wagner@karazm.math.uh.edu (David Wagner) (12/04/90)
[This is a discussion of I Pet 4:6, which talks about Christ having preached "to them that are dead." At first glance, it seems to imply that they got a second chance after dead. David believes that because it says "are dead" and not "were dead", it is not talking about people who had physically died. I pointed out that this distinction isn't present in the Greek, which simply says "the gospel was preached to the dead." --clh] This is an interesting point. Both the KJV quoted by Frank and the NIV I quoted use the verb 'are' in the present tense. Unfortunately I know zilch about greek, so I have to rely on the expertise of others. This is what the Concordia Self-Study Bible says about this verse: "The word "now" does not appear in the Greek, but it is necessary to make it clear that the preaching was done not after these people had died, but while they were still alive. (There will be no opportunity for people to be saved after death; see Heb. 9:27)." They don't even discuss the present tense verb 'are', so I presume that is noncontroversial. I can try to look this up in Eerdmans's Pulpit Commentary, which which will have an exegesis, but my opportunity to do so is limited. Perhaps others on the net will help me out here? Incidentally, Heb. 9:27, 28 says: "Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgement, so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him." I wouldn't say this is a rock-solid proof text, but it is supportive of the statement above. David H. Wagner a confessional Lutheran. My opinions and beliefs on this matter are disclaimed by The University of Houston. [I don't think I agree that the present tense verb "are" is uncontroversial. It's not there at all in Greek. The Greek simply says "the dead". And that's the way NRSV translates it. "For this is the reason the gospel was proclaimed even to the dead, so that, although they had been judged in the flesh as everyone is judged, they might live in the spirit as God does." Note that Concordia's comment is primarily a doctrinal one, namely that if you translated it in the obvious way, it would conflict with their understanding of Heb. As you say, their understanding of Heb, while a reasonable interpretation, is not necessarily the only possible one. It could be that there's a nuance in the Greek that isn't obvious, but what it looks like to me is that KJV and NIV have adopted a reading primarily to avoid a conclusion that they consider unacceptable. By the way, I take 4:6 as a reference to 3:19. --clh]
farkas@eng.sun.com (Frank Farkas) (12/06/90)
In article <Dec.4.00.33.08.1990.353@athos.rutgers.edu>, wagner@karazm.math.uh.edu (David Wagner) writes: >[This is a discussion of I Pet 4:6, which talks about Christ having >preached "to them that are dead." At first glance, it seems to imply >that they got a second chance after dead. David believes that because >it says "are dead" and not "were dead", it is not talking about people >who had physically died. I pointed out that this distinction isn't >present in the Greek, which simply says "the gospel was preached to >the dead." --clh] > I just would like to clarify that LDS doctrine doesn't teach that there is a second chance. All those who have heard the gospel in this life, and rejected it, will have no opportunity once again in the spirit world. However, there are billions who have lived and died without the oportunity to hear the gospel. These will be provided with the oportunity to hear the gospel and to respond by either accepting it or rejecting it. Once again, we need to ask the question, how does a doctrin reflect on the character of God? Being just and fair is one of the atributes of God. Condemning billions because they had no oportunity to hear the gospell is neither just and fair. Therefore, any such notion must be faulty. Paul said the following: Romans 10:12-15 =============== "For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him." "For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved." "How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?" How can it be made any clearer then this? We need to hear to believe and there must be one who will preach. We all know the doctrine that we are saved by grace through faith. Now, if we have not heard it, how can one believe it? And if we don't believe, how are we going to be saved without faith? >Incidentally, Heb. 9:27, 28 says: > >"Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgement, so >Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people; and he will >appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who >are waiting for him." >I wouldn't say this is a rock-solid proof text, but it is supportive of the >statement above. > >David H. Wagner >a confessional Lutheran. > Of course this passage by no means negates I Peter 3:18-19 and 4:6. The answere lies in the understanding that not all statements in the Bible are all inclusive. We need to read all of the passages which deals with a given subject. What Paul said is correct. We do live once, however, judgement doesn't come until the resurrection. What Peter is talking about is what happens between death and resurrection. With brotherly love, Frank
