It is Priests Who Are Appointed Once to Die Before the Judgment (Hebrews 9:27)

As it is appointed for men to die once, but after this comes the judgment.

-Hebrews 9:27

We will look at the context of this verse in several ways.

• The passage
• The chapter
• The Book
• Paul's teachings
• The Law

This verse is often pulled from its context and used to teach that every human being is placed before God and judged for heaven or "hell" immediately. In light of Paul only knowing of two types of bodies (terrestrial and celestial, of the earth, of the spirit in resurrection), we find no room for any immediate state. We also see in the same chapter (1 Cor 15) Paul's only use "Hades" in his epistles and he is referring to believers, in context.

But someone will say, “How are the dead raised up? With what body do they come?” You fool! What you sow is not made alive unless it dies. When you sow, you do not sow the body that shall be, but a bare kernel, perhaps of wheat or of some other grain. Then God gives it a body as He pleases, and to each seed its own body. All flesh is not the same flesh. There is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fish, and another of birds. There are also celestial bodies and terrestrial bodies. The glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another. There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars. One star differs from another star in glory. So also is the resurrection of the dead. The body is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption. It is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness, it is raised in power. It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.

1 Corinthians 15:35-44

When this corruptible will have put on incorruption [in resurrection], and this mortal will have put on immortality, then the saying that is written shall come to pass: “Death is swallowed up in victory."

“O death, where is your sting?
O Hades, where is your victory?

-1 Corinthians 15:54-55

We have covered the topics of Hades and resurrection elsewhere, but it is important to the understanding of Hebrews 9. Since we cannot cram the common interpretation of Hebrews 9:27 into Paul's teachings on death and resurrection, we should look to the greater context for understanding.

But even without referencing Paul's teachings about resurrection, we can dismiss the common interpretation of our verse from the context of Hebrews chapter 9 and the full passage alone.

It was therefore necessary that the replicas of heavenly things be cleansed with these sacrifices, but that the heavenly things themselves be cleansed with better sacrifices than these. For Christ did not enter holy places made with hands, which are patterned after the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us. Nor did He enter to offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. For then He would have had to suffer repeatedly since the world was created, but now He has appeared once at the end of the ages to put away sin by sacrificing Himself. As it is appointed for men to die once, but after this comes the judgment, so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many, and He will appear a second time, not to bear sin but to save those who eagerly wait for Him.

-Hebrews 9:23-28 

The Superiority of Christ is the Context

The greater context speaks to the reality of Christ's perfect and complete sacrifice as being superior to the work of Israel's High Priest and the sacrificial system of the Law. That system was merely a picture of the final work. It also was work that had to be repeated as it could never actually redeem anyone from his sins. We will continue to point us to the superiority and the finality and perfection of the work of Christ as does the Book of Hebrews. We can never stress it to often or too greatly!

For it is not possible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.

Hebrews 10:3


But every priest stands daily ministering and repetitively offering the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins.

-Hebrews 10:11

The Book of Hebrews, written during the Acts Age to Jews, is a presentation of Christ as superior to everything in the Law and in the sacrificial system. Christ is superior to the sacrifices in the tabernacle and temple for his sacrifice does not need to be repeated. Christ' priesthood is superior in that it never ends. The Roman Catholic church offers thousands of masses everyday in which they teach they are offering an ongoing sacrifice, a work that is neither sufficient nor complete. There is no room for compromise with such a system. 

In the Law, the High Priest enters the Holy Place with blood that was not his own. But neither his blood nor the blood of animals could take away sin. Christ sacrificed himself for sin once and for all. Christ never has to die again. He is Israel's ultimate High Priest (but not according to the Levitical priesthood as we shall see). The High Priest under the Law will die and must be replaced in that system with the next High Priest. 

When Christ died, the judgment came, the offering made, and proof of acceptance was satisfied by his resurrection. The High Priest under the Law dies, yet sin is never washed away (it is merely covered). All men are appointed to die. The use of "judgment" in Hebrews 9:27 as interpreted by almost all schools of theology, completely ignores the rest of the context. Christ's work is thus diminished. 

This is how the New Living Translation renders the verse:

It is in the plan that all men die once. After that, they will stand before God and be judged.

We have spoken favorably of certain NLT translations of verses, but here we see the danger of "dynamic equivalency." A doctrine of men is forced onto a verse that says nothing of the sort. Young's Literal Translation renders the verse, "and as it is laid up to men once to die, and after this -- judgment." Nothing here about a man standing before God to be judged after his death. That is tradition, not truth.

Basic Evangelical understanding of redemption knows we are judged in Christ and redeemed the moment we believe. There is a future judgment of service, but tradition never puts that on this verse (and rightly so). So, what is this "judgment?" 

The NLT continues into verse 28 and things no longer make sense if verse 27 was a judgment for any random person upon death with no knowledge of the outcome.

And just as each person is destined to die once and after that comes judgment, so also Christ was offered once for all time as a sacrifice to take away the sins of many people. He will come again, not to deal with our sins, but to bring salvation to all who are eagerly waiting for him.

-Hebrews 9:27-28 (NLT)

We have again here, as we do throughout the Acts age, a pointing to the return of Christ. This is the central point of verse 28. So what would "Dolly Parton [or whomever] died and then God sent her to heaven/hell" (whichever position you take on her faith) have to do with the second coming or the work of the High Priest? What "salvation" is the Lord bringing and to whom? The already redeemed? The already judged? Paul is speaking to Jews about the Kingdom in Israel that is to come (as promised by the Lord in Acts 1 at his coming and reflected in Paul's Acts epistles, such as First and Second Thessalonians). 

In the traditional understanding, a man dies, is judged right then, and then floats off in a mysterious form to either heaven or "hell." Who is "eagerly waiting for him?"  What salvation is he bringing and to whom? 

If you don't like the NLT, here it is in the KJV and the problem remains:

Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation. (KJV)

I reference Dolly Parton because Hebrews 9:27 was employed by the leader of a very large Evangelical ministry to argue that God judged her directly upon death. But Dolly doesn't fit the context nor does any random human. Is the Evangelical leader thinking then that when he dies he'll be judged, go to heaven, then look for the return of Christ for his salvation?

The Greater Context of a Mortal Priesthood

We must also remember, the greater context of chapters 7, 8, and 9 is the superiority of the Priesthood and Offering of Christ, and the types and shadows in the law. Not addressing this issue directly, but in discussing the limited priesthood of the Levites compared to the eternal priesthood of Christ pictured in the priesthood of Melchizedek, Paul wrote:

And in one case dying men [Levitical priesthood] receive tithes, but in the other case [Melchizedek picturing Christ] it is one who is borne witness to that he is living.

-Hebrews 7:8

 

"Dying men" is rendered "mortal men" in other translations and "men that die" in the KJV. These are the ones that die in Hebrews 9:27. They are juxtaposed throughout Hebrews against the superior priesthood of Christ, a priesthood that never ends for Israel. Christ died once for all, was buried, did not decay, rose again to never die again. This is a superior priesthood in every way, certainly superior to "dying men." In any case, all mortal men die whether priest or not, whether believer or not. Christ is superior to all.

As a comparative, Christ's death is the ultimate death. There remains no more sacrifice for sin. All guilt is remitted. No more mortal High Priest is needed. We also have juxtaposed in this book the Lord's priesthood against the Levitical priesthood as a whole. Our Lord is from the Tribe of Judah. This means nothing to gentiles, but Israel's priesthood was limited to the Tribe of Levi. The Lord's priesthood is pictured in Melchizedek, a priest with no beginning or end, a priest of no tribe. 

This is important to remember as this argument was laid out earlier in Hebrews. Melchizedek ministered to Abraham (Abram at the time) while he was still in uncircumcision. 

