Gen. 2:16 -- And the Lord God Commanded the man, "You
are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the
knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die."
This is a very concise, clear statement of fact and declared by God himself.
Gen. 3:2-5 -- The woman said to the serpent, "We may eat
fruit from the trees in the garden, but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the
tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will
die.’"
"You will not surely die," the
serpent said to the woman. For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be
opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."
It is obvious that one of these statements is a lie. We cast ever so many stones
(verbally) at Eve because she came to the conclusion that God must have been lying and
therefore believed what the serpent said.
Before we condemn Eve too strongly, let us stop to realize that the majority of
Christendom has made that same appraisal and has cast their vote for the statement by the
serpent, thus calling God the liar. What might be some of the consequences of this
colossal mistake? Consider the following narrative:
1 Sam. 28:3-15 -- Now Samuel was dead, and all Israel had
mourned for him and buried him in his own town of Ramah. Saul had expelled the
mediums and spiritists from the land... When Saul saw the Philistine army, he was
afraid; terror filled his heart. He inquired of the Lord, but the Lord did not
answer him... "Find me a woman who is a medium, so I may go and inquire of
her."
"There is one in Endor," they
said.
So Saul disguised himself, putting on
other clothes, and at night he and two men went to the woman. "Consult a spirit
for me," he said, "and bring up for me the one I name." But the woman
said to him, "Surely you know what Saul has done... Why have you set a trap for
my life to bring about my death?"
Saul swore to her by the Lord, "As
surely as the Lord lives, you will not be punished for this." Then the woman
asked, "Whom shall I bring up for you?" "Bring up Samuel," he
said.
When the woman saw Samuel, she cried out
at the top of her voice and said to Saul, "Why have you deceived me? You are
Saul!"
The king said to her, "Don't be
afraid, what do you see?"
The woman said, "I see a spirit
coming up out of the ground."
"What does he look like?" he
asked.
"An old man wearing a robe is coming
up," she said.
Then Saul knew it was Samuel and he bowed
down and prostrated himself with his face to the ground.
Samuel said to Saul, "Why have you
disturbed me by bringing me up?"
This is a very impressive narrative. Something supernatural occurred here.
An old man wearing a robe, looking like Samuel and talking like Samuel conversed with
Saul. Saul recognized him and prostrated himself at his feet -- but was it
Samuel?
If you had voted with the serpent, then this might have been Samuel -- to
you. But what does the Bible say about this being a possibility?
Eccl. 9:5,6 (KJV) -- For the living know that they shall die:
but the dead know not anything, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of
them is forgotten.
Also their love and their hatred, and
their envy is now perished; Neither have they any more a portion for ever in any thing
that is done under the sun.
This passage tells us in no uncertain words that this apparition was not Samuel; could
not be Samuel. It could only be a spirit of the serpent masquarading as
Samuel. Another text which reinforces the one already quoted is:
Eccl. 9:10 (KJV) -- Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it
with all thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom in
the grave, whither thou goest.
These texts also give me the basis for my concern for those I read about who are having
regular or sporatic discussions with a beloved departed member of their family. This
text tells us the person who knows all my earthly secrets and is undeniably identical to
my departed loved one is in reality a spirit of the serpent masquerading as our loved one
and unfortunately, in the process of proving to our satisfaction, if we believe this, that
it really was God who was the liar in the Garden of Eden that day.
How often have you heard the words spoken at a funeral service, of one who has recently
departed, that they are now on Jesus' knee, praising God and enjoying eternal bliss, or
words to that effect? If this was true, would it not be a grand occasion and
something we would want to happen to the rest of our children, or loved ones? It
might make us feel better to think this is what is happening, but does the Bible
substantiate this concept?
Ps. 6:5 (KJV) -- For in death there is no remem- brance of
thee: In the grave who shall give thee thanks?
Isa. 38:18 (KJV) -- For the grave cannot praise thee, death
cannot celebrate thee; they that go down into the pit cannot hope for the truth.
Acts 2:29 (KJV) -- Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto
you of the Patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us
unto this day...
(Vs. 34) -- For David is not ascended into the heavens.
This would indicate that David had been dead and in his grave for 1000 years at the
time Peter spoke these words through inspiration and states that he had not at that time
ascended into heaven. We know from God's own words that David was a man after God's
own heart, and if it was customary for the saved to be called up to heaven on their
demise, David would have, without a doubt, ascended.
