MORE MERCY

From Battling the Demonic​

    William De Arteaga

​

​

                                                                                                                                                          A MORE BIBLICAL THEOLOGY OF

                                                                                                                                                          THE AFTERLIFE AND HUMAN

                                                                                                                                                           ETERNAL DESTINY

​

​

For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death

in the body but made alive in the Spirit. After being made alive, He went and made proclamation to the imprisoned

spirits– to those who were disobedient long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was

being built (1 Peter 3: 18-20).

​

But they will have to give an account to Him who is ready to judge the living and the dead. For this is the reason

the gospel was preached even to those who are now dead, so that they might be judged according to human

standards in regard to the body, but live according to God in regard to the spirit (1 Peter 4: 5-6).

​

In 2011 a spirited debate broke out within Evangelical circles which continues to reverberate today. It referred

to a book by Pastor Rob Bell, Love Wins. (1)  Bell was then the pastor of the 10,000-member mega-church, Mars Hill Bible Church, in Grandville, Michigan, and Time magazine rated him as one of the most influential pastors in America.(2) Love Wins essentially reframed the Universalist position, that all mankind will be saved, in terms Bell believed to be modern, yet Evangelical. He made quite an eloquent and rational argument that the traditional view of heaven and hell preached by many Evangelicals (and Catholics) was contrary to God’s

nature as a loving God.

​

Certainly, the Calvinists’ assertion that both God and the saints in heaven will delight in seeing the eternal

torments of the damned in hell, is something few Christians believe today. Indeed, that is instinctively morally repulsive. Significantly, many Evangelical pastors today avoid teaching this “pure” Reformed doctrine, and leave the condemnation to hell of others to God’s judgement.

​

Bell’s attempt to persuade Evangelicals of a more merciful destiny for unbelievers was not successful, and

his critics immediately saw in his presentation the old heresy, Universalism. (3) As the arguments and reviews of Love Wins fomented in the Christian press, one wished that the writings of the Victorian scholars (see below) were still in fashion and had been taught in seminaries. Bell could have posited a theology of “greater hope” that was more carefully and biblically defined, without ending up in Universalism. His critics might have better recognized that his quest for a theology of a merciful destiny for unbelievers is not alien to the Biblical evidence or Church tradition. Thankfully, the debate over Love Wins was surprisingly civil, and the word “heretic” rarely used – an indicator that the resentful sectarianism of past generations is fading. (4)

​

Both sides, Bell’s universalism vs. traditional orthodoxy, were arguing from a flawed theological base–what

should be termed the “Augustinian consensus.” That is, the theology of St. Augustine of Hippo (354-430)

which became the base of Western theology. Augustine was a brilliant and insightful theologian. Unfortunately, he also made several serious misinterpretations and omissions in understanding the Bible. For instance, St. Augustine believed that the gifts of the Spirit were defined by the scripture in Isaiah 11: 2. He did not consider the scriptures of 1 Cor 12-14 as functional gifts of the Spirit. That mistake and omission echoed down thru the centuries and weakened the spiritual vitality and ministries of the Church. (5) Even today his truncated view of the gifts of the Spirit is taught in the Catholic catechism.

​

More to our point in the present discussion, Augustine did not understand the important scriptures in 1Peter

3-4 and how it could fit into a theology of the afterlife and eternal judgement. Calvin copied Augustine’s lapse

and their collective misunderstanding passed on to Reformation theology boosted by a false Third Century

gospel, the Gospel of Nicodemus. That gospel reversed the true meaning of 1 Peter 3-4 and its implications for

“more mercy” for the lost both in the immediate afterlife and their ultimate destiny. What I am asserting is that

the Bible itself provides a more merciful judgement for unbelievers than is normative to Evangelical theology,

but does not pass into Universalism. This is strange to many conservative Evangelical and

Pentecostal/charismatic believers. Thus, this chapter will be very deliberate in laying out the evidence for

“more mercy.” It is my contention that re-incorporating 1 Peter 34 into Christian theology would move the

Church away from the dilemma of either Universalism or the cruel theology of the Calvinist and conservative

Evangelical tradition.

