The Bible Vs. The Traditional View of Hell
Last Revised: September 18, 2007
by: Babu G. Ranganathan
(B.A. Bible/Biology)
*All Scripture quotations are from the King James Version of the Bible.
Copyright 1993, 1997: Babu G. Ranganathan
The author, Babu G. Ranganathan (pronounced Ranga-nathan), has been recognized
in the 24th edition of Marquis Who's Who In The East.
As a former Hindu converted to Christianity, having known the Lord for over
thirty-five years, and being a committed Reformed Baptist, I would like to speak
in defense of the conditionalist view of hell. I had believed in the traditional
view of hell for most of my Christian life so I am very familiar with the various
views about hell that evangelical Christians hold.
The conditionalist view is that the wicked in hell will suffer a period of terrible
agony and anguish in proportion to their individual guilt and sins and then
be eternally destroyed or cease to exist.
Although the wicked in hell, for a period, will suffer consciously for their individual sins, the ultimate penalty for sin itself will be their eternal death (i.e., their eternal destruction or loss of life). That, then, is their eternal punishment (i.e., their eternal loss to life and immortality). But, what about those passages in the Bible, which say that the wicked will, go into "eternal fire" and that in hell there will be "weeping and gnashing of teeth forever and ever," and other similar passages that seem to teach eternal torment? We shall examine, in this essay, those and other passages from the Bible in the light of the context of Scripture.
Be assured, however, that the ultimate and eternal annihilation (destruction)
of the wicked is supported abundantly by the Christian Scriptures. Is God's
righteous wrath an end in itself or is God's righteous wrath a means
to an end (that end being the eternal destruction of the wicked)? Will a thrice-holy
God allow sin the right to exist for eternity in His universe by sustaining
and keeping sinners alive eternally and burning in hell? Is eternal torment
the only way God can satisfy His eternal justice?
Is the ultimate penalty for sin in the Bible eternal torment or is it eternal
death (of both soul and body)? These and many other important questions and
issues (such as how to reconcile the immutability of Christ as God with His
death on the Cross) will be biblically answered in this essay. The view that
the wicked will be eternally destroyed is also supported in the writings of
the first and second century Christian Fathers, as well as by some prominent
groups of the Protestant Reformation such as the Anabaptists, and today the
conditionalist view is supported by some very prominent evangelical Christian
scholars and theologians such as John R. W. Stott and Clark H. Pinnock.
Although there have been individual Christians in various denominations, and even some famous such as the great hymn writer Isaac Watts (author of "When I Survey The Wondrous Cross"), who have come to believe in the conditionalist view, the only major Christian denomination today which officially incorporates this belief as part of church doctrine and creed is the Seventh Day Adventist Church.
What most people believe about hell is influenced very much, by what they believe
about the nature of the human soul. The ancient Greeks, Hindus, Egyptians, Babylonians,
and others believed that the human soul is immortal and indestructible and,
therefore, must live eternally even after the body dies and dissolves into the
dust. This was because many of the ancients believed that the human soul was
intrinsically divine, having the nature of deity, and so it could not die.
This philosophy of the universal immortality of the human soul was a cardinal
teaching of the ancient Greeks and strongly influenced early Christian thought
on the nature of the human soul. Although early Christians rejected the belief
that the soul was of divine essence or deity, most eventually compromised with
Greek philosophy by accepting the idea that all humans have a soul that is immortal.
When early Christianity adopted this belief then it became only logical to believe
that those who go to hell must suffer eternal torment.
The very early Christian Fathers, however, such as Clement of Rome, Ignatius
of Antioch, Shepherd of Hermas, Polycarp (a pupil of the Apostle John), Justin
Martyr, Tatian and Irenaeus held to the belief that only those who believe in
Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior will eventually inherit immortality and eternal
life. In other words, the ultimate possession of immortality is dependent upon
people satisfying God's requirement or condition of trusting in His Son
Jesus Christ as personal Lord and Savior and, thus, that is why the term "conditional
immortality" is used when talking about the subject. The earliest Christian
Fathers believed that, while Christians now have absolute assurance of eternal
life, the actual possession of eternal life will not be until Resurrection Day.
That is why the Apostle Paul in Scripture says that believers (Christians) "by
patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honor and immortality,
eternal life" (Romans 2:7). Thus, Paul equates immortality with eternal
life. Eternal life or immortality is a gift from God to His people through Jesus
Christ; it is not something that all men possess. Even Adam and Eve did not
possess immortality upon their creation. That is why there was planted a Tree
of Life in the midst of the Garden of Eden. Scripture says in 1 Timothy 6:16
that Jesus Christ "only hath immortality ..." That is, Jesus Christ is
the only human being Who now possesses immortality.
But, if eternal life in Scripture means the same as immortality (as the Apostle
Paul clearly teaches in Romans 2:7 and elsewhere) and Christians will only have
immortality in the future, on Resurrection Day, then why did the Lord
Jesus Christ, in the Gospels, use the present tense when He stated that
those who believe in Him have eternal life. The answer is that sometimes
in Scripture future events are expressed in the present tense
for the purpose of demonstrating their certainty.
The Bible says God "calleth those things which be not as though they were" (Romans
4:17). Thus, when the Lord Jesus Christ in Scripture says that anyone who believes
in Him has (present tense) eternal life He does so in order to put His
seal on the absolute certainty of the future fulfillment of the promise.
Since eternal life in Scripture means the same as immortality and immortality
means to live for eternity then it stands to reason that the opposite
of eternal life is not eternal suffering, but, rather, eternal death
(that is the eternal literal death of both soul and body). That is why
Jesus said "...I am the resurrection, and the life; he that believeth in Me,
though he were dead, yet shall he live; And whosoever liveth and believeth in
Me shall never die..." (John 11:25-26). At first glance, these words seem
contradictory because Jesus is saying a believer may be dead and yet He is also
saying that a believer will never die. Which is it? How can both be true? We
have to understand that Jesus is talking about the ultimate fate of the
believer. Ultimately a believer will never die (or be permanently dead) because
he will be resurrected to immortality and glory on Resurrection Day. It is from
this perspective that we are to understand the words of Christ in the passage
here.
