v2 n4. Do Souls Go to Heaven?

While the Jehovah’s Witnesses and other adventists are labeled cultists because they say that the soul does not go to heaven when a person dies, the records of early church history are testimony to the fact that “orthodoxy” is the real culprit.

Did the early church teach the separation of a conscious soul from its body at the moment of death and its immediate departure to heaven? (I am not here discussing the condition of the soul as church fathers understood it, but the question of its immediate location following death.)

Here are the words of Irenaeus of the mid-second century (Against Heresies, Bk. 5): “Some who are reckoned among the orthodox go beyond the prearranged plan for the exaltation of the just, and are ignorant of the methods by which they are disciplined beforehand for incorruption. They thus entertain heretical opinions. For the heretics, not admitting the salvation of their flesh, affirm that immediately upon their death they shall pass above the heavens. [Note that it is the “heretics” who teach that the soul goes immediately to heaven at death. Today, according to present orthodoxy, it is the heretics who teach that souls do not go immediately to heaven or hell. This makes Irenaeus as well as John Wesley a heretic — see quotation above!] Those persons, therefore, who reject a resurrection affecting the whole man, and do their best to remove it from the Christian scheme, know nothing as to the plan of resurrection. For they do not choose to understand that, if these things are as they say, the Lord Himself, in Whom they profess to believe, did not rise again on the third day, but immediately upon his expiring departed on high, leaving His body in the earth. But the facts are that for three days, the Lord dwelt in the place where the dead were, as Jonas remained three days and three nights in the whale’s belly (Matt. 12:40)…David says, when prophesying of Him: ‘Thou hast delivered my soul from the nethermost hell (grave).’ And on rising the third day, He said to Mary, ‘Touch me not, for I have not yet ascended to my Father’ (John 20:17)…How then must not these men be put to confusion, who allege…that their inner man [soul], leaving the body here, ascends into the super-celestial place? [Irenaeus thus reckons today’s teaching as shameful!] For as the Lord ‘went away in the midst of the shadow of death’ (Ps. 86: 23), where the souls of the dead were, and afterwards arose in the body, and after the resurrection was taken up into heaven, it is obvious that the souls of His disciples also…shall go away into the invisible place [Hades]…and there remain until the resurrection, awaiting that event. Then receiving their bodies, and rising in their entirety, bodily, just as the Lord rose, they shall come thus into the presence of God. As our Master did not at once take flight to heaven, but awaited the time of His resurrection…, so we ought also to await the time of our resurrection.

“Inasmuch, therefore, as the opinions of certain orthodox persons are derived from heretical discourses, they are both ignorant of God’s dispensations, of the mystery of the resurrection of the just, and of the earthly kingdom which is the beginning of incorruption; by means of this kingdom those who shall be worthy are accustomed gradually to partake of the divine nature.”

Irenaeus thus condemns the whole “orthodox” tradition about what happens at death, the tradition, that is, which eventually swamped the biblical teaching, from the third century onwards.

The protest of Justin Martyr against what later became orthodoxy, and remains so to this day, is no less incisive (Dialogue with Trypho, ch. 80): “They who maintain the wrong opinion say that there is no resurrection of the flesh…As in the case of a yoke of oxen, if one or other is loosed from the yoke, neither of them can plough alone; so neither can soul or body alone effect anything, if they be unyoked from their communion [i.e. the soul can have no separate, active existence]…For what is man but the reasonable animal composed of body and soul? Is the soul by itself man? No; but the soul of man. Would the body be called man? No; but it is called the body of man. If then neither of these is by itself man, but that which is made up of the two together is called man, and God has called man to life and resurrection, He has called not a part, but the whole, which is the soul and body…Well, they say, the soul is incorruptible, being a part of God and inspired by Him…Then what thanks are due to Him, and what manifestation of His power and goodness is it, if He purposed to save what is by nature saved…but no thanks are due to one who saves what is his own; for this is to save himself…How then did Christ raise the dead? Their souls or their bodies? Manifestly both. If the resurrection were only spiritual, it was requisite that He, in raising the dead, should show the body lying apart by itself, and the soul living apart by itself. But now He did not do so, but raised the body…Why do we any longer endure those unbelieving arguments and fail to see that we are retrograding when we listen to such an argument as this: That the soul is immortal, but the body mortal, and incapable of being revived. For this we used to hear from Plato, even before we learned the truth. If then the Saviour said this and proclaimed salvation to the soul alone, what new thing beyond what we heard from Plato, did He bring us?”

Justin thus implies that teaching an immediate survival of the soul in heaven or hell is Platonism not Christianity.

Justin is here refuting the arguments of Gnosticism which denied the resurrection of the flesh. Traditional Christianity has taken a similar, but slightly different tack by including in the creed a belief in the resurrection of the body, while also teaching an immediate salvation of the soul alone in a conscious, disembodied state. This is said to be the real person, albeit disembodied. Such an idea is flatly contradicted by Justin and Irenaeus and is identified by them as pagan.

Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho:

Trypho: “Do you really admit that this place Jerusalem shall be rebuilt? And do you expect your people to be gathered together, and made joyful with Christ and the Patriarchs...?”

Justin: “I and many others are of that opinion, and believe that this will take place, as you are assuredly aware; but on the other hand, I signified to you that many who belong to the pure and pious faith think otherwise. Moreover I pointed out to you that some who are called Christians, but are godless, impious heretics, teach doctrines that are in every way blasphemous, atheistical and foolish…I choose to follow not men or men’s teachings, but God and the doctrines delivered by Him. For if you have fallen with some who are called Christians, but who do not admit the truth of the resurrection…who say that there is no resurrection of the dead, and that their souls when they die are taken to heaven, do not imagine that they are Christians…But I and others who are right-minded Christians on all points are assured that there will be a resurrection of the dead, and a thousand years in Jerusalem, which will then be built, adorned and enlarged, as the prophets Ezekiel, Isaiah and others declare…We have perceived, moreover, that the expression, ‘The Day of the Lord,’ is connected with this subject. And further, there was a certain man with us, whose name was John, one of the Apostles of Christ, who prophesied by a revelation that was made to him that those who believed in our Christ would dwell a thousand years in Jerusalem; and that thereafter the general and the eternal resurrection of all men would take place.”