​

The Distorted Theology of the Afterlife

​

Western Christian theology about the afterlife has been dominated by two traditions that sought to interpret

scattered biblical revelations about the afterlife into an understandable system. The first, that of the Roman

Catholic Church, was presented by Saint Augustine of Hippo but later expanded and codified by Saint Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274). The second tradition, that of the Protestants, developed both in reaction to, and out of, that Western Catholic tradition.

​

In the traditional Catholic view, the afterlife before the coming final judgement was divided into several “locales” or spiritual states. There is heaven proper, which is where the saints and angels worship and experience the loving presence of God. There is purgatory, where persons who are destined for heaven must be purified through suffering to become eligible for the heavenly state. Then there is hell, where the damned reside in agony, awaiting the final judgment and the confirmation of their status. Between purgatory and hell there was believed to be a “limbo,” named in Latin, Limbus Infanturn, where the souls of unbaptized infants reside in comfort, but without the bliss of heaven. Traditional Catholic theology also affirmed that there was formerly another limbo, one in which the souls of Jewish patriarchs and other righteous souls of the Old Testament stayed until they were freed by Jesus’ descent into the  underworld described in 1 Peter 3 and 4 (upon which we will comment below) called Limbus Patrum.

​

The traditional Protestant view developed out of Catholic theology, but with careful attention to avoid anything that would make credible the Catholic practices of prayers, indulgences, and masses for the dead. Thus, both Purgatory and the Limbus Infantum were eliminated. But interestingly, many of the Reformers accepted for a while the Catholic view of a former Limbus Patrum of the Patriarchs.

​

Both the Catholic and Protestant theologies of the afterlife shared an inadequate and a highly selective biblical base. They concentrated on Luke 16 (the story of the rich man and beggar) Mark 9:43-47, and the scriptures about the Last Judgment in the Book of Revelations. Ignored were the scriptures about the afterlife found in the Old Testament, as for instance the phrase “gathered to his people” found multiple times in the Old Testament (Gen. 25:8 &17, 35:29, 49:30, Num. 20:26, 32:50). Also, traditional Catholic and Protestant theologies tend to confuse man’s ultimate destiny as described in the Book of Revelations, with the after-death state until the Last Judgment, which has been more precisely called the “intermediate state.”

​

THE VICTORIAN SCHOLARS AND THE AFTERLIFE

​

The scattered Biblical hints about the afterlife began to be clarified in the two decades preceding the turn of the

20th Century. (6)  The new paradigm was led by, but not limited to, stirrings by scholars and clergy of the Anglican

Church in Great Britain. The Anglican Church was undergoing one of its periodic reexaminations, searching to

define itself in terms of the Bible, early Christianity, and the Patristic writers. It sought to avoid either the

dogmatic assertions of the Roman Catholic Church or the reactive anti-Catholic theology of the Reformation.

Part of this reexamination was a fresh look at the belief in the afterlife. F. W. Farrar (1831-1903), Canon of

Westminster Cathedral and chaplain to Queen Victoria, was one of the first, and perhaps the ablest, of the

scholar/divines, which we call the “Victorian scholars.”(7) They had the advantages of the system of rigorous

elite Victorian education, which emphasized the mastery of Greek and Latin. They also reaped the fruits of

then recent and revolutionary discoveries in biblical scholarship. These included the rediscovery of many inter-

testament writings that had been lost for centuries and which helped to explain the developed and varied ideas

about the afterlife in the New Testament that were not found in the Old Testament.(8)

​

As in any group of scholars, not everyone came to identical conclusions, but there was uncommon agreement on some findings that are especially important for any discussion of the afterlife. It was agreed that the King James translation of the Bible had unnecessarily muddled the theology of the afterlife by using one word, “hell,” for sheol of the Old Testament, and hades and gehenna of the New Testament. “Hell” is a proper translation for gehenna, a place outside Jerusalem where garbage was burned, but it is a decidedly poor translation for sheol or hades which signified the afterlife place in the Old Testament, but did not necessarily connote a place of punishment.