Understandably, then, if a human being does not possess immortality it is possible
for him or her to be destroyed or cease to exist. This means that it is not
necessary for the wicked to suffer eternally in hell. The Bible, in fact, over
and over again says that the ungodly will be ultimately destroyed in body and
soul. It is true that sometimes the word "destroyed" can be interpreted figuratively.
But it is the subject of the destruction that determines whether we are
to interpret the meaning as figurative or literal. For example, if one is told
that a person had destroyed his life by gambling the subject of the destruction
is the quality of that person's life not his biological life. But when Jesus
says that God can destroy both body and soul in Gahanna, or hell, (Matthew
10:28) the subject of the destruction is a man's whole being, and, thus, the
destruction cannot be interpreted as merely his quality of life. Mike Naudi
points out concerning the passage in Matthew 10:28 that Jesus had just finished
saying to His disciples not to fear those who can destroy the body but not the
soul before He said to them to fear, instead, God Who can destroy both body
and soul in Gahanna (hell). Naudi states that if Jesus was referring
to physical destruction of the body in the first part of the passage then He
must also be referring to the physical destruction of the body in the latter
part of the passage. If the destruction of the body in the first instance meant
the loss of life to the body then the same must be the case in the second instance.
The destruction of the soul then must also mean the loss of life to the soul.
This is the only biblically consistent way to interpret Matthew 10:28.
The point in Matthew 10:28 is that man can only bring earthly life to an end
but the ultimate and eternal fate of a person (his soul) is solely in
God's hands. God alone can ultimately and permanently destroy both body
and soul in Gahanna (hell fire). That is the simple teaching of Scripture.
If one were to destroy, for example, a house there is no more house. There may
be remnants of what was once the house, but as for the house itself, it no longer
exists as a house. Nor does God prescribe fire anywhere in Scripture as judicial
punishment except for the purpose of total destruction.
There are those who argue that the lost who go to hell only "perish" in their
spiritual usefulness to God but that their life continues. The reality is that
the spiritual usefulness of the lost had perished well before they even
go to hell. In a few cases in Scripture "perish" may refer just to usefulness
but this is not so in most of the cases. Again, the context is the key.
For example, when we say all those on a sunken ship "perished" we're certainly
not just referring to mere usefulness but rather to the physical (the
bios) life itself. Even those who believe in the universal immortality
of the soul will not deny that the physical life of the body can actually perish.
Why not, then, the life of the soul?
How then does one interpret biblical phrases such as "unquenchable fire" and
other similar terms that are used in the Scriptures in referring to the destruction
of the wicked? Here we must interpret Scripture with Scripture. In Isaiah 34:10,
for example, God says that the nation of Edom will be destroyed with unquenchable
fire and that the smoke of Edom's destruction will ascend up forever and ever.
Not only will the inhabitants of Edom be destroyed with unquenchable fire, but
Scripture says "Edom's streams will be turned into pitch, her dust into burning
sulfur ... it will not be quenched night and day; its smoke will rise forever"
(Isaiah 34:9-10). The Scripture says here that even the smoke of the burning
streams, dust, and land will rise forever! Will anyone claim that the
unquenchable fire and the smoke rising "forever" here means that Edom's streams,
dust, and land will burn for eternity? If not, then why should we believe that
the people (or souls) of Edom will burn for eternity because of the unquenchable
fire and the smoke rising "forever". Let us be consistent!
The fact is Edom is not still burning today. We know from the passage itself,
as well as from common sense, that the unquenchable fire does not mean the land
of Edom will burn eternally because the verse in Isaiah 34:10 continues and
says concerning Edom that "from generation to generation it (the land) shall
lie waste; none shall pass through it forever and ever." The fire was
unquenchable only in the sense that nothing could intervene to put out the fire
before it accomplished its purpose of total destruction. Thus, the
result of Edom burning in unquenchable fire is that Edom would become desolate
- a wasteland. History shows that the cities and civilization of Edom were,
indeed, wiped off the face of the earth. Petra, the ancient site of Edom, is
today inhabited only by birds and reptiles. Bible scholars have noted in Isaiah
34 that the destruction of Edom is also used to serve as a type (or representation)
of God's ultimate judgment on all nations that oppose Him. In Scripture apocalyptic
and highly symbolic language (i.e. the sun turning dark and the stars from heaven
falling) sometimes is used in describing major judgment and change.
Figures of speech such as "unquenchable fire" are used in the Bible to mean
that the process of destruction is unstoppable or irreversible.
We see the same example in other passages such as Ezekiel 20:47-48 where God
says that when His judgment comes on the land even every green tree will burn
in unquenchable fire. Obviously, those trees are not still burning. It
is important to understand just why God uses such terms in Scripture as "unquenchable
fire." In the Bible, there were some judgments of God (such as in the Old Testament)
in which His wrath was quenched or stopped such as in the case when Moses interceded
for the rebellious Israelites in the desert. Thus, when God says that the wicked
in the end will be destroyed with unquenchable fire what He simply means
is that no one and nothing will intervene to prevent Him from carrying out His
wrath fully through to its completion. Over and over in the Scriptures God is
described in judgment as being a consuming fire and that is true whether
the judgment be of a temporal nature or an eternal nature.