Justin’s Statement on the Intermediate State (in full) (ca 150 AD)

“For if you have fallen in with some who are called Christians, but who do not admit the Truth of the resurrection and venture to blaspheme the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; who say that there is no resurrection of the dead, and that their souls when they die are taken to heaven: do not imagine that they are Christians; just as one, if he would rightly consider it would not admit that the Sadducees, or similar sects of the Genistae, Meristae, Galilaeans, Hellenists, Pharisees, Baptists, are Jews, but are only called Jews, worshipping God with the lips, as God declared, but the heart was far from Him. But I and others, who are right-minded Christians on all points, are assured that there will be a resurrection of the dead, and a thousand years in Jerusalem, which will then be built, adorned and enlarged, as the prophets Ezekiel and Isaiah and others declare” (Dialogue with Trypho, ch. 80, Anti-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1, Eerdmans, p. 239).

The Latin church father Tertullian (often known as the father of Western Christianity) is another who would disagree strongly with modern “orthodoxy” about what happens to the soul at death. He protested against the idea that the soul leaves the body at death and goes to heaven: “Plato...dispatches at once to heaven such souls as he pleases…To the question, whither the soul is withdrawn [at death] we now give the answer…The Stoics place only their own souls, that is, the souls of the wise, in the mansions above. Plato, it is true, does not allow this destination to all the souls, indiscriminately, of even all the philosophers, but only those who have cultivated their philosophy out of love to boys [homosexuals]…In this system, then, the souls of the wise are carried up on high into the ether…All other souls they thrust down to Hades.

“By ourselves the lower regions of Hades are not supposed to be a bare cavity, nor some subterranean sewer of the world, but a vast deep space in the interior of the earth, and a concealed recess in its very bowels; inasmuch as we read that Christ in His death spent three days in the heart of the earth, that is, in the secret inner recess which is hidden in the earth, and enclosed by the earth, and superimposed on the abysmal depths which lie still lower down. Now although Christ is God, yet, being also man, ‘He died according to the Scriptures (I Cor. 15:3) and ‘according to the same Scriptures was buried.’ With the same law of His being He fully complied, by remaining in Hades in the form and condition of a dead man; nor did He ascend into the heights of heaven before descending into the lower parts of the earth, that He might there make the patriarchs and prophets partakers of Himself. [Nothing is said in the Bible about Jesus altering the condition of the Patriarchs while he was in Hades,] This being the case you must suppose Hades to be a subterranean region and keep at arm’s length those who are too proud to believe that the souls of the faithful deserve a place in the lower regions. These persons who are ‘servants above their Lord, and disciples above their Master,’ would no doubt spurn to receive the comfort of the resurrection, if they must expect it in Abraham’s bosom. But it was for this purpose, say they, that Christ descended into hell, that we might not ourselves have to descend thither. Well, then [they say], what difference is there between heathens and Christians, if the same prison awaits them all when dead? [But I say], How, indeed, shall the soul mount up to heaven, where Christ is already sitting at the Father’s right hand, when as yet the archangel’s trumpet has not been heard by the command of God? When as yet those whom the coming of the Lord is to find on the earth, have not been caught up into the air to meet Him at His coming, in company with the dead in Christ, who shall be the first to arise? [I Thess 4:13ff.] To no one is heaven opened. When the world, indeed, shall pass away, then the kingdom of heaven shall be opened” (Treatise on the Soul, ch. 55).

Another “Church Father,” Hippolytus (ca 170-236), certainly did not think that souls were in heaven: “But now we must speak of Hades, in which the souls both of the righteous and the unrighteous are detained…The righteous will obtain the incorruptible and unfading Kingdom, who indeed are at present detained in Hades, but not in the same place with the unrighteous…Thus far, then, on the subject of Hades, in which the souls of all are detained until the time God has determined; and then He will accomplish a resurrection of all, not by transferring souls into other bodies, but by raising the bodies themselves” (Against Plato, on the Cause of the Universe, 1, 2).

v2 n4. More on What Happens When We Die

We offer the following survey of the history of traditional teaching about “heaven at death.”

The celebrated Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible: “No biblical text authorizes the statement that the soul is separated from the body at the moment of death” (Vol. 1, p. 802).

Christian Words and Christian Meanings, by John Burnaby (pp. 148, 149): “Greek philosophers had argued that the dissolution which we call death happens to nothing but bodies, and that the souls of men are by their native constitution immortal. The Greek word for immortality occurs only once in the New Testament, and there it belongs to none but the King of Kings…The immortality of the soul is no part of the Christian creed, just as it is no part of Christian anthropology to divide soul and body and confine the real man, the essence of personality, to supposedly separable soul for which embodiment is imprisonment…Jesus taught no doctrine of everlasting life for disembodied souls, such as no Jew loyal to the faith of his fathers could have accepted or even understood. But Jewish belief was in the raising of the dead at the Last Day.”

(Why then do churches constantly say that disembodied souls have gone to heaven or hell?)

Companion Bible by E.W. Bullinger, on II Corinthians 5:8: “It is little less than a crime for anyone to pick out certain words and frame them into a sentence, not only disregarding the scope and context, but ignoring the other words in the verse, and quote the words ‘absent from the body, present with the Lord’ with the view of dispensing with the hope of the Resurrection (which is the subject of the whole passage) as though it were unnecessary; and as though ‘present with the Lord’ is obtainable without it.”

Law and Grace, by Professor A.F. Knight (p. 79): “In the Old Testament man is never considered to be a soul dwelling in a body, a soul that will one day be set free from the oppression of the body, at the death of that body, like a bird released from a cage. The Hebrews were not dualists in their understanding of God’s world.”