​

The Old Testament uses the word sheol often, but we are never given a definitive description of it. It was presumed to be under the earth, and most passages described it as a place that is dark and gloomy, a joyless place, and a mere shadow of life on earth. Not even God can be praised there, and the person’s consciousness is much reduced (Ps. 6:5, Ec. 9:5-10). In Job 3:13-19 it is lamented that all men, good and bad, come to the same fate in sheol. Apparently, there was no system of rewards or punishment in sheol described in these scriptures. These scriptures indicate that sheol has much in common with the Greek conception of the afterlife, “hades.” In fact, in the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament that was in common use at the time of Jesus, sheol was translated as hades. However, a few passages in the Old Testament hint that there is more to Hades than just a neutral gray area. In 1 Samuel 28:8-20 it is also reported to be a place of “rest,” as the dead judge and prophet, Samuel, complains that his peace has been disturbed by a medium’s conjuring. On the negative side, in the book of Isaiah, there was described a section of sheol more ominously called the “pit” (14:15).

​

The idea that sheol is divided into different sections was greatly elaborated in the books of the inter-testament period. Many of these books were influential in both Judaism and early Christianity, though they were later discarded and became canonical in neither religion. The book of Enoch was especially influential in establishing the afterlife as a place of rewards and punishments per the righteousness, or lack of it, in the person’s life. By the time of Jesus, the rabbinical literature advocated a belief in an accountable and multilayered afterlife. The names gehenna, “Bosom of Abraham,” and “Paradise,” were all from the rabbinical literature of this period and utilized by Jesus to talk about the afterlife. (9)

​

Just as the Old Testament was ambiguous about the nature of the afterlife, the Victorian scholars came to see that the New Testament was equally ambiguous about man’s ultimate destiny. They believed “tentative” should be the key word in forming theological opinions on the matter (a critique of the traditional Catholic and Protestant positions). Canon Farrar had, perhaps, the strongest sense of scriptural ambiguity in this area. (10)  He also identified four separate motifs about man’s final destiny within the New Testament. One motif was the final reconciliation of all men to God (Universalism), and a current that is discernible in the later writings of Paul. For instance, in Romans 5:18 Paul writes, “Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people.” Farrar also cites John 1:29, 3:17, 12:32, Acts 3:21, Romans 5:15 &18-19: 1 Cor.15:22-28, 2 Cor. 5:19, Eph. 1:10, Cols. 1:20, 1 Tim. 4:10, and other scriptures.

​

A second motif is that the wicked and unsaved have no hope and will be doomed forever – the Augustinian view.(11)

Yet another group of scriptures indicates that the incorrigible wicked will not suffer forever, but will be annihilated.(12)

(This is Rob Bell’s position in Love Wins, and indeed is not unbiblical.) Finally, there are scriptures which indicate that there is a temporary punishment and cleansing fire (elaborated as Purgatory in Roman Catholic doctrine). For instance, note Mark 9:47-49 which seems to imply everyone will experience some sort of punishment fire.

​

Normative Christianity in the West, both Catholic and Protestant, has, of course, stressed the second motif – that the wicked are forever doomed, and has given less weight to, or ignored, the other motifs. Worse, these other motifs are called heresies – and thus beyond discussion. Often, this has been put forth in an embarrassingly sectarian manner. For instance, as a boy living under the classical, pre-Vatican II Catholicism, I was taught to believe that only Catholics can get to heaven. My wife, who was instructed in Baptist Sunday schools, was similarly taught that only Protestants who were Baptists would make it to heaven–too bad for the born-again Methodists and Presbyterians, let alone those crazy Pentecostals!

​

This sectarian and unbiblical viewpoint was the product of the divides of heated controversy and warfare that racked Christianity after the Reformation. It left its mark with what one might call a “theology of resentment” towards other denominations. Its consequence is that it weakens the witness of Christianity, and is one reason why many non-believers find it difficult to take Christianity seriously. There is something silly, ungracious and ungodly about Christians consigning other Christians of varying denominations, and all unbelievers, to hell because they were born in the wrong household. More importantly, it disregards Paul’s revelation that those who have not been given the full Gospel will ultimately be judged on the light and revelation they did receive (Rms 2:12-16).