wagner@karazm.math.uh.edu (David Wagner) (12/06/90)
In article <Dec.4.00.33.08.1990.353@athos.rutgers.edu> wagner@karazm.math.uh.edu (David Wagner) writes: >[This is a discussion of I Pet 4:6, which talks about Christ having >preached "to them that are dead." At first glance, it seems to imply >that they got a second chance after dead. David believes that because >it says "are dead" and not "were dead", it is not talking about people >who had physically died. I pointed out that this distinction isn't >present in the Greek, which simply says "the gospel was preached to >the dead." --clh] > Well, here I am, following up to my own post. I had asked my pastor about this passage yesterday, and he answered me today. He explained it to my satisfaction, but the answer is somewhat technical, as you might expect. I'll try to give you my understanding of it, but I'd feel more comfortable with a written exegesis in front of me. "For this is the reason the gospel was preached even to [those who are now] dead, so that they might be judged according to men in regard to the body, but live according to God in regard to the spirit." Let's discard for the moment, the words 'those who are now', which seem to have been inserted for clarification. Let's look at the rest of the sentence. The context is Christians living in a world of sin. The unbelievers around them 'think it strange that you do not plunge with them into the same flood of dissipation, and they heap abuse on you. But they will have to be ready to give an account to him who is ready to judge the living and the dead." It says the gospel 'was preached', (aorist passive) 'so that they (those preached to) might be judged according to men in regard to the body (sarki), but live (zosi) according to God in regard to the spirit. My pastor says 'sarki' means a body, but also what you do with your body, i.e., your works, or the works of the body. Then the meaning would be that 'they might be judged (by men) according to the life they lead among men, but live, (present active subjunctive) according to God, in regard to the spirit.' The preaching of the gospel produces faith, but it also produces christian love; love for God and love for humanity. This is shown by the life Christians lead. Their life is also a witness to the unbelievers around them. To some this witness works to their salvation, and to some it works for judgement. But it cannot work at all if the Christian is dead; he cannot be 'judged according to men' if he is dead. Some may think I am on thin ice here, but if we remember that when we die, our soul/spirit is separated from our body, then Peter cannot be talking about the preaching of the gospel to those who have no body. On the other hand, in 1 Peter 3:19, he writes of Christ preaching to the 'spirits in prison'. As I said in my previous article, 1 Peter 4:6, which speaks of the preaching of the gospel to those with bodies, cannot refer to Christ's preaching to the spirits in prison. A good parallel passage is 2 Cor 5:10: "For we must all appear before the judgement seat of Christ, that each one may receive what is due him for the things done while in the body, whether good or bad." I hope it is obvious to our learned readers that to be 'judged for the things done while in the body' does not not justified negate justificaion (being declared righteous) by grace (undeserved love) alone. Rather it means that the unbelievers are judged by their deeds, which are evil in the sight of the Lord, but that believers are judged by Christ's merits, which credited to them by faith, and their own works are set forth as an example to the unbelievers (Matt. 24:31-46). Needless to say, they can have no such works if they are not converted before they die. Possibly 'sarki' is used in 2 Cor 5:10 in the sense of 'things done while in the body', but I don't know. I suppose, going back to Peter 4:6, that one might construe Peter as talking about the body reunited with the soul at the resurrection, but that would make no sense, because then, for the believer, both body and soul live 'according to God', and there is no opportunity to witness to the unbelievers, for they are cast into the lake of fire for eternal punishment (Matt 24). I invite further responses. David H. Wagner a confessional Lutheran. My opinions and beliefs on this matter are disclaimed by The University of Houston. [It's not so clear to me that being judged is an experience reserved for unbelievers. I Cor 3:11-3:15 seems to suggest a judgement of some sort even for Christians. --clh]