Now, in the case of Edom the fire was not only unquenchable (unstoppable) it
was also eternal in its effect because the fire not only fully destroyed
Edom but it also resulted in Edom never existing as a civilization again (which
is signified in the symbolism of the smoke arising "forever and ever"). It is
not the process of destruction that it is eternal, but, rather, the
result. Similarly, in Jude 7 we read that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed
by eternal fire, but these cities are no longer still burning. The word
"eternal" in Scripture is also used in regard to redemption and salvation. In
Hebrews 9:12, for example, the Bible says that Christ obtained for His elect
eternal redemption. Again, it is not the process of redemption which
is eternal (no one would ever end up being redeemed or saved if the process
of redemption were eternal), but, rather, it is the result of Christ's
redemptive work which is eternal. Other phrases in Scripture using the word
"eternal" such as eternal judgment, eternal punishment, eternal
damnation, also refer to the result and not to the process. In
other words, for example, in the phrase "eternal judgment" it is not the judging
(the process) that is eternal but rather the judgment (the result) which
is eternal, or otherwise God would never finish judging. What kind of Judge
would God be if the process of judging were eternal and never completed?
What about Revelation 14:9-11 where it says: "the smoke of their torment ascendeth
up forever and ever; and they have no rest day nor night"? Doesn't this passage
in Scripture prove eternal torment? No. We also read in Isaiah 34:10 that
while Edom was burning day and night the smoke of the city would
ascend up forever and ever. Does that mean that Edom would never stop burning?
Of course, not! The language simply signifies that the burning of Edom will
ultimately end in permanent (or irrevocable and eternal) destruction. We know
that Edom doesn't exist anymore. Similarly, we are to understand the same from
the passage in Revelation 14:9-11. The smoke of their torment arising "forever
and ever" in the passage does not mean that the torment of the wicked will never
end. The language simply signifies that the torment of the wicked will lead
to their permanent (or irrevocable and eternal) destruction. During the process
of their destruction, the wicked will be tormented but that process will ultimately
end in their eternal annihilation, which is what is signified by the use of
the figure of smoke arising "forever and ever". This is the only interpretation
of Revelation 14:9-11 that would be consistent with how the rest of Scripture
uses such language and with what the rest of the Scriptures teach concerning
the final and ultimate end of the wicked.
The example, however, that indisputably settles the issue is the destruction
of Sodom and Gomorrah. Jude 7 says that the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah
"are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire."
The word "example" in the verse comes from the original Greek New Testament
word "deigma," and wherever any form of this Greek word is used in the New Testament,
it means an example that is visible to the eye. Now in what way were Sodom and
Gomorrah an example of destruction by eternal fire? They were an example
in the fact that these cities suffered total destruction (annihilation) and
they also suffered irrevocable destruction because they would never exist as
cities again. One may argue that the souls of Sodom and Gomorrah are burning
forever in hell now, but if that were the case then Scripture cannot use the
destruction of these cities as a visible example of judgment by eternal fire,
since that is not something that one can observe. When one gives, an example
of something to another it must be by its very nature visible or observable.
After all, the purpose of the example was for living humanity on earth to
see what judgment by eternal fire means. Besides, the belief that the souls
of the wicked will burn forever in hell is based on the unbiblical assumption
that their souls are immortal or indestructible.
But, how can the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah be eternal or irrevocable
when Scripture says elsewhere that the individuals who perished in Sodom and
Gomorrah will be resurrected in the last day to face final judgment? It is true
the Scripture teaches that the individuals who perished in Sodom and Gomorrah
will be resurrected on the last day to face judgment. On the last day (judgment
day) the individuals of Sodom and Gomorrah will suffer conscious punishment
in proportion to their guilt and then be cast into eternal fire where they will
be eternally or irrevocably destroyed as individuals just as they suffered
eternal and irrevocable destruction as cities (or organized societies).
It is the eternal or irrevocable destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah as organized
societies (cities) that serves as an example of what will happen to the
wicked as individuals on judgment day. That is the point of Jude 7.
Doesn't Ezekiel 16:53 teach that Sodom would be re-built someday? No. Bible
expositor Matthew Henry says concerning this verse: "some think that what is
said of the return of Sodom and Samaria (v. 53, 55), and of Jerusalem with them,
is a promise; it may be understood so, if by Sodom we understand (as Grotius
and some of the Jewish writers do) the Moabites and Ammonites, the posterity
of Lot, who once dwelt in Sodom; their captivity was returned (Jer. 48:47; 49:6),
as was that of many of the ten tribes, and Judah’s with them." This interpretation
must be the case since Jude 7 clearly teaches of Sodom's irrevocable destruction
as a city. Sometimes in Scripture, "Sodom" as well as the names of some other
ancient cities are used figuratively to describe those who rebel against God.
Jerusalem, because of its rejection of Christ, is referred to as "Sodom" in
Revelation 11:28 (the verse describes "Sodom" as the city where the Lord (Christ)
was murdered or slain which, of course, is Jerusalem).
Even the words "forever" and "everlasting" in Scripture can have different meanings.
In Scripture, the word "forever" or "everlasting" does not always mean endless
or eternal duration. The word "forever" or "everlasting" in Scripture means
the entire length or duration of the nature of something. If the nature
of something is immortal, then the word "forever" must mean eternity but if
the nature of a something is only temporal, then the word "forever" cannot mean
eternity. For example, we read in Exodus 21:6 that certain servants were to
serve their masters forever. Certainly, this cannot mean for eternity!
Instead, it must mean the entire life spans of the servants. In some passages
of Scripture, the word for "everlasting" or "forever" in the original language
has been translated as "long" or "old" by Bible translators. This is true not
only for the King James Version but also for other versions of the Bible. Therefore,
since the words "forever" and "everlasting" in Scripture can mean either eternity
or the entire temporal length, duration, or age of a thing our only way of determining
which meaning applies is by studying the context of Scripture.