So also Christ did not glorify Himself to be made a High Priest, but it was He who said to Him:

“You are My Son;
today I have become Your Father.” [Ps. 2:7]

As He also says in another place:

\You are a priest forever
in the order of Melchizedek.” [Ps 110:4]

In the days of His flesh, Jesus offered up prayers and supplications with loud cries and tears to Him who was able to save Him from death. He was heard because of His godly fear. Though He was a Son, He learned obedience through the things that He suffered, and being made perfect, He became the source of eternal salvation for all those who obey Him, being designated by God a High Priest according to the order of Melchizedek.

-Hebrew 5:5-10

The Priesthood Pertains Only to Israel

This priesthood is relevant only to the children of Abraham. When the Lord provided coats of skins for Adam and Eve (the founders of all races), he used no intermediary. The picture was complete. Blood was shed for sin. But we must also note in Genesis that no mention of the blood is given, the focus is on the covering (the atonement). 

Unto Adam also and to his wife did the Lord God make coats of skins, and clothed them.

-Genesis 3:21

Israel's sins were "covered" by the animal sacrifices, but the sin was never taken away ("For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins." -Heb 10:4). For Adam, Abel, Seth, Noah, Abraham, Moses, David, etc., the only way sin is taken away is by the perfect sacrifice of Christ (to which they looked forward as we look back). The context of a priest (High Priest) is only for Israel. Christ is not our High Priest (just as he is not the Son of David) in the current calling. In Adam, he his our Lord and our God. He has always been the God of the Gentiles (Rom 3:29, 15:10-11; etc.). But Gentiles never (even now) have been called to be a "nation of priests" as Israel was (Ex 19:5-7).

We will never see the Lord as priest in the Post Acts epistles. We must keep all this in mind and we look back at the Law and the inferior priesthood of the Levitical High Priest which is the context of much of the Book of Hebrews. Christ did his work as High Priest as part of Israel's covenant for them. This is the immediate context of verse 27 in question. 

For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us: nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest enters into the holy place every year with blood of others; for then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

-Hebrews 9:24-26

When the High Priest entered the Holy of Holies, there was no seat. He did not sit. His work was never done as sin was only covered and not forgiven in full. And no gentile (from Adam on) looked to an annual feast nor waited on the work of a High Priest in a tabernacle or temple. The covering was only for Israel, under the First Covenant, and connected to her special, earthly calling. (We remind ourselves here that the hope of the current calling is greater than Israel's hope.)

The Roman Catholic system of priests, confession, Penance, and Purgatory is reflection of this inferior system. They offer daily a sacrifice that they teach can never take away sin. Men must confess, perform Penance, and then may still have to pay for sin in the fires of Purgatory (only venial sins as grave/mortal sins will damn the soul, Christ is of no value without your  works of Penance, as assigned by a priest). Of course, in that system, your family can pay for sins after death with their suffering and works of charily while Christ's work remains impotent. They have saints who have bled for sin. They are still offering the "blood of others" which can never take away sin.

The Judgment and Salvation in View

The Greek word translated "judgment" in Heb 9:27 is "krísis." As used in the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Hebrew canon, Old Testament), it carries both the idea of judgment and salvation. We need to think of salvation in its broader sense of rescue (but even the narrow sense can be applied). So when the High Priest dies, the accused Israelite is saved from what?

What is the significance of the High Priest dying to a Jew under the Law? A Jewish reader would understand the significance of the comparison. Let's look at how a person who accidentally kills another is handled under the Law.

“Six of the towns you give the Levites [priests] will be cities of refuge, to which a person who has killed someone may flee. In addition, give them forty-two other towns. In all you must give the Levites forty-eight towns, together with their pasturelands.

-Numbers 35:6-7

A Jewish reader would understand the significance of the High Priest's death in relation to the accused in a city of refuge. The accused must go to the city of refuge or be subject to death by an avenger. He is essentially trapped there. If he were to leave, he was subject to revenge by the deceased's family.

Then the Lord said to Moses: “Speak to the Israelites and say to them: ‘When you cross the Jordan into Canaan, select some towns to be your cities of refuge, to which a person who has killed someone accidentally may flee. They will be places of refuge from the avenger, so that anyone accused of murder may not die before they stand trial  [judgment: krisis] before the assembly. 

-Numbers 35:9-12

We note again: The accused must stay in the city of refuge if he wants protection from any avenger. If he leaves the protection, he is liable to be killed by an avenger. We repeat this condition so we don't miss the requirement for his full release of responsibility. He must stay in the city until the death of the High Priest. This is paramount to see. The condition is noted three times in one passage.

 

The assembly must protect the one accused of murder from the avenger of blood and send the accused back to the city of refuge to which they fled. The accused must stay there until the death of the high priest, who was anointed with the holy oil. ‘But if the accused ever goes outside the limits of the city of refuge to which they fled and the avenger of blood finds them outside the city, the avenger of blood may kill the accused without being guilty of murder. The accused must stay in the city of refuge until the death of the high priest; only after the death of the high priest may they return to their own property.

-Numbers 35:25-27

When the High Priest dies, the avenger cannot act. The accused is judged/saved from vengeance. This fits not only our selected passage from Hebrews 9, but also the greater theme of the one, perfect sacrifice of Christ for all forever. Christ the High Priest died for Israel, all were set free, no new High Priest is needed as the ultimate has risen from the dead! There remains no more sacrifice (death/blood payment) for sin.

This picture is consistent with other Hebrew references. The Passover, The Day of Atonement, etc. and other types and shadows explained in the Book of Hebrews as is the death of the High Priest and its connection to judgment/salvation (krisis). 

One passage to help us further see the connection between judgment and salvation (rescue):

And when the LORD raised them up judges, then the LORD was with the judge, and delivered (saved) them out of the hand of their enemies all the days of the judge ... when the judge was dead, they returned (turned back) ...’ 

-Judges 2:18-19\

 

The judges of Israel were first of all saviors. This is seen in the judgeship of Othniel and Ehud ‘The Lord raised up a savior to the children of Israel’ (Judg. 3:9-15). The reader will doubtless call to mind the many passages where the poor, the needy and the righteous call upon God to ‘judge’ them, and such passages as Psalms 1:5 where the ungodly are excluded from ‘judgment’. It is this Old Testament conception of judgment and the particular exercise of it seen in Numbers chapter 35 that must be kept to the fore as we read Hebrews 9:27.

-Charles Welch (Perfection or Perdition, excerpt, P.150) 

We also must remember that chapter breaks in scripture are not in the original manuscripts. After the passage at the Hebrews 9, chapter 10 in our bibles continues the theme of the superiority of the sacrifice of Christ.

For the law is a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of those things. It could never by the same sacrifices, which they offer continually year after year, perfect those who draw near. Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered, since the worshippers, once purified, would no longer be conscious of sins? But in those sacrifices there is an annual reminder of sins. For it is not possible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins. Therefore, when He came into the world, He said:

“Sacrifices and offerings You did not desire,
but a body You have prepared for Me.
In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin
You have had no pleasure.
Then I said, ‘See, I have come to do Your will, O God,’
as it is written of Me in the volume of the book.” [Ps 40:6-8]

-Hebrews 10:1-7

The cities of refuge, the judgment, the salvation, the finality all point to Christ. We dare not reach into that book and pull out a verse to serve our traditions.  In Christ we are clean. No one can bring a charge against us. Let them judge us. In Christ we are fully sanctified.

Judge me, O Lord, for I have walked in my integrity. I have trusted in the Lord; I will not slip.

-Psalm 26:1

 

Charles Welch offers this structural outline from Hebrews 9 with the idea of judgment/salvation:

A 27. And as. 

B 27. The men die once. 

C 27.Judgment. 

A 28. So also. 

B 28. Christ was offered once. 

C 28. Salvation. 

The Hebrew Context of the Book of Hebrews

 A Jewish reader wouldn't need the explanation. That is for two reasons. First, he would be familiar with the history of Israel, the Law, the High Priest, the sacrificial system, the cities of refuge, and the annual feasts. Second, he would not have any concept of a bodiless "soul" floating about. When Lazarus died in John 11, there is no mention of any hope that he is sitting around, bodiless, somehow in Abraham's bosom. There is only talk of the only hope for the dead, resurrection in Christ.