Families at the Crossroads, by Rodney Clapp (pp. 95, 97): “Following Greek and medieval Christian thought, we often sharply separate the soul and body, and emphasize that the individual soul survives death. What’s more we tend to believe the disembodied soul has escaped to heaven, to a more pleasant and fully alive existence. We mistakenly envision the Christian hope as an individual affair, a matter of separate souls taking flight to heaven. But none of this was the case for the ancient Israelites.”

Martin Luther: “I think that there is not a place in Scripture of more force for the dead who have fallen asleep, than Ecc. 9:5 (“the dead know nothing at all”), understanding nothing of our state and condition — against the invocation of saints and the fiction of Purgatory.”

“Heaven in the Bible is nowhere the destination of the dying” (J.A.T. Robinson, In the End God, p. 104).

John Wesley, founder of the Methodist Church, Sermon on the Parable of Lazarus: “It is, indeed, very generally supposed that the souls of good men, as soon as they are discharged from the body, go directly to heaven; but this opinion has not the least foundation in the oracles of God. On the contrary our Lord says to Mary, after the resurrection, ‘Touch me not; for I have not yet ascended to my Father.’”

v2 n4. Responding to Jesus

It appears to us that very little attention is paid in church circles to how Jesus preached the Gospel. Radio waves and popular literature are replete with invitations to “accept Jesus in your heart,” to “accept the Lord,” or “pray the sinners’ prayer.” But how did Jesus make his evangelistic offer of salvation?

It is a shocking fact that he did not begin and end by offering his death as atonement for sins. Certainly the death of Jesus and his resurrection are fundamental elements in the Gospel of salvation. But that is not all. Listen to the master teacher in his final evangelistic statement and appeal.

John 12: 44: “Jesus raised his voice and said, ‘The person who believes in me does not just believe in me but in the one who commissioned me. I came into the world as a light so that everyone who believes in me should not remain in darkness. And if someone hears my message and does not respond to it, I do not judge him: I did not come to judge the world but to save the world. The one who refuses to listen to me and will not receive my words has one who judges him. The word which I spoke — that is what will judge him at the last day, because I did not speak from myself, but the Father who sent me, He gave me a command as to what to say and speak. And I know that His command means eternal life…’”

It is perfectly plain from these climactic words of Jesus that our salvation depends on believing in Jesus: “The one who believes in me does not just believe in me but in the one who commissioned me.” But Jesus clarifies what he means by “believing in” him. This fact is mostly overlooked by Bible readers. Jesus goes on by way of explanation: “If someone hears my message/gospel/word and does not respond to it…” So, then, what Jesus demands for salvation is a response to his preaching. The crucial factor is intelligent, positive reaction to what Jesus said, not just to the facts of his death and resurrection. Jesus repeats this vital point with a different phrase: “The one who refuses to listen to me and will not accept my words…will be judged by my message.”

We have here a brilliant summary from John, who personally witnessed the ministry of Jesus, and understood what is involved in salvation. Jesus states, as he constantly did, that he came to save the world. But how is the world to be saved? By listening to and accepting Jesus’ word or words. Those who fail to respond to his word and words do not become disciples of the Lord Jesus.

It is a matter of concern and alarm that in current preaching nothing is made of the word/ words/message of Jesus. Only his death and resurrection are put to the public for belief.

But this is to cut the Gospel in half. The fact is that there are 25 chapters of recorded Gospel preaching by Jesus, the twelve and the seventy in which there is no mention yet of his death and resurrection. The Gospel preaching of Jesus, his word/words/message, centered entirely and exclusively on the matter of the Kingdom of God. An examination of Matthew, Mark and Luke shows that Jesus preached as Gospel much more than a message about his death and resurrection. The statistics look like this: There are 25 chapters of Gospel preaching (Matt. 3-15; Mark 1-7; Luke 4-8), during which Jesus and the Apostles take the Gospel to the public. But in these 25 chapters there is not a single word said of his death. It was not until Matthew 16, Mark 8 and Luke 9 that Jesus “began to tell them” about his death and resurrection. But note well: the accounts make it quite clear that he had been preaching the Gospel prior to that moment. It follows, then, that the Gospel is firstly about the Kingdom of God and also about the additional facts of Jesus’ death and resurrection.

Why is this so important? We have seen above (and the point is repeated throughout the teaching of the whole New Testament) that salvation comes by response to what Jesus said and taught, not just to what he did on the cross. Jesus raised his voice in John 12:44 to insist on this central truth: “He who refuses to listen to my words…He who does not accept what I say…” remains lost in darkness.

Professions of belief in Jesus are hollow until we allow Jesus and the Bible to define what it means to “believe in” him. The most personal and intimate aspect of Jesus is his words. His words declare his mind. So it is through intelligent acceptance of his words that a relationship is made with him, in addition to acceptance of his sacrificial death. Jesus did much more than die. He was a saving teacher as well as being the crucified, risen Savior.

Bible readers should earnestly question the foundation of their belief system and ask what those “cliché-like” phrases such as “accept the Lord,” “open your heart to Jesus” really mean.

The true disciples of the Bible are those who have “listened to” Jesus’ Kingdom Gospel. They are those who have received the words which God has given through Jesus. Jesus reported to God: “the words which you gave me, I have given to them and they have accepted them” (John 17:8). The born-again sons of God are those who receive Jesus by “believing in his name,” that is, everything he revealed in his preaching and teaching as well as his death and resurrection (John 1:12).