Another example is in Jude 6 we read the angels "which kept not their first
estate are reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto
the judgment of the great day." As John L. Bray says, "How long does the word
'everlasting' represent here? Only 'unto' (or until) the time of their judgment
at the great day. They were to be cast ultimately into the lake of fire (Matthew
25:41) which fire is 'everlasting' ('aionios' --pertaining in this case to that
age to come). The everlasting chains pertained to one age, while the everlasting
fire pertained to another age." Since the wicked in hell will not be immortal
and the Scripture says that they will ultimately be destroyed, then their conscious
suffering cannot be eternal. Their conscious suffering (which precedes their
eternal destruction) is "forever" only in the sense that they will suffer for
their individual sins for the entire duration or period of this phase
of judgment after which they will suffer eternal destruction (or death) which
is the ultimate penalty for sin itself.
What about the phrase "forever and ever" in Scripture? The same principle applies
here. The reason for why the word "ever" is used a second time in the phrase
is for the purpose of emphasis. This is common in Biblical language such as
when Christ, in the Gospels, frequently uses the phrase, "Verily, verily I say
unto you..." The second use of the word "verily" in the phrase is strictly for
emphasis. The second use of these words does not, in any way, add to the meaning
or length of the first "verily" or the first "forever" in the phrases.
Even the Devil (Satan) will be eternally annihilated or destroyed. We read a
description of Satan's ultimate eternal annihilation or destruction in Ezekiel
28:14-19. Although this passage is immediately addressed to the ancient King
of Tyre (verse 11), it is clear from the context of the passage that God is
speaking to Satan (the evil spirit behind the King of Tyre) because the descriptions
given cannot fit that of any human being or human king. In fact, the passage
says that the Devil will be "no more" (verse 19). Is there any stronger language
for annihilation or destruction?
Regarding now the justice of God, we must acknowledge that God is absolutely
sovereign. God can satisfy His eternal holiness and justice in whatever way
He pleases. God's holy and righteous wrath is not an end in itself, but
rather God's holy and righteous wrath is a means to an end - that end
being the total destruction of both sin and sinner. It is in this way
that God's eternal justice is glorified. A righteous and holy God will not allow
both sin and sinner to exist for eternity. According to Ephesians 1: 9- 11 God's
ultimate purpose is a universe which is in total harmony with His moral character
and nature, and when this happens God will be "all in all" (1 Corinthians 15:28).
But how can this be if those in Gahanna (the Lake of Fire) continue for eternity
in conscious sin and rebellion against God? In addition, we must ever keep in
mind that although God is just He is not cruel. If eternal conscious
torment of the wicked is not necessary to satisfy God's eternal justice then
to inflict such conscious torment for eternity upon all the unsaved whether
young or old would be a great form of cruelty and torture. Such cruelty and
torture are characteristics of the pagan gods towards their enemies.
The lovely and beautiful character of the true God must not be marred
by unbiblical and corrupt notions of hell. Far from God's glory being diminished,
the Biblical truth and doctrine of eternal annihilation of the wicked supremely
glorifies God's eternal justice in the eternal destruction of both sin and sinner.
The fact that God does not punish beyond what is necessary also greatly glorifies
His lovely character in the administration of His eternal justice. Glory be
to God! Again, I say, Glory be to God!
But, if all men are created in the image of God does it not then follow that
all men must be as immortal as God? Being created in the image of God does not
necessarily mean we must possess anything and everything that God possess. God
is all-powerful is He not? Does that then mean man must also be all-powerful
because man is created in God's image? Theologians refer to the attributes of
God as communicable (that which can be transferred to the creature) and
incommunicable (that which cannot be transferred to the creature). But,
even this does not mean that all of God's communicable attributes must be communicated
or transferred to those created in His image. The Bible is clear that immortality
(an attribute of God) is communicable but will not be communicated (given) to
humans except on Resurrection Day and then only to those who have placed their
faith in Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior. The fact is it is precisely
because man is created in God's divine image and because God infinitely
respects His image that He will not all allow sinful man to bear that image
for eternity. God will not allow those whom He created in His image to exist
for eternity in sin for that would just be a mockery of His image!
We must base our views of hell and the afterlife on what the Bible teaches,
not on tradition or mere human philosophies and opinions. We must not impose
our philosophy of what God ought to be upon Holy Scripture! Not many
people realize the fact that in the New Testament there are different Greek
words for the word "hell." But unfortunately, the English Bible translates these
different words for hell as one word, and this has been a cause of much confusion
for those who wish to study the subject. The New Testament Greek words for hell
are "Hades" and "Gahanna" and they both have different meanings. Hades means
the unseen world of the dead and is only a temporary abode. It has nothing
to do with punishment or reward. It is equivalent to the Hebrew word "sheol"
in the Old Testament in its meaning. Gehenna, on the other hand, is the abode
of punishment for the wicked.
The story of the Rich Man and Lazarus in Luke 16 has often been used by many
Christians, especially preachers, as a depiction of the punishment that the
wicked will suffer in hell. But this is not the case. In the first place when
Jesus refers to the Rich Man being in torment in the flame of hell the Greek
word for "hell" in the passage is not "Gahanna" (the place of final and
eternal punishment), but rather it is the Greek word "Hades" (which in Scripture
is the temporary abode of the dead).
The story of the Rich Man and Lazarus, like the other series of parables before
it, was used of the Lord to illustrate or depict the end of the rule of the
Pharisees and to depict the end of the Jewish Era and dispensation (as represented
by the Rich Man being in torment) and it was also used of the Lord to depict
or illustrate the elevation of Gentile Christendom (as represented by Lazarus).
Actually, Lazarus represented the poor Jews of Jesus' time who were ignored
by the self-righteous religious leaders of Israel and he also represented the
gentiles who, although rejected by the Jewish leaders, would nevertheless be
accepted into the bosom of Abraham through their new found faith in Jesus Christ
as the Messiah. The religious leaders of Israel had lived only for themselves
and ignored the spiritual needs of the spiritually sick and starving people
around them.