Martha said to Jesus, “Lord, if You had been here, my brother would not have died. But even now I know that whatever You may ask of God, God will give You.” Jesus said to her, “Your brother will rise again.” Martha said to Him, “I know that he will rise again in the resurrection on the last day.” Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, yet shall he live. And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?” She said to Him, “Yes, Lord, I believe that You are the Christ, the Son of God, who is to come into the world.”

-John 11:21-27

We have covered this topic elsewhere, but we note it in this study to once again point out that no Jew would understand the context of the priesthood and the dying spoken of in Hebrews 9:27 as being some teaching on bodiless souls going to either heaven or into God torture chamber. The hope is always freedom from death ("the gates of Hades/Sheol") in a future resurrection. 

When Job faced death, he wasn't rejoicing or thinking he would immediately be in "Abraham's Bosom" (which was not possibly in any case). Did Adam and Noah go to "Abraham's Bosom?" Just food for thought as the passage concerning Abraham's Bosom in John is almost universally plucked out of its context as the sole "evidence" for a bodiless future (a doctrine of the Pharisees).

They change the night into day;
the light is short because of darkness.
If I wait, the grave is my house;
I have made my bed in the darkness.
I have said to the pit, ‘You are my father’;
to the worm, ‘You are my mother and my sister.’
Where now is my hope?
As for my hope, who will see it?
Will they go down to the gates of Sheol?
Will we descend together in the dust?”

-Job 17:12-16

This is the writing of Hezekiah king of Judah after his illness and recovery:

I said: In the middle of my days,
I shall go to the gates of Sheol;
I am to be deprived of the rest of my years.
I said, I shall not see the Lord,
even the Lord, in the land of the living;
I shall see man no more
with the inhabitants of the world.

-Isaiah 38:9-11

 

These are believers. And the entire passages should be read to get a sense of the full gloom they have in facing death. The gates of Sheol (Hades, Hell) is death. And death is not looked to in joy. This is why the Lord states that a profession of faith in him is a the key to bursting forth out of the gates of Hades (compare Paul in 1 Cor 15). Gates aren't attacking the "church" (the picture alone makes no sense), gates are holding in the dead. And the only escape is resurrection life.

He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades (KJV: hell) shall not prevail against it.

-Matthew 16:15-18 (MEV)

It is Gentiles who have taken this passage and this book from their purpose and have imposed the Greek mythological version of Hades and our own religious traditions upon them.

Reading the Passage With a Jewish and Scriptural Understanding

Let's read our passage in Hebrews 9 again (even using a biased translation) with hopefully a better understanding of the significance of the High Priest (which is present in the entire last section of the epistle as a whole):

It was therefore necessary that the replicas [pictures, types, shadows] of heavenly things be cleansed with these sacrifices, but that the heavenly things themselves be cleansed with better sacrifices than these. For Christ did not enter holy places made with hands, which are patterned after the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us. Nor did He enter to offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. For then He would have had to suffer repeatedly since the world was created, but now He has appeared once at the end of the ages to put away sin by sacrificing Himself. As it is appointed for men to die once, but after this comes the judgment, so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many, and He will appear a second time, not to bear sin but to save [rescue] those who eagerly wait for Him.

-Hebrews 9:23-28

As with the Book of Acts and the  other Acts-Age epistles, we stress again, the expectation of the return of Christ is part of the context.  We have looked at this elsewhere. But we need to be reminded (in light of the human traditions of Christendom) that the churches of the Acts age (with Jews and grafted-in gentiles) were anticipating both the Tribulation, the Return of Christ to the land to establish his Kingdom in Israel.

While none of that applies to us in the current age, it is present in the Book of Hebrews. But even without that piece, the passage stands on its own when we understand the teachings connected to the High Priest and the cities of refuge under the Law.

The Jewish believer is being assured that Christ's priesthood is superior to any priesthood in the Law. His sacrifice was not like that of bulls or goats, but of his own blood (something no other High Priest could offer). Upon his death, all sin was remitted. The city of refuge inhabitants were free. No charge could ever be brought against them whether inside or outside the city. It is appointed unto the High Priest to die, then the judgment from the council of innocence, then the full release. 

After the human High Priest died, the accused were free. Christ's sacrificial death is far superior and never had to be repeated for anyone else. All in Christ are free forever.  

When we allow ourselves to see this, Hebrews 9:27 comes alive for Jew specifically and for us in its continuing glorification of the finished work of Christ. It is not a random, out of place threat. It is pointing the glorious freedom from even accusation we have in a Savior who has died to make us free, but who will never die again!

Odd Thing We Say to the Bereaved Spouse (Matthew 23 and the Sadducees)

The same day the Sadducees, who say that there is no resurrection, came to Him and asked Him, “Teacher, Moses said, ‘If a man dies having no children, his brother must marry his wife and raise up children for his brother.’ Now there were seven brothers with us. The first died after he married and, having no children, left his wife to his brother. Likewise the second and third, on to the seventh. Last of all, the woman died also. Therefore, in the resurrection, whose wife shall she be of the seven? For they all had her.” Jesus answered, “You err, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God. For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like the angels of God in heaven. But concerning the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken to you by God, ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.”

-Matthew 23:23-32

My mother passed away in 2019. We knew her passing was near so, fortunately, locally and via Face Time we were able to have much of the family with her. She spent her last several years in a Catholic assisted living facility in the next town. My grandmother was in the same facility in the mid 1990s until she passed. In the intervening years, my mother would often visit residents and lead a singalong. She was well-known at the facility.

The overseers of this facility were primarily Irish nuns. Fairly conservative from what I could tell. I didn't interact with them much. I spent my time with the day to day staff. I only note that as this entry concerns a brief moment I had with the nun I assume was the Abbess. 

When my mother finally breathed her last, this nun whispered in my ear, "She's with Michael now." "Michael" referring to my father who had passed away in 2014. Obviously at that moment, I wasn't going to engage in a theological discussion with the nun, but she should have known that was she was saying was, in light of long-standing, codified, common Catholic teaching, nonsense. Worse that that, it was terrible heresy deserving of condemnation (anathema).

If anyone says that after the grace of justification has been received the guilt is so remitted and the debt of eternal punishment so blotted out for any repentant sinner, that no debt of temporal punishment remains to be paid, either in this world or in the other, in purgatory, before access can be opened to the kingdom of heaven, anathema sit [“let him be anathema” or excommunicated].

-Council of Trent (Sixth Session, Canon 30, fully affirmed in by the Second Vatican Council and the current Catechism of the Catholic Church

She was putting both my mother and father into heaven (in her understanding of it). This is not a study on the doctrine of Purgatory, but even if my father had somehow finished paying for his venial sins in God's torture chamber by then (five years being a rather light sentence, for the record), unless that nun somehow had a confirmed vision that my mother was a "Saint," my mom had just enter her own torture chamber.

As we noted in a previous study, the Catholic Church isn't quite sure what Purgatory is. Some say it is not necessarily a fire. These same teachers, who would point to "Saint" Thomas Aquinas and his Summa Theologica in defense of other aspects of their faith, would then be questioning his definitive statement that punishment in Purgatory is, indeed, "fire." But whatever they teach on any given day, it is stated that they do know this, "it is painful." But whatever it is, they must affirm the doctrine. 

"Saint" Augustine (note that some Reformed theologians like RC Sproul hold Aquinas and Augustine among the greatest Christian thinkers and theologians despite this horrific denial of the work of Christ) had this to say of Purgatory (stating clearly as did Aquinas that Purgatory is a fire):

"This fire of Purgatory will be more severe than any pain that can be felt, seen or conceived in this world." -Augustine (xli De Sanctis, as quoted by Aquinas)

That being the fate of both my parents, it would not be a very fun reunion. The nun affirming my parents were both somehow already in heaven was a dual sin for which she will pay her own debt in fire (according to their own teachings). It could be argued she is excommunicated which carries and even greater danger according to her own church.