How wonderfully united the Bible writers were on this crucial issue of what it means to “accept Jesus as Savior.” Matthew and Luke record Jesus’ precious words about how the Gospel of the Kingdom is received or refused by various ones who are exposed to it. “When anyone hears the word/Gospel about the Kingdom and does not understand it, the Devil comes and snatches away what was sown in his heart, so that he cannot believe it and be saved” (Matt. 13:19; Luke 8:12). This is the essence of the Christian Gospel and how it must be received in faith. The critically important factor in salvation, says Jesus, is intelligent reception of the “word about the Kingdom” (Matt. 13:19). Since the Devil knows well that this Message of the Kingdom is his greatest threat, he does all he can to remove it and suppress it. On no account does the Devil want the Gospel as Jesus preached it to be heard. The Devil wants the world to remain in darkness. Only the preaching of Jesus can dispel that terrible night of confusion and error. In Luke 8:12 Jesus said that those who hear his Gospel-word are the objects of the Devil’s attention. The Devil, Jesus said, is bent upon taking that Gospel away from the heart of the potential Christian, “so that he may not believe it [the word/message/gospel of the Kingdom, Matt. 13:19] and be saved.” It is of the highest significance that Jesus is talking here expressly about how to be saved, and yet at this point in his preaching career he has not yet mentioned a word about his death and resurrection! (see Luke 18:31-34).

The evidence is entirely clear. Jesus’ concept of salvation is this: An intelligent reception of his Gospel of the Kingdom as well as the related information about his death and resurrection are essential for the saving process to get underway.

You may ask, “What is the Kingdom of God?” The answer is that it is the hope of all the prophets of Israel. It is the Kingdom which will supersede all present national governments at the time of the resurrection of the dead (Rev. 11:15-18). This is the moment to mention another devastating confusion which has hit some systems of Bible teaching. It is sometimes said that the Kingdoms of this world have already become the Kingdom of God and of His Messiah. This is fundamentally untrue. It is only when the seventh angel sounds the resurrection trumpet to summon the dead from the graves that the rulership of the present world passes fully into the hands of Jesus. Revelation 11:15-18 is an absolutely sure anchor of truth in relation to the Kingdom, the heart of the Gospel.

The Kingdom of God is in fact the heart of the new covenant which Jesus ratified in his blood by dying for the sins of all men. Just as Moses in Exodus 24 rehearsed all the words of the covenant in the presence of the people, and then poured blood on the document containing the covenant and on the people, so Jesus as the ultimate Moses laid out his Kingdom/Gospel/words before the people and then in the presence of those who had accepted it he prepared to pour out his own blood to ratify and seal that new covenant. What specifically is the content of the covenant? Jesus made it more than clear. “Just as my Father covenanted with me to give me the Kingdom, so I now covenant with you to give you the Kingdom, and you will be seated on twelve thrones to administer the tribes of Israel” (Luke 22:29, 30). There is the heart of the Gospel and the heart of the covenant. Everything Jesus taught focused on the Kingdom and the invitation issued to us all to take part in that Kingdom and in its administration of the world — the world as it will be renewed at the great restoration promised in Acts 3:21: Jesus must be retained in heaven, said Peter, “until the time comes for the restoration of all things as declared by the prophets.”

To that great moment Christians are to look forward in joyful anticipation. The distress of the present time “cannot be compared with the glory which will be revealed in the Sons of God” (Rom. 8:18), immortalized at the resurrection and presented to Jesus as co-heirs and rulers of his coming Kingdom.

v2 n4. Creating a Confusing Distinction

A contact of ours was offered the following explanation of the Kingdom of God/Heaven in answer to his inquiry:

“First there is a difference between the Kingdom of Heaven and the Kingdom of God. Christ offered the Kingdom of Heaven to Israel in the Gospels but they refused to accept it and crucified him. Christ withdrew the offer and instead turned to the Gentiles. The Kingdom of Heaven will again be offered to those living in the millennium. It is a physical Kingdom with Christ as its King reigning from Jerusalem. The Kingdom being offered now is the Kingdom of God which is a spiritual Kingdom with a spiritual King, Christ… the Kingdom of Heaven is not being offered at this time.”

May we respectfully point out that what appears above is entirely false to the Bible and creates complete confusion for anyone attempting to understand the words of Jesus and his saving Gospel. The Kingdom of Heaven and the Kingdom of God have exactly the same meaning. They are different titles for the same Kingdom. The difference is only one of terminology, as in the difference between “the USA” and “the States.” The fact that Kingdom of God and Kingdom of Heaven are synonyms is proven by this simple fact: Only Matthew uses the term Kingdom of Heaven. Mark and Luke refer to the same entity as the Kingdom of God.

Mark introduces the ministry of Jesus by stating that he presented the Kingdom of God as the Gospel (Mark 1:14, 15). Luke likewise reports that Jesus came to preach the Gospel of the Kingdom of God (Luke 4:43). Matthew reports precisely the same fact by saying that Jesus came preaching the Kingdom of Heaven. There are numerous examples of the very same saying of Jesus being reported by Matthew as a saying about the Kingdom of Heaven and by Mark and Luke as a saying about the Kingdom of God. For example, Matthew records Jesus as saying “Allow the children to come to me: of such is the Kingdom of Heaven” (Matt. 19:14). Mark and Luke write, “Allow the children to come to me: of such is the Kingdom of God” (Mark 10:14; Luke 18:16).

The distinction drawn in the letter we quoted above, between a “physical” and “spiritual” Kingdom, is also not found in the Bible. It is true that Jesus came preaching first to Jews, and he summoned them to repentance and belief in his Gospel about the Kingdom of God/Heaven. That Kingdom is indeed the Kingdom promised by the prophets, a political Kingdom which will operate from Jerusalem when Jesus returns. But the alternative name for the same Kingdom — Kingdom of Heaven (“Heaven” was substituted for “God” by Jews and Matthew reflects that custom) — also designates the Kingdom to be established on the renewed earth when Jesus comes back. There is only one Gospel and it is the Gospel about the Kingdom of God/ Heaven.

The letter above actually divides the one Gospel into two different messages and thus destroys the unity of the teaching of Jesus and of the New Testament. After the death and resurrection of Jesus the apostles continued to preach, to Jews and Gentiles alike, exactly the same Gospel of the Kingdom which Jesus had preached (Acts 1:3; 1:6; 8:12; 19:8; 20:24, 25; 28:30, 31). This is hardly surprising, since Jesus in his famous commission to the church ordered that “everything I have taught you” be taken to all the nations (Matt. 28:19, 20).