The concept that Hades was a place divided into two compartments, one of suffering
for the wicked and the other of bliss for the righteous, was a Jewish belief
that had developed during the intertestamental period, the period of time in
between when the Old and New Testaments were written. Thus, this particular
view of Hades was not canonical, that is it was not something that God Himself
had revealed to the Jews through Scripture. There is no evidence in Scripture
that Hades is a place where the wicked suffer while awaiting final judgment
in Gahanna (the Lake of Fire). Such a concept of Hades developed as a result
of ancient Greek influences on Jewish thinking about the nature of the soul.
In the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus, Jesus was simply borrowing this
popular Jewish folklore of Hades to use as an illustration to make a point to
the Pharisees and religious leaders of His day, but He was not necessarily endorsing
the folklore as being doctrinally valid or correct. There are various passages
in the Old Testament, such as in Psalms, that tell us that there is no consciousness
in sheol (the Hebrew equivalent of Hades in the Old Testament).
Some argue that the story of the Rich Man and Lazarus is not a parable because
Jesus did not formally introduce it as a parable. But, Jesus did not always
formally introduce His stories as parables, and there are various examples of
that in the Gospels. Now, it is true that in His parables Jesus used things
that actually existed to fill in for illustrations and figures, but in the particular
case of the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus the Lord used a popular existing
Jewish myth about Hades for the purposes of constructing a story.
Christian pastor and teacher Al Maxey makes some interesting comments concerning
the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus:
"In the story, then, of the rich man and Lazarus, Jesus has put them down (the
Pharisees and religious rulers) with one of their own superstitions. ... He
used their own ideas to condemn them. ... It is simply a case of taking what
others believe, practice, or say, and using it to condemn them" (Sidney Hatch,
Daring To Differ: Adventures in Conditional Immortality, p. 91). "Since the
elements of the story are taken from the Pharisees' own traditions, they are
judged out of their own mouths" (ibid, p. 92).
It should be noted that the apostle Paul employed a similar device when he sought
to impress upon certain Corinthian brethren the truth regarding the resurrection,
and spoke of their practice of baptism for the dead. By speaking of this practice
in his own teaching, and by not condemning it, Paul was certainly not thereby
endorsing it. Rather, he merely used a practice then current among certain readers,
to whom he was addressing his remarks, to drive home an eternal truth to their
hearts and minds (1 Corinthians 15:29).
Another
similar situation occurs in John 9:1-3. With regard to a man born blind, the
disciples asked Jesus, "Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he
should be born blind?" Some of the Jews (thanks to Hellenistic influence on
Jewish theology with regard to the pagan doctrines of the preexistence & immortality
of souls) believed souls existed prior to their being placed in a physical body
at birth. Thus, these preexistent souls could sin during this prior life, for
which they would be punished during the present life (possibly by being born
with some infirmity or deformity). Oddly enough, Jesus did not speak out against
this pagan notion, but merely instructed His disciples that neither this man
nor his parents had sinned so as to cause Him to be born blind. Contrary to
what some might think, Jesus did not go around debunking every Jewish or pagan
myth that had arisen in their theology due to pagan influence.... Indeed, He
at times seems to have used them in His dialogue with such persons to convey
deeper eternal realities. This is exactly what I believe is being done with
the parable of the rich man and the poor beggar.
A far more important reason for regarding the story of the rich man and Lazarus
as figurative rather than literal/historical, however, is the obvious conflict
with the inspired Scriptures that occurs when it is regarded as an actual account
of real people and real events. These, in my estimation, are extremely serious
contradictions with revealed Truth"(Al Maxey's website may be accessed at
www.zianet.com/maxey).
Although eternal life in Scripture means more than just eternal existence, it
must, at least, include eternal existence. Eternal life comes as a package,
which includes endless glory, honor, joy, and bliss. The eternal punishment
of the wicked will be just the opposite, the loss, the eternal and irrevocable
loss of eternal existence along with its glory, honor, bliss, and joy. Because
Jesus Christ paid the penalty for our sins God, (the Father) can be just in
forgiving our sins and granting us immortality and eternal life when we genuinely
repent and put our faith and trust in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. That
is why the Bible says that Jesus Christ "hath abolished death, and hath brought
life and immortality to light through the gospel" (2 Timothy 1:10).
The Bible further says in John 3:16 "For God so loved the world, that He gave
His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish (be
eternally destroyed), but have everlasting life (immortality with eternal glory
and honor, cf. Romans 2:7)."
Again, the crux of the issue revolves around whether or not all humans will
be immortal. In Genesis 2:17 God told Adam not to eat the fruit of a certain
tree (the tree of the knowledge of good and evil) and God also told Adam that
if he did eat of it he would die on that day. Specifically, God said to Adam,
"For in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." But the Biblical
record shows that Adam did not physically die on the very day he disobeyed God
and ate of the forbidden fruit. Because Adam did not physically die on the very
day that he disobeyed God, many Christians think that God was referring to spiritual
death and not physical death.
However, in the original Hebrew, in which the Old Testament was written, the
grammatical tense of the word "die" in Genesis 2:17 is in the imperfect mood.
The imperfect mood denotes a process. Thus, what God was actually saying to
Adam is that he would start dying on the day he ate the forbidden fruit.
The literal translation from the Hebrew of what God said to Adam is: "Dying
you will die." God was not, therefore, referring to spiritual death but to physical
death. The fact that God later prevented Adam and Eve from having access to
the tree of life (Genesis 3:22-24) so that they would not live eternally proves
that God was referring to physical death and not spiritual death. The penalty
for sin, then, is the death of both soul and body so that man will not
live forever in sin. A holy God will not allow men who are created in His image
to exist in sin for eternity! This contradicts the traditional doctrine
or teaching of hell, taught in most churches, that the wicked will have an eternal
body and soul, which will burn forever in the flames of hell.
Evangelist John L. Bray gives an interesting commentary on this phrase: "that
in the day thou doeth such and such, thou shalt surely die," is an idiom understood
by the Hebrew people, and it meant "in the day you do such and such, know for
certain that you will die." The day the action took place determined what would
result later; it was settled (emphasis mine) on the day the action took
place."
