Beliefs about the Afterlife (xii)

"I charge you therefore before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, 

who will judge the living and the dead 

at His appearing and His kingdom." 

(II Tim. 4: 1)

Said one leading commentator in comments upon I Peter 4: 6, the text we are still examining (See here at Precept Austin web page):

"Warning! Someone has said this is the most difficult verse in the Bible to interpret! There are some 20 interpretations according to one writer! We will not even attempt to go there, but recommend that you be a Berean." (emphasis mine)

In this part of our series on the topic of the afterlife, we are focusing on it as it relates to the Lord Jesus Christ, and I am giving my interpretation of I Peter 3: 19 and 4: 6, the two passages that speak of Christ preaching to the dead in the Underworld of Sheol or Hades, to his descent into the place of the dead. As I stated previously I took a different view when a novice bible student than the one I believe now. I have studied this subject off and on over the past fifty plus years. At first I settled on the most favored view that the dead had the gospel preached to them while they were alive so that the text should be read as saying "for this reason the gospel was preached to men before they died," or something very similar.

I also generally would affirm that Jesus did not go in spirit to Hades when he died but went to Heaven and stayed there for the three days and nights in which his spirit was separated from his body (when it was dead). I believed, like many others, that the promise made to the thief on the cross (on the right hand of Christ), in the words "today you will be with me in paradise," taught that paradise or heaven was the only place Christ was "in spirit" between his death and resurrection. However, as previously stated, I never fully accepted that interpretation and there were many other texts, dealing with "leading captivity captive," and Christ going into "the heart of the earth," etc. that nagged at me. Sometimes I put deeper study of the subject on a shelf for another day (when I could access more materials such as commentaries). What the passages were saying was harder for me to accept than to understand (as I have previously observed about the reluctance of many bible students to accept it as proof that Christ did descend to the Underworld). 

My present interpretation is not novel, but orthodox. In fact, it is the view, not only of the apostles and early Christians, but of the scriptures themselves. It was arrived at after many years of thinking about the texts integral to the question. It represents, at least on my part, a mature interpretation, an unbiased opinion.

How important is a correct understanding of this subject, and texts dealing with it? I cannot answer that question. I can only say that since embracing the orthodox view I have seen truths about Christ's experience in the afterlife that leaves me amazed and filled with wonder. When I now read about Christ having the keys of Hades and Death, I have a better understanding of Christ's relationship to Hades and Death. Further, the nagging doubt about whether I was interpreting the text correctly, or twisting it, has left me.

In this chapter we are still considering what is the right interpretation and translation of both I Peter 3: 18-20 and 4: 5-6. We will begin this section of our study by looking at what is meant by the words "for this reason" (4: 6) and at the purpose(s) connected with the Greek "hina" (a word denoting purpose or intent, and involving what is called a "hina clause"; And is often translated by the English word "that"). The text is stating the reason for Christ preaching the gospel to the inhabitants of the Underworld. It would be an answer to our anxious question - "for what purpose did Christ go to the Underworld and there proclaim the good news?" 

Though Peter does not go into any detail in answering that question (many will be left with more questions than answers about the reason why the Lord went to Hades and preached there), nevertheless he does offer at least one reason why. Peter surely believed that there were other reasons for Christ going to Hades and preaching there than the one mentioned by him in these words. The reason for Christ preaching in Hades had to do with him acting as Lord and Judge of the dead. Let us again cite the words we are still examining. 

"They will give an account to Him who is ready to judge the living and the dead. 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." (I Peter 4: 5-6)

Well did one commentator write in regard to the prima facie reading of this inspired text:

"No one with an un-preoccupied mind could doubt, taking this clause by itself, that the persons to whom this preaching was made were dead at the time of being preached to. If this is the case, then, pretty obviously, St. Peter is carrying us back to his teaching of 1Peter 3:19, and is explaining further the purpose of Christ’s descent into hell." (Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers) 

That is what I also believe. As I said, I did not accept this at one time, but there was constant nagging doubt about my view resulting from my refusal to accept the obvious meaning of the text. I was fearful that it might uphold the doctrine that it was possible to die lost and condemned, go to the place of the damned in Hades, and yet be saved and go to heaven. That fear is gone through a proper understanding of the descent of Christ into the Underworld. Christ went to Hell, preached there, and it was not for the salvation of any who had died condemned and were on the torment side of the gulf of Hades. His preaching in hell had other reasons than that of salvation. Further, we can hardly call the taking of old testament believers into the third heaven (paradise) a saving of them, unless we want to say they were saved from the confinement of Hades, and from not enjoying the fullness of Heaven.