No Bible verse ever says that there are “two Gospels,” one for Jews and another for Gentiles! There are not “two forms of the Gospel.” There is one Gospel, one hope and one faith. The one and only Gospel is the Gospel about the Kingdom of God, also known as the Gospel of the grace of God (Acts 20:24, 25). It is the News that God is inviting all who respond with intelligent acceptance of the Message of Jesus to receive forgiveness for their sins and the promise of taking part in the Kingdom which Jesus is preparing to establish on earth at his Second Coming.

The dividing of things which belong together and the creation of artificial distinctions is responsible for the hopeless confusion current among different and competing systems of Bible teaching (illustrated for example by the so-called Dispensationalist and Reformed “schools”). Our desire is to call students of Jesus and the Bible back to believe in the one and only “Gospel of the Kingdom and the Name of Jesus” (Acts 8:12) which was first preached by Jesus himself (Luke 4:43, etc.) and then taken to the wider world at Jesus’ command. Acts 8:12 provides an excellent, straightforward definition of the content of the Gospel around which the presently differing factions could unite. This would mean a return to Jesus himself, who always preached the Gospel about the Kingdom and mandated the preaching of the Kingdom gospel as his Great Commission (Matt. 28:19, 20; 24:14).

v2 n3. A Popular Misunderstanding about God Corrected by a “State of the Art” Authority on Biblical Information

At the core of true religion and the love of God there is a confession of faith: God is One Lord. This creed goes back to the revelation given to Israel and enshrined in the famous Shema: “Hear O Israel, the Lord your God is one Lord” (Deut. 6:4). Jesus publicly confirmed this central dogma of Judaism and thus made it the great confession of Christianity (Mark 12:28ff.). Paul confirmed his master’s teaching with the words, “There is One God, the Father” (1 Cor 8:6). (Paul recognized Jesus as the Lord Messiah.) Observe carefully that the heart of biblical revelation is not a statement about a Triune God. The statement of faith which appears often in churches that “there is One God who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit” is alien to the Bible. The creed of the Bible and of Jesus, as is well known by scholars everywhere, especially those engaged in the teaching of the Hebrew Bible (the Old Testament), does not declare that God is three. It declares that He is One. The Jewish people, schooled in the Torah, have always known that God is One and not Three. The Trinitarian formula, on which so many churchgoers depend without much careful investigation, is a post-biblical alteration of the creed taught by Jesus. The Dictionary of New Testament Theology represents the finest in modern scholarship and contains the following thought-provoking comment on who God is in the Bible.

GOD

“Yahweh is the individual personal name of God (Vol. 2, p. 67ff.)…Elohim, though plural in form, is seldom used in the OT as such. Even a single heathen God can be designated with the plural Elohim (Jud. 11:24; I Kings 11:5; 2 Kings 1:2). In Israel the plural is understood as the plural of fullness…

“The One God. Theos is the most frequent designation of God in the NT. Belief in the one, only and unique God (Mat. 23:9; Rom. 3:30; I Cor 8:4, 6; Gal. 3:20; I Tim. 2:5; James 2:19) is an established part of primitive Christian tradition. Jesus himself made the fundamental confession of Judaism his own and expressly quoted the Shema (Deut. 6:4; Mark 12:28ff.; Matt. 22:37; Luke 10:27). This guaranteed continuity between the Old and the New Covenant. For the God whom Christians worship is the God of the Fathers (Acts 3:13; 5:30; 22:14), the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob…The confession of the One God appears in an expanded form in Eph. 4:6: ‘One God and Father of us all who is above all and through and in all’…. Jesus Christ does not usurp the place of God. His oneness with the Father does not mean absolute identity of being… After the completion of his work on earth he has indeed been raised to the right hand of God, but he is still not made equal to God. Although completely co-ordinated with God he remains subordinate to him (I Cor. 15:28). He represents us before God, but this is not to say that Christ is equal with God. In Revelation a distinction is always made between God and the Lamb.

“Rom. 9:5 is disputed. Even if we take the reference of God to Christ, Christ would not be equated absolutely with God, but only described as a being of divine nature, for the word theos has no article. But this ascription of majesty does not occur anywhere else in Paul. The more probable explanation is that the statement is a doxology directed to God, stemming from Jewish tradition and adopted by Paul. Overwhelmed by God’s dealings with Israel Paul concludes with an ascription of praise to God. The translation would then read: ‘The One who is God over all be blessed…[John 20:28 and I John 5:20] are the nearest that the NT comes to asserting the full identity of Christ with God.

“The Trinity. The NT does not contain the developed doctrine of the Trinity. ‘The Bible lacks the express declaration that the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost are of an equal essence and therefore in an equal sense God Himself. And the other express declaration is also lacking, that God is God thus and only thus, i.e., as the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. These two express declarations, which go beyond the witness of the Bible, are the twofold content of the church doctrine of the Trinity’ (Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics I,1,437)…That God and Christ belong together and that they are distinct, are equally stressed, with the precedence in every case due to God, the Father, who stands above Christ…All this underlines the point that primitive Christianity did not have an explicit doctrine of the Trinity such as was subsequently elaborated in the creeds of the early church” (J. Schneider, Prof. of Theology in Berlin, emphasis added).

v2 n3. Bible Study: Fitting the Pieces Together into a Harmonious Whole

During forty years involvement in the field of biblical studies and teaching, I have noticed that many Christians do not follow the fine example set by the Bereans in Acts 17:11: “They searched the Scriptures daily to see if what Paul was saying was true; so many of them became Christians.” Many today, however, simply believe what they have been told.

Take the issue of what happens when we die. Ask a typical churchgoer and he will quote the words of Jesus to the thief: “Today you will be with me in Paradise” (Luke 23:43). This is supposed to settle the question with finality.

