Journal: Bibliotheca Sacra
Volume: BSAC 49:193 (Jan 1892)
Article: Resurrection And Final Judgment
Author: Edmund B. Fairfield

BSac 49:193 (Jan 1892) p. 62

Resurrection And Final Judgment

Rev. Edmund B. Fairfield

[Continued from Vol. 48. p. 103.]

“SANCTIFY them through thy truth; thy word is truth.” Nothing but the truth is of real worth to any man. And in respect to all questions of eschatology the Bible is the only ultimate authority as to what the truth is. Thus far we all agree.

Those who dissent from the views presented in my first paper, hold as follows: —

1. That dying saints do not go at once to heaven, but to a place which is called in the Hebrew of the Old Testament “Shed,” in the Greek of .the New Testament “Hades;” and that they will only reach heaven at some point of time yet in the future.

2. That that point of time is spoken of as “the end of the world;” and that the Bible teaches that this world is to be literally destroyed or burned up. Especially do they hold that the Second Epistle of Peter declares that to be the fact.

3. That Paul teaches in 1 Cor. 15:51 that some Christians will die, and others will not; namely, those who are on the earth when the end comes.

4. That Christ’s resurrection was a type of ours, and that our natural bodies are to be raised and changed at the end of the world.

5. That the term “last day” and other similar forms

BSac 49:193 (Jan 1892) p. 63

of speech refer to this end of all things which is yet in the future.

6. That the Bible teaches that David is not yet in heaven (or was not at the first Pentecost after Christ’s ascension), and by logical inference others of God’s redeemed are not yet there.

It is my full conviction that all these are mistakes: whether or not this will be made to appear, the reader must decide. If it were possible, I would be glad to have him suspend his verdict till I am through with my argument.

In committing my first paper to the type, I knew full well that many points demanded further elucidation; but lack of space forbade. I am happy to have the opportunity now to present what I consider to be the Bible teaching on these other points, involved in this discussion.

In opening a second paper, I may be pardoned, in view of references which have been made to the first, for a few words personal.

1. I am a spiritualist in the Bible sense; but not at all a believer in what is called “modern spiritualism.”

2. Whether or not anything I have written is in harmony with Swedenborgianism, in any manner or degree, I do not know: if...