But we can expect such confusion (or deception) from the Catholic Church. In terms of Evangelical believers (who hold and affirm the complete and sufficient work of Christ), their confusion (although not as abhorrent to Christ) is also found in statements they say about the deceased.

My believing Father-in-Law passed away several years ago leaving a believing widow. She has moved into a Christian retirement village and is free to marry again. If she does not, I am certain (as I've heard the equivalent at other funerals) many will speak of her reunion with her late husband. But what if she had remarried? What do we say then? (The Catholic nun has this problem as well, but since their heresies are far greater, it is of less concern.)

This illogical (unbiblical) understanding of the state of the dead, namely that believers are in a bodiless, conscious state in what they understand as "heaven" immediately upon death, should be easily dismissed. But the latter error (which still presents the remarriage problem) poisons not only our understanding of death, but our appreciation of what Christ accomplished on our behalf (what he conquered for us). Our victory is in resurrection and the celestial body and in a future immortality.

There are also celestial bodies and terrestrial bodies. The glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another.

-1 Corinthians 15:40

For this corruptible will [future] put on incorruption [celestial body], and this mortal will [future] put on immortality. When this corruptible [terrestrial] will have put on incorruption [celestial], and this mortal will [future] have put on immortality, then [future] the saying that is written shall come to pass: “Death is swallowed up in victory.”  

“O death, where is your sting?
O grave [Greek: "Hades," the state of the believing dead], where is your victory?"

-1 Corinthians 15:53-55

 

We have covered the issue of death before, but we note again here that the doctrine of bodiless entry directly into a mythical version of the real "heavenly places" makes the resurrection of no importance. The doctrine of the immortality of the soul leads to many errors ("making the word of God of no effect through your tradition" -Mark 7:13).

Next time we will briefly address why we cannot currently enter the heavenly places. 

Back to our example from the surviving partner remarrying. Christ addressed this issue when the Sadducees tried to trick him. Their trick didn't work on him, but what would Evangelicals say today? Note the Lord goes straight for resurrection, not some mythological intermediary state. 

Jesus answered, “You err, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God. For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like the angels of God in heaven. But concerning the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken to you by God, ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.”

In resurrection (when the believer becomes immortal after his time in the grave, the state of the dead, that is, in Hades, 1 Cor 15:55), there is no marriage. Now, I'm the first to admit I cannot grasp what that is like as I am now walking in a body of death for which God has provided the marriage relationship. But it is true nonetheless. In resurrection, we become like the angels in that particular aspect. That is, angels neither marry nor are given in marriage. 

But the error of bodiless "souls" will be perpetuated until the end of all things both in both Catholic and Evangelical circles. 

The State of the Soul Upon Death in Light of Resurrection

When addressing the resurrection of the Lord, many teachers fail to mention that the resurrection is an undoing of the curse. That is so foundational, it’s disappointing, but not surprising, that it is often left out. Yet the omission strikes at the very foundation of the faith and reduces what Christ accomplished on our behalf as we hope to show you.

The fact that the Lord did not decay in the grave is mentioned 5 times in the Acts. 

What many will do is run immediately to 2 Cor 5:8 (the most misquoted verse in scripture). We have covered that elsewhere on this blog and briefly in video.

• The Most Misquoted Verse
• Larry Ollison Misquotes Scripture (Among Other Errors) -Video

As Tyndale argued, by putting “souls” directly into heaven, we diminish the resurrection; his and ours. The Reformation from Tyndale to Luther started with this foundational truth, yet it was abandoned by the state churches (see: King James, etc.) and the doctrine of the “immortal soul” was reinstated.

And ye, in putting them [the departed souls] in heaven, hell, and purgatory, destroy the arguments wherewith Christ and Paul prove the resurrection. … And again, if the souls be in heaven, tell me why they be not in as good case as the angels be? And then what cause is there of the resurrection?'

The true faith putteth [setteth forth] the resurrection, which we be warned to look for every hour. The heathen philosophers, denying that, did put [set forth] that the souls did ever live. And the pope joineth the spiritual doctrine of Christ and the fleshly doctrine of philosophers together; things so contrary that they cannot agree, no more than the Spirit and the flesh do in a Christian man. And because the fleshly-minded pope consenteth unto heathen doctrine, therefore he corrupteth the Scripture to stablish it.'

-William Tyndale

In sum, we make the resurrection an asterisk when we put bodiless souls anywhere. And by diminishing our own hope of resurrection (the undoing of the curse as laid out in 1 Cor 15), we diminish what Christ did on our behalf by dying in our place. The Lord Jesus took the curse, and then undid it! Others (like Lazarus) were raised from the dead, but Christ alone was resurrected.

So they kept this word to themselves, questioning what the rising from the dead meant.

-Mark 9:10

Israel (the Pharisees, etc.) understood the hope of resurrection (Acts 23:6, John 11:24, etc.). They knew nothing of anything else. So, when scriptures tells us they were confused when the Lord said he would rise from the dead in resurrection (Mark 9:10), we miss the point in English. The Greek speaks of a resurrection “out from among the rest of the dead.” Ek-anastasis (or ex-anastasis). The Lord said in Mark, “ek nekron anaste.” This is what they did not understand.

Two Greek words are employed in connection with resurrection that must be kept distinct, otherwise gross error will result.  The words are anastasis and its cognate words exanastasis and anistemi, and egeiro and its cognate egersis.

-Charles Welch (An Alphabetical Analysis, excerpt Vol 4)

This helps explain the statement by Paul in Philippians concerning the “attaining” of resurrection.

that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection, and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death, if, by any means, I may attain to the resurrection from the dead.  Not that I have already attained, or am already perfected; but I press on, that I may lay hold of that for which Christ Jesus has also laid hold of me.

Paul is not striving to “attain” the free gift of redemption or “life through his name” (John 20:30-31). Paul had absolute assurance of that (1 Thess 4:14-17, 1 Cor 15:51-56, etc.). He is teaching us to strive for the “exanástasis,” a resurrection “out from among the rest of the dead.” It is a resurrection of reward at the judgment seat.

There is an order and rank in resurrection (1 Cor 15:23). As of today, no one but Christ has been raised into his celestial body. There are only two bodies (1 Cor 15:40), terrestrial (earthly, subject to death & decay) and celestial (resurrection body, free from death & decay).

All flesh is not the same flesh, but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of animals, another of fish, and another of birds. There are also celestial bodies and terrestrial bodies; but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another. There is one glory of the sun, another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars; for one star differs from another star in glory.

-1 Corinthians 15:39-41

Paul notes in 2 Timothy that he had finished the race given him and he knew there was a crown that awaited him (2 Tim 4:8). He didn’t suddenly realize he was redeemed. Again, free gift versus an attaining of reward. 

Resurrection (free gift), Resurrection out from among the rest of the dead (reward).

Luther reminds us that death is like sleep in that we have no idea of time passing. The dead in Christ will rise as though no time has passed.