Wrote Greek scholar and bible commentator Kenneth Wuest (See here):

"The words “by which” in the Greek text are en hoi, a preposition and a relative pronoun, the latter either in the locative or the instrumental cases, since the preposition is used with both cases. The pronoun is either masculine or neuter, and there being a neuter noun “spirit” immediately preceding it, the word “which” according to the rules of Greek grammar, refers back to the word “spirit.” One could translate either “in which spirit,” or “by means of which spirit.” The word “went” is a translation of poreuomai, a word that is used of one travelling, going on a journey. The translation reads now, “in which (human) spirit having proceeded,” or, “by means of which human spirit having proceeded.” This speaks of our Lord in His disembodied state after He had spoken the words, “Into thy hands I commend my spirit” (Luke 23:46). His human body was laid in Joseph’s tomb, but He as the Man Christ Jesus, possessing His human soul and human spirit, departed this life. It is clear that our Lord as the Man Christ Jesus went to the place of the departed dead called in the Old Testament “sheol” and in the New Testament, “hell” (Acts 2:27), the word “hell” being the translation of the Greek word “Hades.” But Peter is not speaking of that here. Peter says “in which” or “by means of which (human) spirit also having proceeded, He preached unto the spirits in prison.” The word “also” speaks of the fact that it was in His human spirit as made alive by the Holy Spirit that our Lord proceeded." 

I think that is the normal reading of the text and attempts to deny it, or change its meaning, are vain, and are therefore to be rejected. 

Wuest believes that "the spirits in prison" are the fallen angels of Genesis six and the antediluvian wickedness, a view I have previously referred to. Said Wuest:

"But are the spirits of our First Peter passage angels or demons? Peter tells us that these spirits were in prison. There are just two prisons in the unseen world where evil spirits are confined, Tartarus (II Peter 2:4, “hell” tartarosas where fallen angels are kept; and the Bottomless Pit (Rev. 9:1–12). When our Lord was about to cast out the demons from the maniac of Gadara, they besought Him not to cast them into the deep, the abusson (Luke 8:31). The words “bottomless pit” of Revelation 9:1 are literally “the well of the abusson,” same Greek word as used in Luke 8:31, which fixes the Bottomless Pit as the prison house of demons. To which place did our Lord go and preach? Peter in his first epistle (3:19, 20) and in his second epistle (2:4, 5) links spirits and angels with the flood and states that they sinned at that time. The inference should be clear that he is referring to the same beings, for Hebrews uses the words “angels” and “spirits” as designating the same created beings, and Peter is just following the practice of other inspired writers."

I do not find strong objection to those commentators who see the "spirits in prison" as the fallen angels of Genesis chapter six, and not to the humans of that age who died in the flood. Wuest bases his interpretation on the fact that angels are more generally called "spirits" in scripture than are human beings. He does acknowledge, however, that humans who have died and in spirit left bodies are sometimes called "spirits." 

I also think that the places mentioned by Wuest (Tartarus, Abyss, bottomless pit) are simply places within the whole of Hades or the Underworld. Abraham's festive table, with his kin (believers), occupy the paradisaical upper side of the divided Underworld. We can safely say that there are divisions or sections of the Underworld, concerning which we have already written in earlier chapters (bible cosmology). 

Some also believe the same as Wuest (spirits in prison being the fallen angels) and offer another reason to the ones mentioned by him. These say that the background of Peter's words is the Book of Enoch, called "Enoch1," a book known by Peter and the early Christians. Many bible scholars say that both Peter's and Jude's writings, allude to things that are written in the book of Enoch. Jude even refers to a prophecy of Enoch that is found in Enoch, a verse we have already cited ("Behold the Lord comes..."). 

In Enoch the fallen angels (called the "watchers") send Enoch from the Underworld (Tartarus) to Heaven to carry their petition to God for pardon and Enoch comes back with the message of "no." There is truth in this view, and the Enoch story no doubt was in the back of Peter's mind and a context or paradigm for what Peter said about the fall of the angels; And, there may be a similarity between the message Christ brings from heaven to Hades and the message Enoch brought from heaven and delivered to the fallen angels who were in the lowest hell. Christ also would have proclaimed "no" to the requests of the damned, whether men or angels, who sought pardon, mercy, or acquittal. 

It seems clear to me that those "spirits in prison" (who are described as they who were "at one time disobedient at the time when God was longsuffering while the ark was being built") are identified with those who died in the flood, and this implies that they had physical bodies. No pure spirit beings were drowned in the flood. God was showing longsuffering not to the fallen angels while the ark was being built but to sinful human beings. 

It could be argued that the "sons of God" (angels) who mated with the "daughters of men," had taken on bodily forms in order to procreate and thus their bodies may have been destroyed in the flood. Also, their hybrid offspring, the "giants" or "nephilim," would have had giant physical bodies and they too would have been destroyed in the flood. 