​

But, back to the Victorian scholars: Canon Farrar went to great lengths to point out that early Christianity, and especially the early Church Fathers, were more optimistic than moderns and held out the “greater hope.” That is, they mostly believed that most of mankind would eventually come to God, and that the punishment of the incorrigible wicked would be limited in duration, and that in the end they would be annihilated. This “greater hope” theology is quite natural to places and times where the Gospel is new, as in the first centuries in the Roman Empire. In such environments it is not really “good news” to preach a Gospel which says that Grandma, who was a loving, generous lady, but worshiped pagan gods out of ignorance, is now in eternal torment and will never be released from that.

​

Interestingly, the early church scholar, Origen, chose to center his theology on the Pauline scriptures of the

restitution of all to God. He was condemned as a heretic in the 5th Century when the GrecoRoman world was

mostly Christian and the “grandma in hell” issue had receded from immediate notice. Ironically, Gregory of Nyssa, who held the same views as Origin but was more circumspect, is celebrated as one of the great Fathers of Orthodoxy.

​

As a group, the Victorian scholars agreed that the afterlife was not as simple as the common doctrine of heaven and hell, and that a characteristic of the afterlife was the opportunity it offered for further growth. Again, Canon Farrar was a pioneer in suggesting a partial solution to the apparently contradictory nature of the afterlife scriptures in the New Testament. It was to understand that there is a difference between a person’s intermediate after-death state and their final destiny which will be determined at the Last Judgment.(13) New Testament writers were so sure that Jesus’ second coming was imminent that they often did not discern the difference between what was revealed as pertaining to the afterlife in the intermediate state, and the afterlife after the Last Judgment.(14)

​

After a century and a half, the scholarship of the Victorian scholars stands as a major achievement of Christian theology. From the 1900’s, liberal Protestantism increased in influence and interest waned in the purely spiritual (including afterlife) aspects of theology in favor of the more “practical” and social-action issues. The “demythologizing” movement in Liberal Protestantism reached a point where many of its theologians reduced all spiritual phenomena to psychology, and even denied the concept of personal survival after death. (15) More modern works on the afterlife, such as John A. T. Robinson’s In the End God, (16) and John H. Hick’s Death and Eternal Life,(17) tend to be heavy on philosophy and light on scripture. Fortunately, some advocates of “process theology” popular several decades ago, rediscovered much of what the Victorian re-examiners said about continued growth in the discarnate state, and affirmed the same biblical and Patristic positions asserted by the earlier scholars.(18)

​

​

THE CRITICAL ISSUE OF MORE MERCY IN 1 PETER 3-4:

​

About the New Testament, the Victorian scholars carefully parsed an important passage addressing the greater

hope/more mercy issue, found in the first letter of Peter. Like Paul, Peter’s literary style leaves something to be

desired, and the scriptures in question are sandwiched between moral exhortations. But the central meaning is

sufficiently clear:

​

      For Christ also died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being

put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit; in which he went and preached to the spirits in prison, who

formerly did not obey, when God’s patience waited in the days of Noah, during the building of the ark, in which a

few, that is eight persons, were saved through water. …

     For this is why the gospel was preached even to the dead, that though judged in the flesh like men, they might live

in the spirit like God (1 Pet. 3:18-21; 4:6).

​

What Peter describes is Jesus’ preaching ministry in sheol/hades (called a “spiritual prison” in this passage).

This is corroborated in Ephesians 4:8-10, as there it is revealed that Jesus succeeded and led “a host of

captives” into the heavenly realms.

​

This is why it says:

“When he ascended on high, He took many captives and gave gifts to His people.”

(What does “he ascended” mean except that he also descended to the lower, earthly regions? He who descended is the very one who ascended higher than all the heavens, in order to fill the whole universe.)