Salomon judgeth that the dead are asleep, and feele nothing at all. For the dead lye there accompting neyther dayes nor yeares, but when are awaked, they shall seeme to have slept scarce one minute…

But we Christians, who have been redeemed from all this through the precious blood of God's Son, should train and accustom ourselves in faith to despise death and regard it as a deep, strong, sweet sleep; to consider the coffin as nothing other than our Lord Jesus' bosom or Paradise, the grave as nothing other than a soft couch of ease or rest. As verily, before God, it truly is just this; for he testifies, John 11:11; Lazarus, our friend sleeps; Matthew 9:24: The maiden is not dead, she sleeps. Thus, too, St. Paul in 1 Corinthians 15, removes from sight all hateful aspects of death as related to our mortal body and brings forward nothing but charming and joyful aspects of the promised life. He says there [vv. 42ff]: It is sown in corruption and will rise in incorruption; it is sown in dishonor (that is, a hateful, shameful form) and will rise in glory; it is sown in weakness and will rise in strength; it is sown in natural body and will rise a spiritual body.' …

Thus after death the soul goes to its bedchamber and to its peace, and while it is sleeping it does not realize its sleep, and God preserves indeed the awakening soul. God is able to awake Elijah, Moses, and others, and so control them, so that they will live. But how can that be? That we do not know; we satisfy ourselves with the example of bodily sleep, and with what God says: it is a sleep, a rest, and a peace. He who sleeps naturally knows nothing of that which happens in his neighbor's house; and nevertheless, he still is living, even though, contrary to the nature of life, he is unconscious in his sleep. Exactly the same will happen also in that life, but in another and a better way

-Martin Luther (excerpts)

The lost do not have life. They remain under the curse by their own choosing. That is, they shall die and return to dust (Gen 2:17; Gen 3:19; 1 Cor 15:21-23). There are a few verses that can be interpreted to mean that some of the dead are “raised from the dead,” but none of the lost will experience “resurrection.” Lazarus was raised from the dead, but he died again. he will experience “resurrection” “at the last day” (John 11:24).

Lazarus was both dead and not dead. This is how we are to understand believers when they die.

These things He said, and after that He said to them, “Our friend Lazarus sleeps, but I go that I may wake him up.”  Then His disciples said, “Lord, if he sleeps he will get well.” However, Jesus spoke of his death, but they thought that He was speaking about taking rest in sleep. Then Jesus said to them plainly, “Lazarus is dead.”

Jesus said unto her, 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. Believest thou this?

We sleep in death, yet we “never die.” We are “dead,” yet still alive.

The lost do not have life, thus they do truly die.

As an aside, the Pope declared the immortality of the soul and condemned any notion (and any person arguing) that it is not. The Reformers objected to that position noting it is pagan and not biblical.

Quick Take:

Heaven or Hell, Saved or Lost Bad Theology

Quick Take:
The Simplistic Heaven/Hell Theology and Immortal Soul Paganism

Pope Leo, Gates of Hell, Lord's Day,

Weeping and Gnashing on Social Media

What is a Soul?

 It's important to revisit some of these basic doctrines. If one does not rightly divide these foundational concepts and truths, much confusion will ensue and terrible error can creep in unaware. One of the most important foundational pillars is the idea of the soul. 

Of course, the soul is an important biblical truth. But it must be understood through the witness of scripture and not through the lens of commonly held beliefs or mythologies. 

Soul is who you are, not what you have. You are not a triune being (and neither is the Lord Jesus).

"And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath [Hebrew: nᵉshâmâh, English: spirit] of life; and man (Adam) became a living soul" 

-Gen 2:7

Adam was made from dust (as we are, indirectly in Adam, and to which we return in death bc of the curse of Adam on all of us "in Adam all die"). When Adam was made, he was a soul, but not a "living soul." When "spirit" was put in him, he BECAME a LIVING soul.

When the Lord was on the tree, he breathed his last and gave up the spirit (the breath of life) and died.

And when Jesus had cried out with a loud voice, He said, “Father, ‘into Your hands I commit My spirit.’ ” Having said this, He breathed His last. 

-Luke 23:46

We are told the Lord's "soul" was in "hades" (Acts 2:31) That is, who he was was in a state of death known to God. He told us "the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth" (Matt 12:40). The Lord was not simultaneously in heaven where he gave up the Spirit, and in a place called Hades where his soul was, and also in the heart of the earth. His body was in the tomb (the earth) and who he is was in a state of death (hades).

The tomb and Hades are conquered by resurrection. In resurrection the spirit (breath of life) returns to the body. That is our hope. Paul mentions Hades one time, and it is context of believers and resurrection (rescue from the state of death).

So when this corruptible has put on incorruption, and this mortal has put on immortality [in resurrection], then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written: “Death is swallowed up in victory.”
“O Death, where is your sting?
O Hades [grave, state of the dead], where is your victory?” - 

1 Cor 15:54-55

We await resurrection from the state of death. Our immortal and incorruptible life is hidden in Christ to be revealed in resurrection. We "groan" not to be naked, but to be clothed in resurrection (2 Cor 5:1-10, 2 Cor 4:7-14)

For you died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God. 

-Col 3:3

You ARE a soul. Each person IS a soul. Scripture proclaims, a soul can die. The one who sins is the soul who sins. It is not an entity, it is the person.

• The soul who sins shall die. (Ezek 18:4)
• The person who sins is the one who will die. [HCSB]

The gospel saves souls/people from death and destruction (not bodiless torture by God).

let him know that he who turns a sinner from the error of his way will save a soul from death [thánatos, same word Paul uses in 1 Cor 15:55] and cover a multitude of sins. 

-James 5:20

We are all living "souls." We die because we have sinned. We are rescued from death and Hades in resurrection. We then become (are made) immortal souls.

Next time we'll look at "Abraham's Bosom" from the story of The Rich Man and Lazarus in Luke 16.

Quick Reminder About Death and Mortality and Resurrection

If I assembled a room full of people (Christians, Muslims, Animists, Atheists, Agnostics, Mets fans, you name it), there is one thing we can agree on... in one way or another, our bodies are mortal. We are all going to die.

That is the central problem of mankind, death

Rom 5:12 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned.


Ezek 18:20a The one who sins is the one who will die.

In Christianity, we understand from Paul that "the wages of sin is death" (Rom 6:23). This might freak out some Christians, but when someone is told that he cannot pay his sin debt, that someone is wrong. You can pay your sin debt. Die. Not "die" simply in terms of "passing away" but "die" in terms of really dying. Going back to the dust. Exercising your mortality. Ceasing to be.

God has already been reconciled to humans. He is not holding their sins against them. However, people must individually be reconciled to God. We don't preach judgment, we preach reconciliation.

Now all things are of God, who has reconciled us to Himself through Jesus Christ, and has given us the ministry of reconciliation, that is, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not imputing their trespasses to them, and has committed to us the word of reconciliation.

-2 Corinthians 5:18-9

God is a God of justice. In the end, all will "surely die" (as God warned Adam and Eve in the garden) if they refuse the free gift of "life through his name" (John 20:30-31). For the believer, the scriptures tell us in Isaiah 53 and in 1 Peter 2 "by His stripes we are healed." He took the temporal stripes of our punishment and suffered death. But whereas our punishment and death would be the final result of our sin, He rose again to conquer both sin and death!

God's free gift is "life" through Christ (Rom 6:23; John 20:30-31). When we place our faith in Christ, we are passed from death, unto life (John 5:24).

When one owes a debt and pays it, he doesn't get a free gift. He simply paid the debt. If there is a gift it must be received. This is the essence of Christianity. God offers a free gift of immortal and incorruptible life in resurrection.! This is a true gift.

This gift cannot be earned (lest it cease to be a gift) or lost (lest it cease to be free).

Of course, to be freed of the obligation of never-ending death and to have that obligation obliterated so an alternative can be offered, a substitutionary death must be presented to pay the debt of never-ending death. That is where Christ's death, burial (lack of decay) and resurrection (undoing of death) come in. He died for our sins (in our place) so we are no longer obligated to "cease to be." We can be "hid in him" and live again (undo physical death).

Rom 4:25 He was delivered over to death for our sins and was raised to life for our justification.

1 Cor 15:3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures...

1 Cor 6:14 By his power God raised the Lord from the dead, and he will raise us also.

God is not in the torture business. You may pay your sin debt through mortality and death or you may choose to seek the free grace of God through Christ Jesus (resurrection life).

Of course, choosing death does not mean that you won't have to face your sin. Who you are (soul) is known to God and he may restore a mortal body to display his just decision to allow you to die by having you face your sins and face your choice to choose never-ending death over the free gift of life, but I will leave that in His hands. To be honest, I can see it both ways. I honestly am not sure how that will play out for the unbeliever. Fortunately, because of Christ alone, I'll never have to experience it. One thing I am sure of for those who reject the gift of resurrection life: they will perish.

