, so did Christ
But as Peter makes his point, he also gives us information on how Christ’s suffering brought about His triumph
Notice what Peter says beginning in verse 18
Read 1 Peter 3:18-22.
The word triumph means, an “instance or occasion of victory” (Dictionary.com)
The death and resurrection of Jesus was certainly that
It was victory over death, over sin, over hell and over Satan
As we look at verses 18-22, Peter talks about that victory in “the triumphant sufferings of Christ”
He does that by making two points
The first point talks about Christ’s suffering itself
The second talks about His triumph over the enemy
Let’s notice the first point in verse 18
Peter says...
LESSON
I. Christ Also Suffered (v.18a-c)
“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”
He says...
He “died” (pascho, aor.act.ind.) the aorist indicates a past event
Scripture teaches that “Christ also died”
The use of “also” indicates that Christ suffered too
Romans 5:6 says He “died”
Titus 2:14 says Christ “gave Himself for us”
Hebrews 9:26 says He “sacrificed…Himself”
Matthew 27:45-50, “45 Now from the sixth hour darkness fell upon all the land until the ninth hour.
46 About the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?” that is, “My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?” 47 And some of those who were standing there, when they heard it, began saying, “This man is calling for Elijah.”
48 Immediately one of them ran, and taking a sponge, he filled it with sour wine and put it on a reed, and gave Him a drink.
49 But the rest of them said, “Let us see whether Elijah will come to save Him.” 50 And Jesus cried out again with a loud voice, and yielded up His spirit.”
Scripture also teaches...
He died “once” (hapax, adv) used together with the aorist (died) indicates the uniqueness of Christ’s work as something that cannot be repeated” (DEH).
He died “once” and “never again” (Louw-Nida)
The once-for-all offering of Christ stands in contrast to the annual sacrifice of the Jewish high priest on the Day of Atonement and portrays the absolute sufficiency of His atoning work
Romans 6:10 says, “…He died…once for all”
Hebrews 9:28 says, “Christ…having been offered once”
Christ died once and Peter tells us why
He died once “for sin”
According to Whedon, the preposition peri (“for”) “represents Christ throwing himself down upon and around sins in such a manner that the falling curse of the broken law would surely strike him.”
“for sins” (peri harmartias) is used in the LXX for the sin offering (Lev.5:7;
6:30) and conveys the thought of atonement (DEH)
Peter doesn’t say Jesus died on account for His own sin but for the sins of the “unjust”
Romans 4:25, “He who was delivered over because of our transgressions, and was raised because of our justification.”
2 Corinthians 5:21, “He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.”
“the just (righteous, NIV) for the unjust (unrighteous, NIV)” speaks of the character of Christ and those who benefit from His death
He is “the just” or “righteous” who died for the “unjust” or “unrighteous”
Zec.9:9, “Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion! Shout in triumph, O daughter of Jerusalem!
Behold, your king is coming to you; He is just and endowed with salvation, Humble, and mounted on a donkey, Even on a colt, the foal of a donkey.”
1 John 2:1 refers to Him as “Jesus Christ the righteous”
Peter already stated in...
1 Peter 2:24, “and He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, so that we might die to sin and live to righteousness; for by His wounds you were healed.”
Isaiah 53:6, “...the Lord has caused the iniquity of us all to fall on Him.”
Romans 5:8, “But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.”
Galatians 1:4, “who gave Himself for our sins...”
Not only did He die once for our sins but He also died...
He died to “bring us to God”
His once for all death for our sin “brings us to God”
The compound verb “bring” (prosagage) in the aorist tense implies actual entry into an intimate personal relationship (DEH)
Ephesians 2:13, “But now in Christ Jesus you who formerly were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.”
Colossians 1:21-22, “21 And although you were formerly alienated and hostile in mind, engaged in evil deeds, 22 yet He has now reconciled you in His fleshly body through death, in order to present you before Him holy and blameless and beyond reproach—”
Peter again refers to Christ’s death by assuring his readers that...
He was “put to death in the flesh”
This is an aorist passive participle that recalls the violent action of men against Him in crucifying Him (DEH)
“In the flesh” (sarki) points to the reality of His death as a real human being (DEH)
“flesh” refers to the humanity that Christ assumed at the incarnation (Jn.1:14; 1 Tim.3:16)
Peter now launches into how...
II.
Christ Triumphed (vv.18d-22)
“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, 22 who is at the right hand of God, having gone into heaven, after angels and authorities and powers had been subjected to Him.”
By being “made alive in the spirit” (v.18d)
This phrase is the antithesis of the previous phrase “being put to death in the flesh”
It is literally “on the one hand…on the other hand” (DEH)
The construction in Greek is identical
So “on the one hand He was put to death in the flesh” and “on the other hand He was made alive in the spirit”
What does “made alive in the spirit” mean?
Is spirit referring to the Holy Spirit or His human spirit?
Some translations use a capital “S” to indicate it’s the Holy Spirit
Other translations, like the NASB, use the lower case “s” to refer to His human spirit
You have good men on both sides
Charles Spurgeon takes it as referring to the Holy Spirit
Martin Luther refers to it as His human spirit
D. Edmond Hiebert takes it as referring to the Holy Spirit
John MacArthur refers to it as His human spirit
Which is it?
In addition to good men, there are also good arguments so it is a matter of interpretation
We can note a couple of things by looking first at the text:
The word Spirit (pneuma) is without the definite article which gives support to His human spirit rather than the Holy Spirit
Plus if you’re using it as a contrast to the flesh, you can only do that with His human spirit and not the Holy Spirit
In addition to this, there is no textual basis to capitalize the “S” and refer it to the Holy Spirit
The three oldest and best Greek manuscripts are entirely in capital letters (Vaticanus, Sinaiticus [4th century], Alexandrinus [5th century])
Nestle in his text does not capitalize the “s” which tells us this is a textual interpretation just like we see in our translations (KJV, NIV capitalizes the “S”, NAS doesn’t)
It is true the Holy Spirit raised Jesus from the dead according to Romans 8:11.
But here Peter is contrasting the flesh with the spirit
So he says Jesus “having put to death in the flesh,” and death means separation, then “but made alive in the spirit”
The question that comes out of this is in the last phrase, “does it assume that He had been dead in spirit?
Does it assume that at some point in the death on the cross He had died spiritually?
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9