ta00est@unccvax.uncc.edu (elizabeth s tallant) (12/11/90)
In article <Dec.6.04.18.10.1990.23959@athos.rutgers.edu>, wagner@karazm.math.uh.edu (David Wagner) writes: > In article <Dec.4.00.33.08.1990.353@athos.rutgers.edu> wagner@karazm.math.uh.edu (David Wagner) writes: > >[This is a discussion of I Pet 4:6, which talks about Christ having > >preached "to them that are dead." At first glance, it seems to imply > >that they got a second chance after dead. David believes that because > >it says "are dead" and not "were dead", it is not talking about people > >who had physically died. I pointed out that this distinction isn't > >present in the Greek, which simply says "the gospel was preached to > >the dead." --clh] Don't forget that Christ said "let the dead bury the dead." Now, if someone's body has died, he or she is obviously unable to bury another person. What Christ meant is that the young man to whom he was talking should follow Him, and let the spiritually dead bury the physically dead. Therefore, we are all "dead" until we have accepted salvation. Now, how do we become dead? As Paul points out, we have all sinned and are dead in sin until we recieve salvation. Then, in Romans, Paul tells us that when we are babtised by the Holy Spirit, we die with Christ. Then, a new and "alive" person emerges. Thus, Christ preached to the spiritually dead. After you have experienced a physical death, it's too late to have salvation. Elizabeth [Jesus was known for making hyperbolic and even (dare we say it) humorous remarks. It is not beyond the realm of possibility that "let the dead bury the dead" when taken literally was describing an impossible action. --clh]
wagner@karazm.math.uh.edu (David Wagner) (12/11/90)
In article <Dec.6.03.20.05.1990.23301@athos.rutgers.edu> farkas@eng.sun.com (Frank Farkas) writes: >In article <Dec.4.00.33.08.1990.353@athos.rutgers.edu>, wagner@karazm.math.uh.edu (David Wagner) writes: >I just would like to clarify that LDS doctrine doesn't teach that there >is a second chance. All those who have heard the gospel in this life, and >rejected it, will have no opportunity once again in the spirit world. >However, there are billions who have lived and died without the oportunity >to hear the gospel. These will be provided with the oportunity to hear >the gospel and to respond by either accepting it or rejecting it. I'm glad to hear the first statement. I strongly disagree with the second. >Paul said the following: >Romans 10:12-15 >"For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord >over all is rich unto all that call upon him." >"For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved." >"How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how >shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they >hear without a preacher?" >How can it be made any clearer then this? We need to hear to believe and >there must be one who will preach. We all know the doctrine that we are >saved by grace through faith. Now, if we have not heard it, how can one >believe it? And if we don't believe, how are we going to be saved without >faith? Everything you say here is correct. But you omit one point: "For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that *men are without excuse*." --Romans 1:20 "In the past, he let all nations go their own way. Yet he has not left himself without testimony: He has shown kindness by giving you rain from heaven and crops in their seasons; he provides you with plenty of food and fills your hearts with joy." --Acts 14:16,17 God reveals himself in his creation, and shows grace to all men by giving them rain, crops, food, and joy while they live on the earth. Thus men are without excuse. But nowhere does SCripture say that this 'natural knowledge of God' is able to save anyone; only the Gospel can do that. David H. Wagner a confessional Lutheran
cms@gatech.edu (12/11/90)