Faith is an individual matter. The choice is therefore laid out for the individual: you can either choose to seek the free gift of immortal and incorruptible life in a celestial body that will know no sickness or death or you may choose to die. No church, no pastor, no catechism will answer for you or can make your decision for you. It is your choice.

The Elements of Death Removed from Those Who Receive the Free Gift

• The sting of death (1 Cor 15:55)
• The victory of death (1 Cor 15:55)

It is never said of an unbeliever in scripture that he "sleeps" at his death, but this is how believers are to view death. We do not feel the "sting" of death. It is though we make our bed in death (Psalm 139) and await awakening in resurrection.

For one to receive this gift he must understand that he needs to be freed from the condemnation of death and from "the law of sin and death" (Rom 8:1-2). Do you understand that you have sinned and that the wages of your sin will be death? One needs not only understand that, he must seek the remedy. And the only remedy to the law of sin and death is the substitutionary death of the Christ and his conquering of the grave by his not decaying and rising again!

Death is the enemy Christ came to destroy.

1 Cor 15:26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death.

Romans 6:9 Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him.

Rev 21:4 He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death

Death is "the last enemy." Death is how the history of man begins and the destruction of that curse is how it will end. The introduction of the Greek mythology of a fiery torture chamber robs Christ's death of its glory. His death should be valued as the substitute for our death. He (a) did not decay in the grave and (b) he rose from the dead. It is death that hangs over the world. We need to tell people they can be freed from the penalty of death and freed from the power of sin that requires death.

So WHEN this corruptible has put on incorruption, and this mortal has put on immortality, THEN shall be brought to pass the saying that is written: “Death is swallowed up in victory.”

Paul teaches that it is the goodness of God that leads us to turn from sin and turn to him in faith (Rom 2). Contemplate the wonderful goodness of God found in the free gift of eternal life won by the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ! Christian rejoice in it, and pray others find salvation and the free gift of life in it!

 

He's coming!

Ye Shall Not Surely Die - The Lie of Eden and Today

 

And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die

-Genesis 3:4

We've look at this core lie of the evil one in various studies on the false doctrine of "the immorality of the soul." But today I want to pull back the lens and look at this pervasive lie and how it is currently manifesting itself in the general culture.

News programs and politicians have discovered the power of anecdotes. We do not completely discard the use of anecdotes as they sometimes do reflect a larger reality. However, we want to avoid taking an anecdote and use to make sweeping generalizations without warrant.

Let's put the idea of the lie "ye shall not surely die" along side the use of anecdotes in trying to prove a sweeping generalization.

A friend of mine recently posted a story about the recent increase in the number of people hospitalized and the number of people who have died from COVID-19. The post was meant to illicit fear and suggest that huge numbers of people are dying from the disease. To be sure, many have died (we do not minimize that fact), but the overall numbers tell a different story in terms of how deadly the disease is (in general).

Total cases: 20,346,372

Deaths: 349,246

Source:  CDC COVID Data Tracker (Jan 4, 2021)

Again, we do not minimize any death and we certainly encourage anyone who perceives any threat to his/her health to take all precautions. I am "at-risk" because of my heart condition, so I am certainly sympathetic to those at-risk (especially the elderly). But the CDC numbers above reflect a mortality rate of less than 2% of cases. 

We now turn to more info to help give us context on published death rates you may have encountered.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released new data last week that depicts how many Americans who have died from COVID-19 also had other contributing conditions. According to the report, only 6% of deaths have COVID-19 as the only cause mentioned, revealing that 94% of patients who died from coronavirus also had other “health conditions and contributing causes.” (fox8.com, Aug 30, 2020)

  

With these full-scale statistics before us, let us pivot to the original concern. Just as my friend posted selective numbers to try and illicit an emotional reaction, others post individual stories of those who have unfortunately died from COVID-19 to "prove" either that we need to take even more extreme measures or to pin blame for political purposes. I'm going to leave these alone and instead point to what I believe is the reason the use of anecdotes in this area has proved so successful.

The idea is to get all of us to treat almost every death as preventable. Without the notion being explicitly expressed, the idea that no one one should "surely die" is behind much of the manipulation. Almost anyone anywhere under the age of 70 who dies of almost anything causes the crusaders to find who is at fault. 

Health care being deemed a "right" is based on this thinking. That's a large topic we will not examine here, but for millenia people died from everything. We are fortunate to live in an age of fantastic medical advances. We have pharmaceuticals and surgeries today unknown and impossible to imagine in other ages. I'm alive today because of these relatively recent advancements. Yet, I never claimed a "right" to them. We will just have to leave that there.

Back to our premise and a look the Utopian Lie

We are being taught to think that every death is a political death. Every death is the fault of someone. Every death is preventable. Every death is undeserved. This creates anger and emotional responses to reality. It also plays into the lie of the Evil One. Yes, we shall all surely die.

Scripture speaks of death as an "enemy." In fact, when death is finally destroyed, it is called "the last enemy." It is the curse. It is what plagues all humans. It is the result of our birth in Adam and our own sin. It is what Christ came to reverse. We mourn the dead because all deaths are sad. But that does not mean all deaths are preventable.

The two-pronged lie poisons the greatest event in all of scripture: the resurrection of our Great God and Savior, The Lord Jesus Christ. The first prong is the prong of the "immortal soul" which supposedly lives without resurrection. The second denies that all men deserve death (at some point, not that murder is justified, etc.). Yes, the death of a child may be tragic. It may be the result of negligence, etc. But we cannot fall into lie that ALL deaths must have a villain*.

[*We pause here to note that CNN took down its ubiquitous COVID death count graphic after the inauguration [Jan 20]. As of today (Jan 22) it is still not up.]

The double lie of the immortal soul and that almost every death is the fault of a political enemy is part of another two-pronged, hallucinogenic fantasy. One prong the idea of a coming Utopia and the other prong is the misguided concept of collectivism. Where the first goes, the other follows. These are deadly, anti-God, humanistic drugs. They have no place in Christian doctrine. 

The anti-Christ murderer (and Catholic "saint") Thomas More coined the word Utopia. Wikipedia offers this brief description:

A utopia focuses on equality in such categories as economics, government and justice, with the method and structure of proposed implementation varying based on ideology.

We see another drug in there: equality. Equality is fine if it merely describes a condition such as "equal before the law," but as a basis for running a society, it becomes an addictive substance which drugs the masses into accepting things like "re-education," the cancel culture, discrimination, and the punishment of success. All of which we are seeing in this current age. 

Utopia hates Christianity and its claims of exclusivity of life in Christ alone. Sadly, many in the name of Christianity have abandoned Christ for the drug of Utopian dreams. The same church that puts an "UNDO RACISM" or "LOVE THY NEIGHTBOR (NO EXCEPTION) "sign on its property would never deign to put a "CHRIST IS THE ONLY WAY" sign in their yard.

They are deemed "brave" for the former while the truth is that all they will receive is praise from a Christ-rejecting world. The real act of bravery would be to put up the latter. for that, they would receive scorn and have an opportunity to suffer for the Lord. But, alas, the praise and the self-righteous, self-glorification (virtue signaling) are powerful and addictive narcotics.

Larry Ollison Misquotes Scripture (Among Other Errors)

A short video giving us a good example of how the traditions of men can poison our understanding of scripture and the Plan of God.

2 Cor 5:8 is one of the most misquoted verses in Christianity. We have taken pagan ideas related to death and have forced the scriptures to affirm what we already believe instead of allowing scripture to teach us. The doctrines of the "immortal soul" and the "intermediate state" rob from what our Lord accomplished on Calvary by dying, being buried, not decaying, and rising again. 