"When God said to Adam, 'For in the day that thou eatest thereof, thou shalt
surely die (Genesis 2:17), He meant that on the very day that Adam committed
that first act of disobedience, on that day his death was certain, regardless
of how long it was until he actually died." Evangelist Bray points out that
it is with this meaning that the phrase is used in other parts of Scripture
such as when King Solomon told Shimei (his father David's old adversary) "to
build a house in Jerusalem and to live there and not to go anywhere else, but
to stay there. He (Solomon) said, 'For it shall be, that on the day thou goest
out, and passest over the brook Kidron, thou shalt know for certain that thou
shalt surely die' (1 Kings 2:37)." The biblical record shows that Shimei did
disobey Solomon and that Solomon did put him to death, although Shimei's death
did not happen on that very day he disobeyed Solomon.
Another passage in Scripture which is used (or I should say misused) to support
the traditional teaching of hell is Daniel 12:2. GJ Griz in commenting on Daniel
12:2 (my comments and interpretations are in brackets) says, "Gabriel
tells Daniel that some will awaken to shame and everlasting contempt. The Hebrew
word for 'contempt' [or "disgust"] in Daniel 12:2 also appears in Isaiah 66:24
[where the word is used in the context of disgust expressed by onlookers as
they view the dead bodies or corpses of those slain in battle Thus, this verse
probably expresses how the faithful will look upon the corpses of the wicked
in that final day of judgment]. Isaiah says abhorrence while Daniel says
contempt. [In any case, it is the word "everlasting" that is at issue
here]. The Hebrew word 'owlam' is translated 'everlasting' in Daniel 12:2. In
many other passages, it does not mean throughout eternity [but rather the entire
age or period of something that is temporal and not permanent]. The wicked will
be completely destroyed! Although there will always be a general memory of the
wicked and their end (after all the record of Scripture will exist for eternity),
what there will no longer be is anymore fearful memory and experience of the
pain, oppression, and injustice of the wicked, for they will be no more.
Why does 1 Corinthians 1:18 use the present tense for the word "perish"
in describing those who ultimately reject the Gospel? If their time to perish
is in the future, on Judgment Day, why is the present tense used. The word "perish"
is in the present tense because those who ultimately reject the Gospel are in
a sense already perishing (dying) physically under the sentence of death until
one day they will permanently perish (or die). Their permanent death will not
occur until after they are resurrected from their earthly death to face final
judgment. Of course, it is true that believers in this life are also physically
dying (perishing) daily as the Apostle Paul says in 2 Corinthians 4:16 where
concerning believers Paul says that even though the outward man is perishing
the inward man is being renewed daily. In the context of believers, however,
their perishing is only temporary because it will not ultimately end in permanent
physical death but instead in glorious physical resurrection to immortality
and eternal life.
Many Christians find it difficult to believe that the soul as well as the body
can die. The soul, they say, can live on and be conscious even after the body
decays into the dust. Christians generally believe that Jesus confirmed the
existence of consciousness in Hades because of what He said to the repentant
thief who also was dying on a cross beside Him. But it must be kept in mind
that in the Greek manuscripts of the New Testament there were no punctuation
marks such as commas. The punctuation marks found in our English Bibles, for
example, were provided by the translators. So depending upon where the comma
actually is in a sentence can change the entire meaning of the sentence.
The passage in Luke 23:43 of the English Bible is translated with the comma
before the word "today" so that Jesus is saying to the repentant thief, "Verily
I say unto thee, today shalt thou be with Me in paradise." It gives the meaning
that the thief would join Jesus in paradise on that very day. But what if the
comma in the sentence is placed after the word "today." Then the sentence that
Jesus said would read, "Verily I say unto thee today, thou shalt be with Me
in paradise." It changes the entire meaning of the sentence. Then Jesus is not
necessarily saying that the repentant thief would join Him in paradise on that
very day. The Bible repeatedly refers to Christians who had died as being "asleep"
indicating that their death is only temporary since they will one day be resurrected
to immortality and eternal life.
But if there is no consciousness for the dead until Resurrection Day why did
the Apostle Paul say that he desires "to depart, and to be present with Christ"
(Philippians 1:23). However, in 2 Corinthians 5 Paul defines that to be absent
from the body and present with the Lord means to be clothed in our resurrected
bodies. Paul didn't mind death because he knew that the next conscious thing
that he would experience after death would be joyful and perfect eternal fellowship
with Christ at the Resurrection. This is why the early Christians thought so
much about the meaning of Easter and its resurrection significance. If the early
Christians believed that they would be in the presence of Christ immediately
after death, as most Christians believe today, then the coming of Christ again
on Resurrection Day would not have had as much meaning or value for them. But,
in any case, even if the soul did survive the death of the body this would still
not necessarily mean that the soul is immortal.
In regard to the last book of the Bible, the book of Revelation, and its contents
regarding the final judgment several important points need to be kept in mind
for a proper interpretation of this most difficult-to-interpret book of the
Bible.
The first point to realize is that Revelation is a book filled with symbolic
language, and, therefore, the book is not to be interpreted literally. The book
itself tells us not to interpret it literally. In the very first verse of the
very first chapter we read, "The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God (the
Father) gave unto Him, to show unto His servants things which must shortly come
to pass; and He sent and signified it by His angel unto His servant John"
(Revelation 1:1). The word "signified" in the passage comes from a Greek word
meaning "signs" or "symbols."