But the problem is this: Luke 23:43 is a fraction of the total biblical evidence available for study. Nevertheless many will settle for an easy “solution.” That verse obviously proves, they think, that Jesus and the thief departed at the moment of death into the presence of the Father in heaven. On that basis, churchgoers are exhorted to believe that they too will survive death as “souls” and pass on to celestial regions.

Imagine a conversation between a child and her mother: “Mommy, where did Jesus go the day he died?” “Well, to heaven to be with God, dear. Do you remember he said that he and the thief would be together that day in Paradise?”

“But wait, Mommy, do you remember that Jesus earlier said that he would ‘be three days in the heart of the earth’? If he was in the heart of the earth, how can he have been with the Father in heaven?”

“Well, dear, perhaps Jesus’ spirit was with the Father while his body was in the heart of the earth.”

“But how can that be, Mommy? Three days after the day Jesus died he said to his friends: ‘I (Jesus) have not yet ascended to the Father.’ How could he possibly have gone to heaven to the Father, if three days later he said he had not yet ascended to the Father?”

Mommy’s attempt to answer the difficulty includes an immense and unproven assumption: that in the Bible a person can go on existing consciously as a “spirit” or “soul” separated from their body. For Mommy’s “solution” to be true that assumption must be biblically demonstrated. But the “departed soul” concept owes its origin to Platonic philosophy and not to the Bible at all. The Interpreter’s Bible Dictionary says correctly: “No biblical text authorizes the idea that the soul separates from the body at death” (Vol. 1, p. 802).

So what is the solution to our question about what happens when we die? First we must lay out the facts:

1) Jesus apparently said that he would be on the day of his death with the thief in the presence of the Father (Luke 23:43).
2) Jesus said with complete clarity that he would be in the heart of the earth when he died and remain there for three days (Matt. 12:40).
3) Peter confirms this by saying that God did not leave Jesus in the world of the dead, Hades (Acts 2:31). This proves that Jesus did indeed go to the world of the dead. But God did not leave him there. He brought him out of the tomb by resurrection three days after he died.
4) When the women arrived at the tomb, the angel said, “He is not here. He has risen from the dead” (Matt. 28:6). This proves that Jesus had indeed been in the tomb until he was resurrected.
5) On the Sunday after his death, Jesus expressly said: “I have not yet ascended to my Father” (John 20:17). So he could not possibly have been to heaven before the resurrection Sunday.

Here is what the evidence presents:

Points 2-5 demonstrate that Jesus went to the grave at his death and that he did not go to the Father in heaven the day he died.

Point 1 alone (the very point which most rely on almost instinctively) appears to contradict the evidence of points 2-5.

How shall we resolve the problem?

The Bible does not contradict itself. If Jesus was in the heart of the earth he cannot have been with the Father in Paradise (the text does not say, as many assume, “heaven”).

Here is the solution which resolves the apparent contradiction.

What Jesus actually said to the thief on the Friday of their crucifixion was: “Truly I tell you today, you will be with me in Paradise.” Punctuating the sentence that way — putting the comma after “today” — makes sense of the immediate context and brings the statement into line with Jesus’ other clear statements that he did not go anywhere other than to the grave that day — the day of his and the thief’s death.

Now we are ready to follow the whole of Jesus’ conversation with the thief:

The thief, in a repentant frame of mind, begs Jesus: “Lord, remember me when you come [in the future] bringing in your Kingdom.” His request was to be remembered on the future day of the arrival of Jesus to set up the Kingdom of God, the Christian hope. The thief demonstrated faith in the Gospel: firstly, that the Kingdom of God is coming and secondly that Jesus was the Messiah.

Jesus graciously gave the thief more than he asked. He said: “Truly I assure you today [you don’t have to wait to be remembered in the future], you will indeed be with me in the future Paradise [of the Kingdom of God on earth].” Paradise is the restored garden of Eden in the renewed earth of the Kingdom which Jesus will bring at his second coming (Rev. 2:7). Jesus equated Paradise, which he promised the thief, with the Kingdom of God in which the thief requested a place.

Jesus did not go to heaven at death. No one in the Bible goes to heaven at death. Everyone goes to the grave, the world of the dead (Hades), to await the resurrection which will occur when Jesus comes back to establish his Kingdom. As I Corinthians 15:23 says so beautifully: “Those who belong to Christ will be resurrected at his coming.” Until then they remain in the grave (Hades), the residence of all the dead, including Jesus when he died, until they are called out of Hades as Jesus was three days after his death. Only Jesus has so far emerged from Hades into immortality. He did this on the third day, the day of his resurrection.

Now back to the “problem” of Luke 23:43, so often quoted as a supposed proof of an immediate presence of the soul in heaven, in contradiction to the plain statements that Jesus did not go to the Father the day he died.

In many New Testament Greek manuscripts the words are written without gaps and without punctuation. So Luke 23:43 would look like this: TRULYISAYTOYOUTODAYYOUWILLBEWITHMEINPARADISE.

Where shall we put the comma?

1) After “today” and read: “Truly I say to you today, you will be with me in Paradise.”
2) After “to you” and read: “Truly I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.”

In some very early manuscripts of the Bible there is some indication of punctuation, as we shall explain.

We must investigate all the evidence before making up our minds on a biblical teaching. The Truth sets us free (John 8:32). Christians are those who believe what is true.

There are examples of the phrase “I say to you today…” elsewhere in the Bible. The phrase is used to convey solemn emphasis. In Deuteronomy 30:16, 18, 19 we read:

“I command you this day....”

“I declare to you this day....”

“I call heaven and earth to witness to you this day....”

And in the New Testament Acts 20:26 provides a parallel: “I solemnly witness to you this very day....” Further examples will be found in Deut. 4:26, 39, 40; 6:6; 7:11; 8:1, 11, 19; 9:3; 10:13; 11:2, 8, 13, 26, 27, 28, 32; 13:18; 15:5; 19:9; 26:3, 16, 18; 27:1, 4, 10; 28:1, 13, 14, 15; 29:12; 30:2, 8, 11, 15, 16, 18, 19; 32:46. Observe also Gen. 25:33: “Swear to me today…” Gen. 22:14: “that they might say today…” Gen. 41:9: “I today remember…” Deut. 9:6: “Today you will know…” Deut. 29:10: “Today you all stand…” Deut. 30:6: “I announce to you today….”