​

To be clear, and perhaps redundant, here is described a group of dead disobedient sinners who were given a

second chance for salvation by Jesus. There was little confusion among the earliest Christian writers about the

meaning of these passages. Between his death and resurrection Christ preached to the dead in sheol/hades, and

those who accepted his word ascended with him to heaven.(19)

​

Several traditions in early Christian literature elaborated this revelation. The first generation of Christian

apologists and theologians were trained in Greek philosophy and especially loved Plato, and could not see him

in hades or hell. Some affirmed Plato had been preached to by the Apostles, and then ascended to Heaven. But

the most famous case of continued preaching in hades is found in the Shepherd of Hermas, which was held as

scripture by many churches in the second and third centuries, and is canonical today in the churches of Oriental

Orthodoxy (Coptic Church, Ethiopian, etc.). This epistle asserts that the Apostles followed Jesus’ example, and

at death they too preached to the heathen in hades, and baptized them!

​

“Because,” he said, “these apostles and teachers who preached the name of the Son of God, after falling asleep in

the power and faith of the Son of God, preached it not only to those who were asleep, but themselves also gave

them the seal of the preaching. Accordingly, they descended with them into the water, and again ascended. [But

these descended alive and rose up again alive; whereas they who had previously fallen asleep descended dead, but

rose up again alive. (Anonymous, Shepherd of Hermas, chapter 16) (20)

​

The motif of a second chance for those who have died has received scant attention in Christian theology

past the Third Century. A notable and modern exception is C.S. Lewis’ novel, The Great Divorce.(21) In that

work, hell is not a fiery place, but a “gray town” where everyone exercises various degrees of delusion and

vanity – and universal frustration results. A bus load of these souls from hell are given an excursion to the

foothills of heaven. There, they are met by the spirits of those they knew on earth. The souls from gray town

are invited to repent and proceed on a journey to heaven. Only one does, and the rest make various excuses for

why they cannot. They return to the gray town to continue their lives of falsehood and frustration. Lewis

believed that many spiritual truths were best presented in parable form (just as Jesus did) and thus, The Great

Divorce may be considered as Lewis’ parable for what he considered the afterlife to be in the “more mercy”

tradition of the Victorian scholars.

​

​

St. Augustine and a False Gospel vs. 1 Peter 3-4

​

The Early Church’s view that Jesus’ ministry in hades in 1 Peter 3-4 can be repeated by other Christians, did not make it to the Middle Ages in the Western Church. It was disabled by the circulation of a false gospel called the Gospel of Nicodemus from the Third century, and by the prestige and ascendency of St. Augustine’s theology within the Latin West.

​

St. Augustine was so convinced about the immediate heaven or hell model of the afterlife that he had difficulty in crediting 1 Peter 34 with its literal meaning. A fellow bishop named Evodius wrote Augustine for guidance in interpreting 1 Peter 3-4, as he, too, was perplexed. Augustine stumbled around for various interpretations, but negated the literal one, that Jesus preached to the “disobedient spirits” and finally admitted that he did not have a good interpretation:

​

If this exposition of the words of Peter offend any one, or, without offending, at least fail to satisfy any one, let him attempt to interpret them on the supposition that they refer to hell: and if he succeeds in solving my difficulties which I have mentioned above, so as to remove the perplexity which they occasion, let him communicate his interpretation to me.(22)

​

Calvin followed St. Augustine’s perplexity, and possibly borrowed from the Gospel of Nicodemus in

interpreting 1 Peter 3-4. He cavalierly dismissed the literal possibility that the souls in question were the

“disobedient spirits” and affirms that they were the Patriarchs and righteous persons of the Old Testament

waiting for Jesus in a “watch tower,” not a prison:

​

I therefore have no doubt but Peter speaks generally, that the manifestation of Christ’s grace was made to godly

spirits, [italics mine] and that they were thus endued with the vital power of the Spirit. Hence there is no reason to

fear that it will not flow to us. But it may be inquired, why he puts in prison the souls of the godly after having

quitted their bodies? It seems to me that phulake [prison] rather means a watchtower in which watchmen stand for

the purpose of watching, or the very act of watching, for it is often so taken by Greek authors; and the meaning

would be very appropriate, that godly souls were watching in hope of the salvation promised them, as though they

saw it afar off.(23)

​

​

A FALSE GOSPEL OBSCURES THE “GREATER HOPE”

​

Let us now turn specifically to that false gospel, the Gospel of Nicodemus. It was composed in various stages

by multiple authors, part of it as a redaction of Jesus’ trial before Pilot, found in Matthew. Another part is a

supposed letter by Pilot describing the miraculous events about Jesus’ death and resurrection, and his own

conversion – an imaginative fiction. The last part, and last to be added, contains a description of Jesus’ descent

into hell. It is written in pious and bombastic language, and easily discerned to be different from any of the true

Gospels. In this gospel Jesus descends into hell – yes, hell, not hades, presided over by Satan himself. There he

saves Abraham and the Old Testament saints from Satan’s dominion and leads them to the gates of heaven.