I do not doubt that Christ had a message for the fallen angels, but don't believe that is what Peter is referring to (in 3: 19), but is rather a message Christ gave to disobedient humans who died in the flood, and who composed "the world of the ungodly" (Peter's words). Consider the fact that "the spirits in prison" of 3: 19 are part of the larger class called "dead ones" in 4: 6. Angels do not die, for they have no physical bodies. 

Christ preached the gospel to "the dead ones." This implies that they were human beings for they had experienced physical death, and then entered the Underworld or afterlife as a conscious disembodied spirit. The simple subject "the dead" or "dead ones," nearly always, in the bible, refers to human beings who have died. This does not deny that angels and spirits may not die in some non physical or metaphysical sense. The fallen angels will spend eternity in Gehenna, in the "Lake of Fire," "which is the second death." (Rev. 20: 14) But, they are never called nor included in the group called "the dead." 

Further, Wuest seems to imply that the "demons" are the same as the fallen "angels" or "sons of God" of Genesis chapter six, which is a common error. However, I believe, along with others, that the demons are the spirits of the wicked human dead and are not angelic spirits. (See my writings and notes on that subject in my blogs) So, in preaching to the "dead ones" in Hades he is preaching to demons by his preaching to the wicked spirits of deceased humans. He is not specifically said to be preaching to fallen angels in either text (3: 19 & 4: 6). They rather show what Christ said to the human occupants of the Underworld. Reason and inference do tell us that Christ no doubt had things to announce to Satan and the fallen angels and their monstrous offspring (Nephilim or giants). 

Wuest is right to defend the view that Christ descended in spirit to Hades. That is the main point. He is a Greek scholar and he affirms, as other such scholars, that the text says that Christ himself went in his spirit, when it left his crucified body, to the place of departed spirits. He does not believe that Peter is affirming that Christ went in spirit to the antediluvian sinners and preached to them via Noah, at least as regards the 3: 19 passage. 

Some think that the idea of Christ descending into the Underworld is a "Catholic" doctrine, and not a Protestant belief, certainly not "Baptistic." But, that is not the case. Christ descent into the Underworld was believed by Christians in the first century, long before there was a "Catholic Church," certainly before there was a "Roman" Catholic church. 

However, the error of the Catholics was not their idea of a "limbus patrum" (Abraham's bosom) where all OT believers were gathered awaiting Christ's coming, for many Protestants and some Baptists have believed such. Nor was their belief that Christ descended to Hades an error, for the first Christians believed it, and as do many Protestants, including Baptists as myself. No, their error about Christ's descent relates to their idea about "Purgatory," and about their contention that salvation or redemption is possible for those who have gone to the Underworld as condemned criminals under sentence.  

Wuest also wrote:

"Our Lord therefore, between His death on the Cross and His resurrection from Joseph’s tomb, preached to the fallen angels in Tartarus. But what did He preach to them? The word translated “preached” here 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. Angels are not included among those for whom Christ died. Hebrews 2:16 says, “For verily He took not hold of angels: but He took hold of the seed of Abraham.” In perfect righteousness, God in justice passed by fallen angels, and in infinite mercy, procured for fallen man a salvation at Calvary, purchased by His own precious blood (Acts 20:28). As to a suggestion regarding the possible content of the proclamation, that must await our treatment of the subject concerning the nature of the disobedience of these fallen angels."  

All this is right. However, in his comments on 4: 6 he writes:

"The words “them that are dead,” refer to Christian believers who had died. The gospel had been preached to them and they had become Christians. As a result of this they had been judged according to men while they were on earth. This judgment was in the form of persecution because of their Christian testimony. The word translated “according to” means literally “down,” and speaks of domination. This judgment was in the hands of men and was administered by them."  

Here Wuest seems to argue differently than he did for his comments on 3: 19. Here he takes the view, along with others, that Peter is referring to Christians, especially martyrs, they being "the dead" who had the gospel preached to them (before they died) for the purpose stated by Peter. Such interpreters see the words as equivalent to saying "the gospel was preached to departed believers, before they died, so that though later judged and condemned to die by depraved men, they would nevertheless live to God in spiritual life in heaven." But, that makes no sense. Is that not the reason why the gospel is preached to all, to those who have lived and died and gone to heaven, as well as those who are living still? Is it the same reason why the gospel will be preached in the future to those chosen to salvation? Are we to interpret Peter's words to mean all the same as "for this reason were they saved by the gospel before they died"? 

This view also says that the "judge" who judged the dead ones who heard the gospel preached by Christ are the persecutors and murderers of the righteous. These are identified as "men in the flesh," denoting wicked people who persecute spiritual Christians, particularly in their condemning to death (judging) the ones who had heard and believed the gospel. Wuest said "this judgment was in the form of persecution." But that is not correct. 