In article <Dec.4.00.33.08.1990.353@athos.rutgers.edu>, wagner@karazm.math.uh.edu (David Wagner) writes: OFM says: > [This is a discussion of I Pet 4:6, which talks about Christ having > preached "to them that are dead." At first glance, it seems to imply > that they got a second chance after dead. David believes that because > it says "are dead" and not "were dead", it is not talking about people > who had physically died. I pointed out that this distinction isn't > present in the Greek, which simply says "the gospel was preached to > the dead." --clh] David Wagner's comments deleted since they are summarized well above. > By the way, I take 4:6 as a reference to 3:19. --clh] Quickly, here's NAB: "For this is why the gospel was preached even to the dead that, though condemned in the flesh in human estimation, they might live in the spirit in the estimation of God." It seems to me that because the dead are indeed judged the same dead must know by whom they are being judged (that is, Christ). Those who never heard of Christ must be preached the good news so that they will know how and by whom they are being judged, those who heard but did not believe must be preached the good news so they will know that the gospel was/is indeed the truth. Whether this means that they are capable of salvation after death or that, in order to suffer eternally in hell, they must have the gospel preached to them so that they will know why they are suffering, I can guess and choose the former over the latter. Yet, besides Hebrews, this seems to contradict Luke 16:19-31 (the parable of the rich man and Lazarus), where Abraham says there is a great gulf between "heaven" and "hell" that cannot be crossed. The rich man requests that Lazarus be sent to the man's five brothers that they might repent, but Abraham replies that if they don't believe the Torah and the Prophets, they wouldn't believe even if someone were raised from the dead. This seems to be prophetic if Jesus indeed raised the same Lazarus from the dead and the Pharisees still did not believe. The question I'm trying to raise is: The gospel is preached to the dead to what purpose? In addition, if the gulf which cannot be breached by human beings still stands, then why is it said that Christ is Lord of both the living and the dead so that those on earth, in heaven, and under the earth bend the knee at the name of Jesus (Philippians 9-11)? It's interesting to me that in the above Lucan passage, Christ speaks of Abraham of the first covenant of faith, and does not mention the Son of Man. Thus, the gulf could not be breached before his death on the cross, but could be breached afterward. After all, before His death, Abraham was able to preach the concept that the good are rewarded and the evil are punished to the evil rich man tormented in the flames and do so from heaven. So, communication is allowed, whereas physical contact (help) is not. The idea of Jesus being Lord of heaven and hell and earth indicates that his Lordship extends to physical contact with the world of the dead and help (setting the prisoners free). Otherwise, Jesus did nothing new in communicating the gospel to the dead; such preaching is without purpose unless we the living overhear it. The purpose of Abraham's remarks to the rich man, for example, do nothing for the rich man, but are exclusively for the purpose of instructing the living, which the rich man seems to understand, cf. his request for the instruction of his brothers by the risen Lazarus. 1 Peter 3:18-22, piecemeal, to save space: "Put to death in the flesh, he was brought to life in the spirit." ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This refers to the time period after his death before his resurrection when he rescued the dead from prison. "[Baptism] is not a removal of dirt from the body but an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers subject to him." This refers to his physical resurrection from the dead. So, perhaps he preached to the prisoners, rose from the dead, then carried them with him. I don't think the exact sequence of events is terribly relevant. At any rate, my Jerome commentary tells me that the gospel was preached to those now dead, to Christians who heard the good news either from Christ or from his disciples, and who had died before the letter of Peter was written. It says that "the dead" should not "facilely be identified with the 'imprisoned spirits' of 3:19." My New Jerome adds, "the point of the text is to vindicate those Christians who had accepted the gospel on earth but who had since died (cf. 1 Thess 4:13-18). This text has quite a different theme from that of 3:19." Peake's notes that it may be a reference to the spiritually dead, that is, those who have died in the death of Christ. Oops, I just remembered I have an appointment, more later..... -- Sincerely, Cindy Smith _///_ // SPAWN OF A JEWISH _///_ // _///_ // <`)= _<< CARPENTER _///_ //<`)= _<< <`)= _<< _///_ // \\\ \\ \\ _\\\_ <`)= _<< \\\ \\ \\\ \\ <`)= _<< >IXOYE=('> \\\ \\ \\\ \\_///_ // // /// _///_ // _///_ // emory!dragon!cms <`)= _<< _///_ // <`)= _<< <`)= _<< \\\ \\<`)= _<< \\\ \\ \\\ \\ GO AGAINST THE FLOW! \\\ \\ A Real Live Catholic in Georgia
farkas@eng.sun.com (Frank Farkas) (12/11/90)
