I believe that everyone is placing too much importance in the theological aspects of the creed. It may be more helpful to actually look at the lexical changes that took place over time. Mr. Johnson stated that there according to Professor G. C. Stead, the earliest creed resembling the Apostles' Creed cannot be found before A.D. 340, However, the text of the the Interrogatory Creed of Hippolytus is attributed to circa A.D. 215. If we look at the elements of this text, we can see quite a few variations - here is the text, as translated:
"Do you believe in God the Father All Governing?
Do you believe in Christ Jesus, the Son of God, Who was begotten by the Holy Spirit from the Virgin Mary, Who was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and died (and was buried) and rose the third day living from the dead, and ascended into the heavens, and sat down on the right hand of the Father, and will come to judge the living and the dead?
Do you believe in the Holy Spirit, in the holy Church and in the resurrection of the body?"
Nowhere is there a mention of arising "again" from the dead, simply he rose "living from the dead".
Now, the creed of which I believe Professor G. C. Stead was refering, is the Creed of Marcellus (A.D. 340). You can see a progressive evolution in the lexical structure. Here are the elemements:
"I believe in God, All Governing; And in Christ Jesus His only begotten Son, our Lord, Who was begotten of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, Who was crucified under Pontius Pilate and buried, Who rose from the dead on the third day, ascending to the heavens and taking His seat at the Father's right hand, whence He shall come to judge both the living and the dead;
And I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy Church, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, life everlasting."
Again, we see no reference to the concept of two deaths. It states "Who rose from the dead on the third day". We see no reference to neither two deaths or to the inclusion of Jesus decending into hell until the Creed of Rufinus (circa 404 AD). Here is the text:
"I believe in God the Father almighty, invisible and impassable;
And in Christ Jesus, His only Son, our Lord, Who was born by the Holy Spirit from Mary the Virgin, crucified under Pontius Pilate and buried. He descended to hell. On the third day He rose again from the dead, He ascended to heaven, where He sits at the Father's right hand and from whence He will come to judge both living and dead;
And I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy Church, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of this flesh."
It is interesting to note that once the concept of decending into hell is included, so is the lexical notion of "again". It seems very possible that the word again, can be interpreted as as entailing two parts 1) he was crucified under Pontius Pilate and buried and 2)from hell he arose again (the first time). Think of it this way, if you were to say, "John had a heart attack and was pronounced dead for two minutes, but then, all of a sudden, he came back to life again." The "again" part may not be referencing "two deaths" but rather "TWO LIFES".
Also, bear in mind that much is lost in translations, there are many concepts that cannot easily be expressed from one language to another. For example, Greek had many terms for love: philia, eros, agape, storge and xenia. It is difficult to express the differences between these terms using only the English "Love". "Philia" references dispassionate or virtuous love such as between a friends or family. "Eros" is passionate love with sensual, sexual overtones - it is the love of anothers body, of desire (this is the root of the English word "Erotic". "Agape" is pure love, such as in "I love you" - it is distinct from "Philia" because philia suggests a mutual relationship, while Agape does not necessarily. "Storge" is the equivilent to something akin to affection, nature not passionate - such as "I love my cat" and Finally, "Xenia" is the most difficult to translate because it is a love between strangers - but ancient Greeks had a philosophy of being extremely hospitable to strangers, they would take them into their home, feed them and care for them - the concept has no equivilent in English.
One other point I would like to make is once more concerning translations. In the Latin version of the creed - around 700 A.D., the particular portion we are concerned with is as follows: passus sub Pontio Pilato, crucifixus, mortuus, et sepultus; descendit ad inferna; tertia die resurrexit a mortuis; ascendit ad coelos" Look at the last segment tertia die (on the third day) resurrexit (he arose) a mortuis (from the dead).
This is the version from where the English version came from. However no mention of two deaths.
It is extremely difficult to translate certain concerpts from one language to another - this is why Jews resurrected Hebrew and Muslims insist that the Q'ran be written in tradional Arabic. There are many instances of translation "mistakes" or ocurrences - one particularly interesting concept is the the idea of Moses parting the Red Sea. In the original Greek, Moses parted the Reed Sea which was more only several feet in depth, and , as it turns out, a much more pratical route to take if one were leaving from Egypt. But, of course, that is a debate for another time.
-Pete