First, "in order that" (hina - "that they might be judged") cannot be interpreted as "although they might be judged," which it does not mean. There is a lot of difference between "that they might" and "although." The latter is the term used by those who say that the judges of the text are persecutors. Those who take this view argue these points: 

1) "men in the flesh" are unsaved people who persecute and put to death those who have heard and believed the gospel, and 

2) that the judgment denotes condemnation to death by "men in the flesh," and 

3) that the "dead ones" preached to denotes believers who have died, especially died as martyrs. 

Thus, they see the intent of Peter was to encourage believers with the thought that they will have spiritual and eternal life even when they die, and so therefore there should be no fear of dying as a result of preaching and following Christ. However, how a person can get that out of the words "for this reason was the gospel preached even to those who are dead that they might be judged by men in the flesh..." is bewildering. 

Such an interpretation does not answer the question "why was the gospel preached by Christ to the dead"? In fact, they of such interpretations change the question. Peter is going to give us the reason why the gospel was preached to "the dead," not the reason it is preached to "the living." The above view does not give us the reason. How is the preaching to departed believers (before they died) special and peculiar to them? Is the reason why the living are preached to different? Those of this view read the text this way: "the gospel was preached to our saved departed brothers and sisters so that they, though having been condemned to die, will yet live unto God in spirit." Or, "in order that you might be saved when you die as a martyr, the gospel was preached to you." 

Second, the one who will "judge" the dead ones who heard the gospel preached by Christ in the Underworld (or even who heard it while they were alive for that matter) is the same judge mentioned in the preceding verse where Peter speaks of him "who is ready to judge living and dead." That is Christ and he is the Judge and Lord of the dead, in that character he made announcements to all who were in the Underworld when he descended into the heart of the earth. We will be looking at that aspect of our present subject in an upcoming chapter, that of Christ becoming "lord" of the dead.

I see the text as saying "for this reason was the gospel preached (by Christ as in 3: 19) to dead ones, so that they might be judged by the judge of the living and the dead as being either "men in the flesh" (lost) or as men alive to God in spirit (saved)." I will further explain my reasons for this interpretation as we continue to look at the grammar and syntax of the passage, and consult some Greek translators. 

Wuest continues:

"The words “in the flesh” are to be construed with “might be judged,” for they balance up the words “in the spirit” which clearly are to be understood with “live.” We have here the dative of respect." 

That is true, except he left out the word "men" when he mentions "in the flesh." It is "men in the flesh." We know that "men in the flesh" could be used in more than one sense. It may mean "men who are in their bodies" (or living people, not disembodied spirits). It could denote those who are animalistic and depraved, being used in the sense Paul often used the adjectival phraseology. Notice these words of his:

"For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his." (Rom. 8: 6-9)

Clearly people "in the flesh" (Greek sarx) are people who are controlled by the lusts of the flesh, not being spiritual, not having "the Spirit of Christ." 

I believe Peter is using "men in the flesh" in the same way as Paul. Even those like Wuest who believe the preaching was done to departed believers while they were alive on earth (and not to the dead spirits in Hades), also see these men as lost depraved sinners, for they are the murderers of believers. The question is who is doing the judging (or deciding)? Further, what does it mean for Christ to judge one of the dead (who heard his preaching in Hades) "according to men in the flesh"? That point we will discuss shortly.

Wuest continues:

"These Christians were judged with respect to the flesh, that is, with respect to their earthly existence in the body. The natural result of accepting the gospel would be the living of a Christian life, and the natural result of that would be persecution. But these Christians died, many of them as martyrs. Now, in heaven they were living according to the Word of God with respect to their spirits, their human spirits. They in their disembodied state were serving the Lord in the future life."

But, that is not correct. First, "them who are dead" does not denote "these Christians," these "martyrs," as we have seen. Rather, as we have seen, this interpretation says that the gospel was preached not to dead people, but to living people. Very ironic. Second, the judging is done by the only judge mentioned in the context, which is the one who is "ready to judge living and dead."(4: 5) But, Wuest, and they who share his view, make the judge(s) wicked human beings who kill believers. That is wrong. The error is in not comprehending what is meant by "that they might be judged according to men in the flesh."

Questions

1. Who are the "they" in "that they might be"? Well, obviously it is "them who are dead." 

2. Who is the "judge" of the "they"?

3. What does it mean to be "judged according to men in the flesh"?

4. What does it mean to be "judged according to or as being alive to God in spirit"?

On these points and questions, we will have more to say. We will speak further of the purpose Peter says that Jesus fulfilled in going to the Underworld and preaching there. We will look closer at the grammar and syntax of the passages under investigation and doing that will bring us back to these points. We will continue to do that in the next chapter.