In his salvific work, the Lord reversed the curse of death and decay. Scripture teaches that death is our enemy, not our friend. Dr. Ollison also carelessly handles the parable of the rich man and Lazarus in Luke 16. Almost his entire presentation in this clip is from human and pagan traditions. For more on this topic (and related) click on the links at the end of the video or visit bibleunderstanding.com

A Quick Response to Accusations Against E.W. Bullinger

 Dr. Bullinger doesn't need me to defend him. He was a humble man who gladly accepted critiques of his work. He famously told Charles Welch, after Mr. Welch pointed out a concern in regard to Dr. Bullinger's exegesis of the Pauline epistles, that he would have to denounce half his own writings! He did so with a laugh. The critique was valid. He humbly accepted it. If one is to accuse him of error, he had better be precise. Publicly bearing false witness against a brother in Christ is a serious matter.

This will not be an exhaustive post in regard to one such public critique, but I did want to address a few issues. Specifically, false charges and blasphemy against E.W. Bullinger,  

Let all bitterness and rage and anger and clamour and blasphemy be put away from you, along with all malice,

-Ephesians 4:31

 

I refer to to this post by Dan R. Smedra: The Anglo-Catholic Errors of E.W. Bullinger

I write from the perspective a former, devout Roman Catholic. I was born, raised, and educated in the Catholic Church. Catholic school, altar boy, acolyte. Religious Education Teacher, Youth Leader, etc. I even made a trip to the Vatican. I can usually spot Catholic influence a mile away. That is why the title of Mr. Smedra's post struck me.

Again, I'm not embarking on a line-by-line defense, but I do want to address some of his accusations. We have noted before Harry Ironside's atrocious attack on Mr. Bullinger's teachings (accusing us of being universalists). That attack contained downright lies. What I see in the above referenced post is a similar mischaracterization or misinterpretation of Dr. Bullinger's teaching. 

The irony here is that Bullinger (possibly more than any other teacher), very much different from what is taught in the Catholic Church, stressed the absolute singleness and individuality of Bible Study. That is, the responsibility for rightly dividing the word of truth rested solely with every individual believer. Let me quote from the conclusion to his monumental work, "How To Enjoy The Bible."

All Bible study must in the end be individual. As with ordinary bodily food: others may prepare the food and serve it up in various forms: they may cook it in more senses than one: they may present it in "made dishes": they may carve it, and cut it up, and even put it in the mouth, as with babes; but, after all, there is no more that they can do. They cannot eat it or digest it for us; they cannot assimilate it for us; even so it is with the spiritual food of the Word of God. Notwithstanding all that has been said in the foregoing pages, the great necessity remains: the work of Bible study must be, to the end, intensely personal and individual. Each one must look out the reference for himself. He must trace the words through all their occurrences where these are given; he must consider their usages; he must read the contexts; he must make his lists and tables, and do his countings for himself: for so only can he feed upon the Word and the words, and be nourished, and be strengthened himself, and grow thereby: so only will he be able to say with Jeremiah: "Thy words were found, and I did eat them; And thy word was unto me the joy and rejoicing of my heart." [E.W. Bullinger] 

emphasis mine 

Now let us turn to a few points from Mr. Smedra (and as we always do, we encourage the reader to read the original post, linked above, in its entirety).

Mr. Bullinger did not clearly acknowledge the necessity of the Holy Spirit's sovereign illumination of the Text.  Either he believed that the Fall wasn't serious enough to render man incapable of grasping truth with one's natural abilities, or he believed in the Wesleyan doctrine of common grace, thus siding with Roman Catholicism rather than the Reformation or historic dispensationalism.  [Dan R. Smedra]

This is a sweeping and irresponsible conclusion to draw simply because Dr. Bullinger taught that the believer can and should study the Word diligently. I turn back to the conclusion of Bullinger's book noted above where we find this utterly clear statement in regard to understanding scripture:

It is assumed, from the first word to the last, that the readers have passed from death unto life, and have the Divine gift of a spiritual "understanding," apart from which all that has been said will be useless. We must be able to say: "We know that the Son of God hath come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may get to know HIM that is true, and we are in Him that is true, even in His Son Jesus Christ" (1 John 5:20). We have not written to convince unbelievers, though God may over-rule our work to that end. We have not written in defence of the Bible, for not only does it not need any defence of ours, but it is our own "shield" (Psa 91:4) and "sword" (Eph 6:17), without which we are defenceless indeed. We have written only for those who have "peace with God" (Rom 5:1), and enjoy "the peace of God" (Phil 4:7), and know "the God of Peace" (Rom 15:33). Only such have leisure to be occupied with God. Only such can "sit at the Lord's feet and hear His Word" (Luke 10:39, RV). All others must be "cumbered about much serving." 

They must needs be occupied with themselves: either as sinners taken up with their sins, or as penitents with their repentance, or as believers with their faith, or as saints with their holiness. Unless and until we know our completeness in Christ (Col 2:10), and "believe God" when He declares that "He hath made us to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light" (Col 1:12), we shall be in such a condition of conscience, and heart, and life as will not leave us any time for occupation with God. Instead of going on our way "giving thanks to God" for what He has done, we shall be giving way to mourning for what we have not done. We shall be like David when he "sat in his house" and was occupied with what he would do for the Lord. For, not until we learn what the Lord has done and purposed to do for us, shall we be ready, with David, to go in and sit before the Lord (2 Sam 7:1,18). In the former case David's thought was, "Who I am"; in the latter he was exclaiming, "Who am I, O Lord God?" [E.W. Bullinger]

emphasis mine 

 

Could he be more clear? There is not one scent of "common grace" here. Quite the opposite! Absolutely no one in his natural state can possibly understand scripture is the argument. He says of this extensive work on tools for understanding scripture, that the passing from death unto life by faith is absolutely necessary and "apart from which all that has been said will be useless." That is, Dr. Bullinger clearly taught that the natural man cannot understand spiritual things. 

Summation of the excerpt: Without the new nature from God, which comes with a Divine Gift of Spiritual understanding, study is useless.

How could Mr. Smedra accuse Bullinger of teaching that man can "grasp truth with his natural abilities" or that he somehow believed all men have the benefits of "common grace?" Such irresponsibility! Either his scholarship is sloppy, his research incomplete, or (like Ironside before him) he chooses to grind his axe based on his assumptions, desired conclusions, and a personal disdain for Dr. Bullinger. 

We end this section with Dr. Bullinger's reference to the necessity of God's hand in the use of Bullinger's own book:

May the Lord deign to use these pages, and make them to be that "guide" to a better understanding and a greater enjoyment of His own Word.

Let us now turn to the attack in regard to what Mr. Smedra calls "spiritual death."

 

Most seriously, [Mr. Bullinger and his followers] failed to understand the biblical truth of "spiritual death".

I find the use of quotation marks interesting. They are curiously used as the phrase is nowhere found in the pages of the Bible nor is any spirit ever said to have died. It is a doctrine of the Reformers and Reformation theology which is itself a product of Catholicism and its doctrine of "spiritual death."  

Ironically, the concept of "spiritual death" has as one of its proponents, John Wesley. In doing so, Wesley (as have countless others) denies the words of the God in Genesis and promotes a lie. The phrase could be said to be a "Wesleyan doctrine," but not a "biblical" doctrine. 

From John Wesley's Explanatory Notes on Genesis:

That is, thou shalt lose all the happiness thou hast either in possession or prospect; and thou shalt become liable to death, and all the miseries that preface and attend it. This was threatened as the immediate consequence of sin... Not only thou shalt become mortal, but spiritual death and the forerunners of temporal death shall immediately seize thee.

Furthermore, those that teach that unbelievers are tortured by God by fire, without hope and without end, are teaching that man is immortal. They teach that he "will not surely die." It is the lie of Satan as is the doctrine of bodiless bliss at the time of physical death. All men are mortal, believers and unbelievers. It is only in resurrection that believers "put on immortality," (1 Cor 15:54).

Christ came that men might have life. Without Christ, men have no life in them. Read the story of Lazarus in John 11. Is there any doubt that Lazarus was dead? Is there anything in the text that suggests he was waiting in bliss somewhere? What is the only hope spoken of there by Martha or by the Lord himself? RESURRECTION. 