Detailed punctuation in the Bible has been added by translators and it can drastically affect the meaning of the text. Hebrews 10:12 is an example of erroneous punctuation in the King James Version; i.e., the comma should follow “sins” not “ever.” It is only reasonable to repunctuate Luke 23:43 in a way which makes it harmonize with everything else the Bible says about death and Resurrection. Daniel 12:2 and John 5:28, 29 remain as solemn testimonies to the fact that the dead are not in heaven, but that they rise from the ground or their tombs on the future great Resurrection day:

“Many of those who are sleeping in the dust of the ground shall arise…to everlasting life…”

“The hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice, those who have done good to a resurrection of life…”

Nothing should be allowed to disturb the central biblical doctrine of the future Resurrection of all the faithful from the sleep of death to life in the Kingdom of God. This stupendous event will occur when Jesus returns (1 Cor. 15:23).

Many of the Greek manuscripts of the Bible do not have punctuation. However, some very early manuscripts do have some marks of punctuation. In the Vatican Codex (4th century) there is evidence of a comma after the word “today.” And in the Curetonian version of the Syriac translation of Luke (5th century), we read “Amen, I say to you today, that with me you will be in the Garden of Eden.”

A German translation of the Bible, published in 1934 by Wilhelm Michaelis (Kroner Verlag, Leipzig) renders Luke 23:43 as follows: “Truly I give you my assurance today: You will one day be with me in Paradise.” The author adds this comment in a footnote: “Jesus does not wait until the last day, but promises the thief even now (‘today’ should probably be attached to the first part of the sentence) that his request will be granted. Paradise occurs in the NT only in 2 Cor. 12:4 and Rev. 2:7 and is the equivalent of everlasting life or Kingdom of God” (translation from the German mine). The Rotherham Bible (1895, reprinted in 1974) reads as follows: “Verily I say unto thee this day: With me shalt thou be in Paradise.” The official translation of the Roman Catholics, the Latin Vulgate, does not place a comma anywhere in this verse. It thus avoids the false impression that Jesus was in heaven on the day of his death.

The celebrated Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, Vol. 5, p. 385, says: “Paradise, as used in Luke 23:43..., is evidently not heaven (John 20:17, Acts 2:31).” In other words John 20:17 and Acts 2:31 show that Jesus could not have gone to the Father in heaven on the day of his death. And similarly, no Christian goes immediately to heaven at death.

This fact has not prevented popular preaching of Luke 23:43 as a guarantee of “heaven at death” for the believer.

As with all “restorationist” movements our purpose is to alert our fellow Bible readers to the paganism which has crept into the faith. We cannot think that serious Christians will be satisfied with the status quo once they are informed of doctrines which masquerade as truth, however popular. Popular phrases such as “so and so has passed on, gone home, gone to be with Jesus in heaven” do not reflect the teaching of Jesus at all. They have more in common with spiritism and illicit raising of the dead and are condemned in Scripture as worthless and dangerous.

We ask only for a fair examination of the facts and there is a vast quantity of additional evidence available.

v2 n3. Immortality and Our Need to Obtain It

The doctrine of the natural immortality of the soul — the notion that a human being survives consciously at death — is a pagan addition to Christianity. This fact is so widely recognized by scholars of all denominations that it is puzzling that a radical reformation on this issue has not swept the land. The problem is that churchgoers are not generally searching for truth on the great questions of life and death. They seem content to abide by “what we have always believed.” This attitude invites deception. If they were to survey the readily available literature on the subject, as well as the Bible, it would become obvious that survival in a post-mortem condition as a disembodied spirit in heaven or hell is a fiction needing to be rooted out of our thinking. Jesus did not believe it; neither then should his followers.

The problem is that the pagan notion that man is inherently immortal, by virtue of his “immortal soul/spirit,” is deeply entrenched in popular church culture. It is confirmed repeatedly when congregations assemble at funeral services. After all, it is comforting to imagine that our loved ones who have died have really just moved into a different sphere of life and consciousness.

The Evangelical Alliance was founded at an enthusiastic meeting in London in 1846. Assembled were 800 members of various denominations: Presbyterians, Independents, Methodists, Baptists, Lutherans, Reformed, Moravians, and others. A nine-point doctrinal statement was agreed upon. Number 8 read as follows: “[We believe in] the immortality of the soul and the resurrection of the body.”

It is a remarkable fact that this body of churchgoers thus committed themselves to belief in a non-biblical concept. Equally noteworthy are the constant objections of evangelical scholars of various denominations in regard to the question of man’s immortality. They fully know that the doctrine of the “natural immortality of the soul” has no basis in Scripture. It is merely a man-made tradition.

Evidently evangelicals have not listened to some of those eminent scholars who have complained that the immortality of the soul and man’s uninterrupted life at the moment of death are without support in the Bible. Philip Schaff, the famous church historian (1819-1893), expressed his conviction that it was time to take up the unfinished business of the Reformation and bring it to completion. Schaff called attention to the necessity of reforming and correcting the prevalent and popular teaching of the survival of the soul in the “middle state,” prior to the resurrection when Jesus returns. He wrote:

“While the Reformers rooted out the medieval [Roman Catholic] doctrine of purgatory, they failed to substitute a better theory of the “middle state” [the intermediate state] and left it for our day to reconsider this whole question and to reach positive results…The old Protestant theologians nearly identify the pre-resurrection state of the righteous and the wicked [what happens at the point of death] with their post-resurrection state, except that the former is a disembodied state of perfect bliss [heaven at death] or perfect misery [hell]. By this confusion the resurrection and the general judgment are reduced to an empty formality.”