Part of the text reads:

​

And the Lord stretched forth his hand and made the sign of the cross over Adam and over all his saints, and he took

the right hand of Adam and went up out of hell, and all the saints followed him. Then did holy David cry aloud and

say: Sing unto the Lord a new song, for he hath done marvelous things. His right hand hath wrought salvation for

him and his holy arm. The Lord hath made known his saving health, before the face of all nations hath he revealed

his righteousness. And the whole multitude of the saints answered, saying, “Such honor have all his saints. Amen,

Alleluia.”

​

And thereafter Habakkuk the prophet cried out and said: “Thou wentest forth for the salvation of thy people to set

free thy chosen.” And all the saints answered, saying: “Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.”(24)

​

Note this is a contradiction of what 1 Peter 3 says. In that authentic epistle, Jesus preached to the “disobedient spirits” from the time of Noah, not to the Patriarchs of Israel. Further, the famous passage in Luke 16 of Lazarus and the rich man mentions a heavenly place called the “Bosom of Abraham” where that patriarch resided in obvious comfort with Lazarus the just beggar. This quasi heaven could not possibly be the “prison” (or Calvin’s watchtower) mentioned 1 Peter 3, or the hell of the Gospel of Nicodemus.

​

I recall watching, sometime in the 1980s, the famous TV evangelist, Jimmy Swaggart, preach a sermon about Jesus’ descent into hell.(25)  Swaggart imitated Jesus approaching each of the Patriarchs such as Abraham and Joseph. To each one he said something that rhymed about their life of faith, and released them to heaven. It was all very impressive. Whether the Rev. Swaggart got his sermon idea from a Bible commentary, or lecture notes from his Bible college days was not mentioned, but it ultimately came from the bogus Gospel of Nicodemus.(26)

​

If 1Peter 3-4 were the only scripture on this matter, there would be a serious problem in affirming a continuing ministry to the dead in hades. It could be asserted that what happened in hades after Christ’s crucifixion was a unique event. In that case the living Church would have no role in this type of ministry. Several scriptures indicate that this is not the case, and that the Church on earth does indeed have a legitimate hand in this ministry.

​

The first scripture passage concerning this issue is one of the most widely known and quoted, Matthew 16:18. It is used by Roman Catholics as proof text for the establishment of the primacy of the Papacy. Protestants use it as proof text for the importance of faith in the individual believer. In all but the most recent translations its meaning has been seriously distorted by the use of the word hell instead of hades, as in the Greek text. “And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hades will not overcome it.”

​

A common mistake in interpreting this scripture, based on less accurate translations, is to assume that this is a

defensive commission, that is, if demonic forces attack the church, it will have the power to stand. That is

obviously incorrect. Matthew 16:18 is an offensive commission. In warfare the “gates” of a fortress do not

move and attack – they are not like tanks, as in modern warfare. Rather, gates are designed to resist assault.

This passage means that the best-fortified points of hades (including that part within Satan’s dominion) cannot

withstand the assaults of the church. Further, what did an army do when they busted open the enemy’s gate?

Did they sit there and celebrate with a barbecue with the splintered wood? No. They went into the fortress and

plundered the place, just like Jesus did in his ministry in hades. One more confirmation for this last point must

be noted in our next chapter: the proxy baptism on behalf of the dead done by the Corinthian church.

 

​

​

1. Rob Bell, Love Wins: A Book About Heaven, Hell and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived, (New York; Harper Collins, 2011).

The debate broke out even before the book was published, with a pre-publication review of Love Wins in the New York Times, Eric

Eikholm, “Pastor Stirs Wrath With his Views on Old Questions,” March 4, 2011.