Much of the symbolism in Revelation can be decoded by examining how these symbols
are used in other parts of Scripture, particularly in the Old Testament. The
Old Testament book of Daniel is very valuable for this purpose because many
of the prophecies in the book of Daniel overlap with those found in the book
of Revelation. For example, the "beast" mentioned in the book of Daniel represents
a great political power, or empire, or kingdom. This same figure of the beast
is used in Revelation. From the context and language of Revelation, we can surmise
that the figures of the beast and the false prophet are symbolic of political
power and apostate religious beguilement. The point is that the beast and false
prophet are not literal individuals or persons, and, therefore, when they are
eventually cast into the Lake of Fire we must not think that they are experiencing
conscious torment. As we shall see later, the Lake of Fire in Revelation stands
for annihilation. If that is so then why does Revelation 20:10 say that the
beast and the false prophet are in the Lake of Fire when the Devil is
finally cast in there after a thousand years? The word "are" is not found in
the ancient Greek manuscripts of the New Testament but, instead, the word was
inserted by English translators. That is why the word "are" is in italics in
the King James Version. Words in italics in the King James Version indicate
that the words were supplied by the translators. So, we can just as easily translate
the passage to mean that the Devil was cast into the Lake of Fire where the
beast and false prophet were. In fact, the Greek word for "are" (eisi)
can be translated as: are, be, were, etc. But, even if we grant the use of the
word "are" the verse can still be interpreted to mean that the beast and false
prophet continued to remain in a state of annihilation at the time the Devil
was cast into the Lake.
That the Lake of Fire stands for annihilation is indisputable because Revelation
20:14 states, unequivocally, that the Lake of Fire is the second
death. What is the second death? Well, it is certainly not spiritual
death because those cast into the Lake of Fire (i.e the wicked on judgment day)
were already spiritually dead. The difference between the first death
and the second death is that the first death is temporary since everyone, the
righteous and the wicked, will be resurrected in the Last Day to face final
judgment. The book of Daniel tells us that the righteous and the wicked will
all be resurrected on the same day. The second death, on the other hand,
is eternal (or permanent) with no resurrection to follow. Only the wicked will
experience the second death. It is not the punishing, which is eternal,
but rather the punishment, which is the eternal and permanent cessation
of being. The wicked will experience the second death after they suffer consciously
for their individual guilt and sins.
As for phrases used in the Bible in regard to the end of the wicked that they
will go to a place "where their worm dieth not, and where the fire is not quenched"
these are two different ways of saying the same thing, that these agents of
destruction, the fire and the worm, will not cease until they have done their
work of complete and total destruction.
Contrary to popular belief and interpretation the phrase in Scripture, "where
their worm dieth not" is not a reference to the undying human soul or conscience.
We have already seen statements in Scripture that God will destroy, not preserve
or keep alive, the bodies and souls of the wicked in the Day of Judgment. The
worm and fire were figures that people in Jesus' time could readily identify
and understand because in that time the dead bodies of those who suffered dishonor
in society were thrown into a valley where fire and worms devoured these bodies.
Phrases such as "gnashing of teeth" used in Scripture to describe the end of
the wicked have also been misinterpreted. Wherever Scripture uses "gnashing
of teeth" such as in Acts 7 it is always in the context of the wicked being
angry or jealous of the righteous. In the Day of Judgment when the wicked see
the ultimate blessed and happy state of the righteous they will, indeed, weep,
wail, and gnash their teeth as they realize what they have lost and as they
are finally destroyed and cease to exist forever. The weeping and wailing will
be similar to the bitter weeping that Esau, in the Old Testament, experienced
when he realized what he lost by selling his birthright and inheritance to Jacob
for a mess of porridge. So, too, the wicked in hell will weep and wail bitterly,
even while they are being destroyed, when they realize what happiness and bliss
of heaven they had given up because they chose to live their lives on earth
for only money and themselves.
It may surprise many to know that the Bible teaches animals as having souls.
In the Old Testament, for example, the Hebrew word for "soul" ("nephesh") is
used for both animal and man. For example, Genesis 1:21 says: "And God created
great whales, and every living creature that moveth ..." The words "living creature"
are from the Hebrew words "nephesh chaiyah". The same Hebrew words are used
in Genesis 2:7 where we read concerning the creation of man that after God had
created man from the dust of the earth He then breathed into man the breath
of life and man became a "living soul" ("nephesh chaiyah"). The breath of life
itself was not the soul, but, rather, Scripture teaches that man became
a living soul as the result of God breathing into him the breath of life. The
definition of "soul" actually varies according to the context of Scripture.
The basic meaning of "soul" in Scripture refers to the mind or conscious nature
in animals and man, but the word also is used specifically in various passages
of Scripture in reference to the will, thoughts, emotions, and affections. The
New Testament Greek word for "soul" is "psuche" and it is equivalent in meaning
to the Old Testament word "nephesh". The soul may very well be physical but
yet distinct from the rest of the body. If the soul is physical then it is distinct
from all other forms of non-conscious matter or energy. The Scriptures teach
that both humans and animals are constituted with spirit (a life-giving force),
soul, and body. Even if the soul isn't physical, it would not necessarily mean
that soul is immortal. Immortality must be given by God Who alone is the ultimate
Source and Sustainer of all things. It is very humbling to realize that we humans
were created as mortal as the animals. Only those who have put their faith in
Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior who will ultimately have immortality of soul
and body on Resurrection Day.
The question naturally arises whether the teaching of eternal annihilation would
be an effective deterrent to sin as in contrast to the teaching of eternal suffering.
Here, of course, we are entering into philosophy and human reasoning rather
than Scripture alone.
Nevertheless, let us briefly talk philosophy. First, let it be said that God
is more concerned about a person doing what is right because he or she genuinely
wants to rather than just because of punishment alone. A person's reasons for
repentance should include genuine sorrow over sin. In fact, in contrast to fear,
the Bible teaches that the goodness of God is meant to lead people to
repentance! (Romans 2:4).
Also,
the teaching of eternal suffering will never be an effective deterrent to sin
if people do not believe that God would really inflict such a thing. They believe
that after seeing souls suffer for a long time God would change His mind and
admit them into heaven after all.