William Tyndale (c. 1490-1536), who was martyred for his faith, had earlier made exactly the same point against the Roman Catholics. “In putting souls in heaven and hell [at death] you destroy the arguments with which Paul proved the resurrection.” The same objection applied also to his Protestant colleagues.

Evangelicals, indeed nearly all Protestants, have taken on, with the immortality of the soul, a Roman Catholic doctrine, without protest. It is surely time for this mistake to be seen for what it is — a significant denial of a central Bible teaching — that the dead go nowhere at the moment of death, other than to the grave. Echoing the protest of Professor Schaff, Dr. Charles Briggs, editor of The Presbyterian Review and writing in a book entitled Whither? A Theological Question for the Times (1889) said:

“All the faults of Traditionalism converge at this point, i.e., in eschatology [teaching about the Christian future, at death and at the resurrection and Kingdom of God]. Here we find extra-confessional errors, intra-confessional errors and the entire Church is in a condition of great perplexity.” But has this confusion been cleared up?

Things have changed very little and business is as usual in the denominations. Sermons preached to commemorate the dead continue to falsify the biblical teaching, by reinforcing the pagan notion of survival in a disembodied form. This magazine attempts to further the unfinished work of the Reformation. We stand on the shoulders of the giants whom we quote in support of our various positions. From the various denominations the plea for a straight biblical teaching about death and the afterlife has been sounding out, but with very little response:

An Episcopal doctor of theology said:

“Never-ending existence [the immortality of the soul] is not the common heritage of all men in virtue of their having been born into this world, but is rather to be regarded as a gift bestowed on those who seek it from the Eternal Himself. The Father being the only one who possesses immortality in Himself (1 Tim 6:16), it is to Him that we must turn to obtain the immortality we need.” A Baptist doctor of theology wrote “Not a single passage of Holy Writ, from Genesis to Revelation, teaches, so far as I am aware, the doctrine of man’s natural immortality. On the other hand, Holy Writ emphatically declares that God only has immortality (I Tim 6:16): that is to say God only is naturally, inherently, in His own essence and nature immortal…It is amazing that a notion so thoroughly heathen as man’s natural immortality was not long uprooted out of Christian theology…There is on the part of the Church itself such a belief in the doctrine of the natural immortality of all men as to amount to a virtual denial of the doctrine that immortality or eternal life is the gift of Christ alone…When we come into our pulpits, it is not to soothe our listeners with brilliant conjectures, hopeful surmises, elaborate attempts at demonstration concerning immortality — that kind of preaching we leave to heathen teachers and pagan philosophers in Christian lands. But when we come into our pulpits, it is to give to our listeners positive, divine information about the hereafter.”

Amen!

What then is the origin of the noxious doctrine of the natural immortality of the soul?

A Methodist Yale Professor answers: “Having given the whole subject a careful and prayerful investigation — examining alike the strongest rational and Scriptural arguments used to support the dominant view — I am compelled to reject the current doctrine of the inherent immortality of the soul.” He then gives 12 reasons, of which we have space to print just the first:

Satanic origin. “This doctrine of the immortality of the soul can be traced through the muddy channels of a corrupted Christianity, a perverted Judaism, a pagan philosophy and a superstitious idolatry, to the great instigator of mischief in the Garden of Eden. The Protestants borrowed it [the notion of immortality and immediate consciousness at death in heaven or hell] from the Roman Catholics, the Catholics from the Pharisees, the Pharisees from the Pagans and the Pagans from the Old Serpent who first preached the doctrine amid the lovely bowers of Paradise to an audience all too willing to hear and heed the new fascinating theology — ‘You certainly shall not die.’ Satan patched up his system by inventing the double-entity theory that man is a dual being with a material body and an immaterial soul consisting of the real man whose soul leaves his body at death and continues to exist as a conscious personality either in conscious bliss for ever or conscious misery for ever.” Dr. Phelps added, “When this theory is accepted God is discredited and Satan believed.”

The theory continues to be the standard fare of millions upon millions of churchgoers.

Speaking further of the insidious paganization of original Christianity, Dr. Phelps pointed out that “Satan’s oily argument” was adopted by the pagans down the “stream of time.” It was popular in Egypt and led also to the concept of the transmigration of souls. For the Greek the concept of natural immortality became a philosophy. Plato was its chief proponent and he coupled the doctrine of immortality with that of preexistence.

In reaction to the doctrine of endless punishment (which follows logically from the mistaken notion that man is naturally immortal), a further error developed. The idea of endless torment was so revolting, if not inconceivable, that some rushed to the opposite but unbiblical extreme, that every human being will inevitably be saved (“Universalism”).

Dr. Phelps of Yale concludes with this warning for us all: “The commingled systems of Christianity and Platonic philosophy permeated the church. This unholy leaven worked until nearly the whole lump was at last infected.”

It should come as a salutary shock and wake-up call to us all that the doctrine of survival at death in heaven or hell received official authorization from the Pope in 1513. In that year Pope Leo X affirmed that the soul is immortal and decreed that those who assert otherwise are “heretics.” Amazingly most of the Protestant reformers sided with the Pope and their Helvetic Confession echoed the official Roman Catholic support for the pagan doctrine of natural immortality by declaring: “We condemn all who scoff at the immortality of the soul, or bring it into doubt by subtle disputations.”

It is hardly surprising that Protestants are once again joining hands with Roman Catholics. After all they have much in common! But the common ground is a crypto-paganism in regard to the nature of man and his destiny. Dr. Phelps spoke out boldly when he tried to warn his colleagues: “Think of the harvest of grievous errors such a dogma as the immortality of the soul has brought forth — Mohammedanism, Shakerism, Swendenborgianism, Spiritualism, Purgatory, the worship of Mary [who is actually not in heaven at all], Universalism…All these systems are built on the assumption that dead folks are alive.”

Readers will find a compendium of information on the corruption of Christianity by paganism in The Conditionalist Faith of Our Fathers by Froom (Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1965). We are indebted to this work in the article above.