2. Time, April 21, 2011, http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/ completelist/0,29569,2066367,00.html

3. Mark Galli, “Rob Bell’s ‘Ginormous’ Mirror.” Christianity Today. Posted May

15, 2013 http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2013/may/rob-bells-ginormous-

mirror.html

4. See the excellent article by Mark Galli, “Rob Bell’s Bridge Too Far,” Christianity Today, posted 3/14/11. Galli suggested that issues

might best be left somewhat open due to a certain ambiguity in scripture, as Canon E. W. Fararra had done a century before (see

below).

5. William De Arteaga, Agnes Sanford and Her Companions: The Assault on Cessationism and the Coming of the Charismatic

Renewal (Eugene: Wipf & Stock, 2015) Chapter 3,

“The Augustinian norm: The Church without the Gifts of the Spirit.”

6. These scholars were born and educated in the Victorian era, but some wrote their works in the following “Edwardian” decade.

7. In my first book, Past Life Visions (New York: Seabury, 1983) I called them the “Victorian revisionists,” but the word revisionist

now implies heresy and liberal theology, neither of which apply to the scholars in question.

8. F.W. Farrar, Mercy and Judgment (New York: E.P. Dutton, 1881); E.H.

Plumptre, The Spirits in Prison (London: Wm. Isbister, 1885); Arthur

Chambers, Our Life After Death (Philadelphia: George W. Jacobs, 1902); Lars

Nielsen Dahle, Life After Death and the Future of the Kingdom of God, Trans. by John Beveridge, (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1896);

Lewis Muirhead, The Terms Life and

Death in the Old and New Testaments, and Other Papers (London: Andrew Melrose,

1908); and, J.H. Leckie, The World to Come and Final Destiny (Edinburgh: T. & Clark, 1918). Note that all except the Muirhead

volume have been reprinted in modern editions and are available at moderate costs. Several can be downloaded for free from the

web.

9. J. H. Leckie, The World to Come, pp. 68-102.

10. Farrar uses the Hegelian term “antinomies,” see his Mercy and Judgment, e.g., 12.

11. The scriptures cited for this motif are: Matt. 13:49-50, 16:27, 25-46; Mark 3:29; Isaiah 12:1.

12. This is often termed a heresy, “annihilism,” in spite of its solid biblical basis. See: Matt. 3:12, 5:30, 10:28; Luke 13:1-5, 20:18; Acts

3:23; Rms. 6:23, 8:13; Hebrews 10:26-31; Revelations 20:14, 21ff.

13. See, for example, J. H. Leckie, who expanded Farrrar’s insight in: The World to Come, 68-102.

14. Farrar, Justice and Mercy, 13.

15. See: Russell Alwincle, Death in the Secular City: Life After Death in Contemporary Theology and Philosophy (Grand Rapids:

William B. Eerdmans, 1974) especially chapter 3, “Theology without hope.”

16. (New York: Harper & Row, 1968)

17. (New York: Harper & Row, 1976)

18. See: Norman Pittinger, The Last Things in Process Perspective (London: Epworth Press, 1970)

19. Farrar takes special pains to show this: Judgement and Mercy, 76 ff., and also see Plumpter, Spirits in Prison, 78 ff.

20. Translated by Roberts-Donaldson, on the web at various sites

21. (London: Geoffrey Blos, 1945) and more modern editions

22. St Augustine, Letter 164 (to Bishop Evodius) New Advent site.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1102164.htm

23. John Calvin, Calvin’s Commentaries. Sourced November 17, 2016. http://biblehub.com/commentaries/calvin/1_peter/3.htm

24. Gospel of Nicodemus, chapters 16-19, available on the web at various sites. Here is the link to The Early Christian Writings text:

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/gospelnicodemus.html Also

in: Lost Books in the Bible (New York: New American Library, 1974)

25. The idea of Jesus’ descent into hell with him being tormented there for three days has become fixed in a section of Pentecostal

theology that flows from the seminal “Word of Faith” preacher E.W. Kenyon to the televangelist Kenneth Copeland, who preaches

it often.

26. This is not a blanket criticism of the Rev. Swaggart, who was gifted in his ministry, and flawed in his personal life – like many of

us.