On the other hand, the prospect that those who go to hell will suffer for their
sins and then be eternally destroyed so that they do not exist anymore is far
more believable, and, therefore, a far more effective deterrent to sin. If people
are convinced that there really is an eternity of bliss and joy to lose that
in itself is a powerful thought and deterrent to sin, whatever they might or
might not believe about eternal suffering.
Finally, whether or not people genuinely repent at least they can respect God's
justice and character if His eternal punishment does not consist of eternally
tormenting those who go to hell. Such respect alone brings God great honor and
glory.
What about those who are unsaved but who are suffering and are in misery in
this life? If the ultimate and eternal annihilation, or destruction, of soul
and body of the unsaved is true, then isn't the eternal loss of life for such
people really a reward since they will no longer exist in misery?
Well, let's look at another example. There are some individuals in society who
having been released from prison cannot or will not become adjusted to civilian
life. Some of these persons have been known to commit crimes again so that they
may go back to prison where they feel life would be better. Does this then mean
that prison is no longer punishment for these people? Of course, not! So, too,
it does not mean that eternal literal destruction of soul and body is not punishment
simply because it is a better state than eternal life in misery.
From God's perspective (the only perspective that counts), life is a gift and
meant to exist only when in harmony with His will. A thrice-holy God will not
allow sin to exist for eternity by keeping sinners alive for eternity. God has
ordained temporary existence of sin and the life of the sinner for various purposes,
but it is not in His eternal and ultimate purpose to do so.
What is punishment and not punishment is ultimately from God's perspective and
view, not what we necessarily think. I may hit my toe accidentally against the
leg of a table and suffer terrible pain, but having such, pain does not necessarily
mean I am in a state of punishment. Conversely, the lack of pain does not necessarily
mean absence of punishment. For example, when a murderer receives the death
penalty from society he or she no longer experiences pain, at least not from
society. Does this then mean that society did not punish the murderer since
the murderer having died no longer experiences any more pain inflicted by society?
The theological lesson to learn from all this is that it is God's Word that
is to be our ultimate authority on the issue of punishment and not our philosophy!
Christians throughout history, regardless of denomination, have always agreed
on the essential (core), or primary, doctrines of Christianity, especially regarding
the Person and redemptive work of Jesus Christ. Where Christians have had differences
in beliefs such differences have been in matters of secondary doctrine. What
has been discussed in this essay, as important as it may be, is a matter of
secondary doctrine. Some cults and non-Christian religions may have some correct
secondary doctrines, but their primary doctrines about God and, specifically,
the Person and work of Jesus Christ are wrong and incorrect.
Finally, one very important question arises that needs to be answered. If Jesus
Christ was truly God how then could He completely die (in body and soul)
since the Scriptures teach that God is immutable (unchanging). In answer to
this question, it is important to understand that everything about God, including
His immutability and His very existence itself, is dependent upon His moral
nature. God's immutability is conditional upon His moral nature. In fact,
it would be theologically safe to say that the only thing about God that cannot
change at all is His moral nature. Thus, it is only God's moral nature, which
is truly unconditionally immutable. In the context of Scripture, when
God says "I am the Lord. I change not" (Malachi 3:6) it is in reference to His
moral being and nature. Whatever God can do or cannot do is governed
by His moral constitution or nature. For example, the Scripture says in Hebrews
6:18 that it is impossible for God to lie. Thus, when Scripture tells
us elsewhere that with God all things are possible it must be understood
from the context of comparing Scripture with Scripture that only all things
are possible with God, which are not contradictory to His moral nature.
In other words, God is only as immutable as His moral nature allows Him to be.
What does all this mean? It means that when God the Son (Jesus Christ) took
the legal guilt and liability for our sins on the Cross then His divine moral
nature required that He die since the penalty for sin is death. As He had to
be true to His moral nature, the Son gave up His life. It is precisely because
of the immutability of His moral nature that Christ (Who is God) died when He
took the guilt of our sins! Because He was God, Christ's death had infinite
value so that it was not necessary for Him to remain dead for eternity in order
for His death to satisfy the full penalty for our sins.
However, although Jesus was God, if He had truly died completely (body and soul),
how could He have raised His own body from the grave as He said He would. There
are two possible answers. One is that when His soul was given back its life
Christ then entered His own body and raised it up from the grave. The other
possible answer is in understanding what Jesus said about His authority over
His own life and death. Jesus said that the Father had given to Him authority
to lay down His life and to have His life raised from the dead (John 10:11-18).
Shortly before Jesus died, He exercised this authority by entrusting to His
Father His spirit (not the Holy Spirit in this case but rather the spirit, which
is the principle of life, the breath of life). Remember His words on the Cross,
"Father into Thy hands I commend My spirit" (Luke 23:46). By doing this, He
gave authority for death to overtake Him on account of our sins for which He
died but He also had delegated His right and authority over His own life to
the Father to raise Him up from the dead. In this way, Jesus was very much responsible
for both His own death and resurrection. What great love and condescension the
Son of God subjected Himself to on our behalf! The reader is urged to
examine in more detail the Biblical fact of Christ's Godhood and deity in the
author's essay
The Deity
of Jesus Christ Explained and Defended.
For more comprehensive and further reading on the subject of conditional immortality,
the reader is urged to obtain a copy of Edward Fudge's excellent book
The Fire That Consumes. The book is forwarded by the great evangelical
scholar F.F.Bruce.
For
those interested in a Biblical study of the almost forgotten Preterist
view and interpretation of Bible prophecy concerning the second coming of our
Lord and Savior Jesus Christ please contact Evangelist John L. Bray at: P.O.
Box 90129, Lakeland, Florida 33804. Evangelist Bray has written books, pamphlets,
and numerous articles on preterism. Also,
Preterism-Eschatology contains
much useful information of interest concerning preterism and the various preterist
interpretations of Bible prophecy. Of course, please understand that by sharing
these sites I am not necessarily endorsing all of the preterist interpretations
and views expressed in them.
as of 12-2006