Who Is Promoting Catholic Doctrines?

The idea of a fiery pit wherein God tortures the lost is UTTERLY Catholic. It is creation of the "Early Church Fathers," borrowed from Greek mythology. It is these men to whom the Reformers and the Catholic Church bow and forsake their responsibility to study. 

Bullinger, in no uncertain terms, stated that Bible Study is an INDIVIDUAL responsibility, it requires hard work, and that ONLY BELIEVERS have any hope of understanding scripture. 

We are called to be WORKMEN who must STUDY in that way that we be APPROVED and not ASHAMED. Is that Catholicism? Is that a denial of the role of the Spirit? Is that "common grace?" Of course not. Bullinger calls us to do the WORK and in no way implies this is an accomplishment of the carnal nature. 

Mr. Smedra quotes Lewis Sperry Chafer as though he is in conflict with Dr. Bullinger's understanding. Ironically (again), a right division of scripture reveals that instant understanding and having the words to answer all men is a Pentecostal Age truth. The Catholic understanding of the Pentecostal gifts and the Pentecostal ordinances is far more inline with Mr. Smedra than with Dr. Bullinger.

Do we imagine that Chafer would suggest that no study is of any value? That any and all believers only understand scripture in accordance with whatever the Lord gives them at the time of conversion? Of course not. 

Perhaps Mr. Smedra should concern himself less with the judgment of unbelievers and his desire to see God torturing billions of men and women (torture Reformed teacher R.C. Sproul says we'll all rejoice in watching some day) and worry about his own judgment at the Bema Seat. All of us need to be concerned. 

As we have noted in regard to study of the Word, we must go about it as "WORKMEN" that we may be "APPROVED" and not find ourselves "ASHAMED." 

Are we to conclude from Smedra's argument that anyone, including himself, who quotes scripture in defense of, or in proposition, of, or refutation of any doctrine is denying the work of God in us? Is it an appeal to "free will" if we do so? That is, for me to refute my previous Catholic doctrines, I have to study the Bible. Such knowledge is not magically bestowed on all believers. If that were so, Paul wouldn't waste time either warning us about false teachers or warning us about being ashamed for lack of proper studying. 

After quoting two lines from Bullinger's massive library of writings, Smedra states:

Again, not a word about the Holy Spirit's sovereign ministry of revealing truth (John 16:13) nor of the natural man's inability to understand spiritual things, as expounded by the Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 2.

So, let us apply his reasoning to this assertion.

By quoting John 16:13 as part of his argument, Dan is assuming we can understand it. He must conclude that we either know the truth there or do not know the truth there based on whether God has illuminated us to its meaning. In quoting from scripture, Dan thus denies God's hand and exalts the free-will of the reader over the work of the Spirit. 

That sounds like intellectual crap, because it is. But I would argue it is in line with the accusation that Dr. E.W. Bullinger taught that understanding scripture is independent of a work of God. We have clearly dispelled that blasphemy against the man. 

Here is a summation of the position and it should be clear for all to see from Bullinger's writings:

A. No one can possibly understand scripture without the new nature which is a gift of God by grace through faith alone. 

B. Each of us is workman who is instructed to read and study the Word of Truth for which we will answer, having our work found approved or ourselves found ashamed.

To say that by teaching the second statement, one is denying the first is nonsense and food for weak minds ready to hate.

Final irony here, Dan refers to Bullinger as "Mr. Bullinger." Yes, Dr. Bullinger's title was honorary, but Dan chose to slight him since he did not receive this honor from a university. Conversely, he quotes as an authority "Dr. L. S. Chafer" who also received only honorary doctorates.

The Spirit Works Through Study (A Basic Concept)

And we are left to ask, if ALL understanding of scripture is solely by the illumination of the Sprit apart from any effort on our part, who is to determine whether Bullinger, Chafer, or Smedra are correct on any point of doctrine? How can any Christian disagree on anything?

Denying the personal responsibility of the individual to do the hard work of a Bible student leaves us all vulnerable to pronouncements of men who claim illumination by the Spirit. A Pope and his Council, perhaps? And let me assure you, the discouraging of study on the premise that all such work is useless is a very Catholic concept. 

Bullinger's critics would argue  they are not teaching this, but if not, their attacks on Dr. Bullinger must be abandoned. For he taught 

1. the inability of the natural man to understand scripture
2. necessity of the creation of the new nature by God as an act of grace
3. and the responsibility of the one with the new nature to feed that nature by diligent Bible Study  

Dr. Bullinger encourages all of us who have the new nature to INTESELY study God's word. In doing so, in no way does he discount the necessity of either the New Nature or the role of the Spirit. 

I refer readers to an excerpt from Dr. Bullinger's  "The Two Natures of the Child of God." Could he be more clear on his belief that the natural man (old nature) cannot understand truth? If a man is to understand anything, God must "deign" he do so?

“The Natural Man.” And we are told that “the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he get to know them because they are spiritually discerned” (1 Cor.2:14).

In the structure of this portion of 1 Corinthians, verse 14 stands in correspondence with verse 8; which tells us that “none of the princes of this world knew the wisdom of God”, i.e., the great Secret–the Mystery–for it was “hidden” in God (Eph. 3:9), and no eye had ever seen it, or ear heard it. And even when now it is “revealed” (1 Cor. 2:10), the natural man cannot get to know it, because it is only discerned by the spirit, or the new nature within us, created and enlightened by the Holy Ghost. This is conclusive as to the character, power, inclination and condition of “the natural man”; which means man by nature, as he is born into the world.

Another of Smedra's charges, "failure to clearly understand or articulate the truth of spiritual blindness" is refuted by the statement above as here as well:

“The Old Man.” And what about him? He, we are told “is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts” (Eph. 4:22). The old man is full of desires or lusts. These lusts are deceitful and deceiving. They are in all things contrary to God, contrary to His Spirit, and His Word; and to the new nature, the spirit, when it is once implanted within us. In this connection, it is called...

“The Heart” i.e., the natural heart, which is “deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked” (Jer. 17:9), so deceitful that it constantly deceives and betrays us: so deceitful that none but God can really know it. The Lord Jesus has some “teaching about the heart” of the natural man in Matthew 15:19. “Out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies.”

Do any of these quotes suggest that Bullinger fails to understand the spiritual blindness of the carnal nature? 

Accusing Dr. Bullinger of teaching "common grace" or enlightenment apart from the Holy Ghost is blasphemy.

More from Dr. Bullinger on the sad state of the natural man:

 

In the light which shined out of darkness (Gen 1:2,3) we shall see the light which has shone "in our hearts to give the knowledge of the glory of God in the face (or person) of Jesus Christ" (2 Cor 4:6). No wonder that those who know nothing of this spiritual light of the New Creation know nothing of the light that was created on the first day as revealed in the record of the old creation. The natural man sees only a myth and an old wives' fable in the Creation record, and seems actually to prefer the Babylonian corruption of primitive truth. These "other Gentiles walk in the vanity of their mind, having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart" (Eph 4:17,18). Woe be to those who follow these blind leaders, for "they shall both fall into the ditch" they have prepared for themselves by their fleshly knowledge and worldly wisdom." 

One last thought from me; the doctrine of eternal, fiery torture is both "Babylonian" and "Catholic." And it is Mr. Smedra who promotes this human Catholic tradition (along with the Satanic lie that men shall ever live), and not Dr. Bullinger. He seems to be a victim of the traditions he claims to reject.

Here a few other blog entries on this and related topics:

• Deconstruction Don Perkins' Introduction to "Hell" - Part 1
• Deconstructing Don Perkins' Introduction to "Hell" - Part 2
• How to Prevail Against the Gates of Hell
• Traditions That Interfere With True Understanding
• Another Look at "Gehenna" (Hell)
• More on the Traditional Doctrine of Hell
• Animals Are Souls And You Are Not Immortal
• The State of the Dead
• Scripturally Comforting the Bereaved - Part 1
• Scripturally Comforting the Bereaved - Part 2