In article <Dec.6.04.18.10.1990.23959@athos.rutgers.edu>, wagner@karazm.math.uh.edu (David Wagner) writes: >In article <Dec.4.00.33.08.1990.353@athos.rutgers.edu> wagner@karazm.math.uh.edu (David Wagner) writes: >Well, here I am, following up to my own post. I had asked my pastor about >this passage yesterday, and he answered me today. He explained it to my >satisfaction, but the answer is somewhat technical, as you might expect. >I'll try to give you my understanding of it, but I'd feel more comfortable >with a written exegesis in front of me. Deleted text. >It says the gospel 'was preached', (aorist passive) 'so that they (those >preached to) might be judged according to men in regard to the body >(sarki), but live (zosi) according to God in regard to the spirit. >My pastor says 'sarki' means a body, but also what you do with your body, >i.e., your works, or the works of the body. Then the meaning would be that >'they might be judged (by men) according to the life they lead among men, >but live, (present active subjunctive) according to God, in regard to the >spirit.' > I believe that this is rationalization, or explaining away Bible passages which doesn't fit the things which we believe in. I Peter 3:18-19 =============== "For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:" "By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;" It clearly says that he went to preach to those who were in the spirit world, and I Peter 4:6 tells us why. >I suppose, going back to Peter 4:6, that one might construe Peter as >talking about the body reunited with the soul at the resurrection, but >that would make no sense, because then, for the believer, both body and >soul live 'according to God', and there is no opportunity to witness to >the unbelievers, for they are cast into the lake of fire for eternal >punishment (Matt 24). > Once again, how will be billions who have lived and will live, yet they have not heard the gospel? Paul says we can't believe in something which we have not heard. How are they then going to be saved without faith in the Lord Jeasus Christ? Do you know another way? If not, what does it say about God that he will condemn bilions who, not because of any fault of their own, have not heard the gospel? >I invite further responses. > >David H. Wagner >a confessional Lutheran. >[It's not so clear to me that being judged is an experience reserved >for unbelievers. I Cor 3:11-3:15 seems to suggest a judgement of some >sort even for Christians. --clh] I agree with the comments of the moderator. We will all be judged by our works. How can we receive our reward, if this is not so? Final udgement will take place not in the spirit world, but at the time of resurrection. With brotherly love, Frank [I believe your reference is to Rom 10:14ff. While this passage has been cited a couple of times in this discussion as allowing for the concept that those who haven't heard the Gospel won't be condemned for that, I'm not so sure that's what Paul meant. In Rom 10:18ff, Paul goes on to say, "But I ask, have they not heard? Indeed they have; for 'Their voice has gone out to all the earth,...'" ... "I have been found by those who did not seek me; I have shown myself to those who did not ask for me" (quoting Is., apparently referring to Gentiles). When combined with Rom 1:18ff, I have the impression that Paul thinks God has managed to make enough known about himself everywhere that all people are responsible for acknowledging him. --clh]
David.Anderson@cs.cmu.edu (12/12/90)
Lynn, here. I feel it's necessary to clarify something Frank Farkas wrote about the lds belief on preaching to the dead, to wit: > Excerpts from netnews.soc.religion.christian: 6-Dec-90 Re: Preaching to > the dead? Frank Farkas@eng.sun.com (2874) > I just would like to clarify that LDS doctrine doesn't teach that there > is a second chance. All those who have heard the gospel in this life, and > rejected it, will have no opportunity once again in the spirit world. I think it's very important to say that no one except God is in a position to know if a person's "chance" to hear the gospel in this life was adequate. We mortals generally are not privy to what's going on in a person's life which may make him/her more or less receptive to hearing the gospel message at any given moment. Some people's lives are such that they will need *healing* (psychological, emotional, etc.) before they are able to fully understand the gospel, much less accept it and live it. I would personally be loathe to point to *anyone* (even a member of any church, including lds) and say, "Well, that person obviously heard the gospel, rejected it, and so tough luck!" It ain't that simple, and it sure ain't my place to do so.