The Lord, speaking through Jeremiah, tells us of His Second Coming, and establishing
His kingdom in Jerusalem and the Holy Land, immediately thereafter.
Jer. 30:7-9 (KJV) -- Alas! for that day is great, so that
none is like it: it is even the time of Jacob's trouble; but he shall be saved out of
it... But they shall serve the Lord their God and David their king, whom I will
raise up for them.
Now we know that David is scheduled to remain 2000 more years, at least, in the grave
at which time God has promised to raise him up for them, to be their prince.
Not to bring him down from heaven where most Christians would expect him to be.
I believe this old world is being set up, by Satan, to make these appearances from the
dead an increasingly common occurrence. Even our television programs are full of
it. We have serials that are built around such characters. When the real
deception occurs it will be such an easy thing to accept since we have allowed ourselves
to be conditioned to it.
There is no question that these appearances will be supernatural. Most skeptics
have no belief in the supernatural and they will be the easiest to deceive when
circumstances beyond any natural explanation will be demonstrated. If one is not
being fortified by a Scriptural basis for their understanding, they will accept as from
God that which is beyond any possibility of a natural explanation. No doubt
the majority will be deluded by these miraculous demonstrations which are beginning to
surface in various countries of the globe. These will intensify in frequency.
Many will say, "Of course the body dies, but the immortal soul lives
on." We must be careful about this concept. This is a maneuver to keep
the serpent in the truth column, but where in Scripture does it ever say that the soul is
immortal?
Eze. 18:4 (KJV) -- Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of
the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die.
This does not say that the soul that sinneth shall have immortal life in burning hell,
but that it shall die -- cease to exist. If it was to undergo eternal torment
then it could not die and this text in Ezekiel would be untrue. Perhaps Christ's
words will settle the issue:
Matt. 10:28 (KJV) -- And fear not them which kill the body,
but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul
and body in hell.
The doctrine of the immortal soul is based on the statement of the serpent, made in
Eden. There is no Scriptural basis for this other than the word of that serpent
which I choose to believe is a lie.
1 Tim. 6:15,16 (KJV) -- ... the King of kings, and Lord of
lords' Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto.
This statement by Paul should make us careful in our application of this term to anyone
or anything except to God himself. But some will counter with Christ's statement
concerning an eternal fire which the wicked are thrown into at his coming.
Matt. 25:41 (KJV) -- Then he will say to those on his left,
‘Depart from me you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the
devil and his angels.
Does this eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels have the same duration as
eternal life which is given to the saved? If this is the case, then our cunning and
crafty serpent has just validated his statement that he made to Eve. Isn't it safe
to say that a majority of Christians will raise their hands to assert that this is the
truth?
If the person that is undergoing this torment in eternal fire is feeling the pain,
understands all the reasons why this is happening, then he must have a functioning brain
and nervous system and obviously a part of him must be living on. In that case he
would have to be immortal. Notice these scriptures to the case in point:
Jude 7 (NIV) -- In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the
surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve
as an example to those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire.
1 Peter 2:6 (KJV) -- And turning the cities of Sodom and
Gomorah into ashes condemned them with an overflow; making them an example
unto those that after should live ungodly.
These verses are given to us as models of how eternal fire will deal with the wicked at
the time of settling eternal accounts.
Do you believe that, if you had been able to probe the ashes of Sodom the day following
the eternal fire was applied, that the residents would be in torment? Probably there
were still some hot coals, but certainly no sign of life. How about a week
later? Not even any heat left in the ashes.
Notice the word in the text says punishment -- not punishing. If you
condemn a criminal to the electric chair for some foul deed and the sentence is carried
out; he has received his punishment. It is completed.
Now, if he had received a life sentence, then while serving this sentence he is
undergoing punishment which is not complete until death or his sentence is terminated,
then it could be said that he has received his punishment.
Let us return to our model of Sodom and Gomorrah, of being a recipient of eternal
fire. Don't you imagine that there were various degrees of wickedness in that
population? There very well may have been some that we would have considered good
neighbors, minded their own business, etc. And of course there were those who
everyone knew were ringleaders in this sordid mess of immoral behavior.
The question I would like for us to consider is; do you believe that there was a
variation in the length of time prescribed to consume the wicked in that conflagration,
based on the extent of their wickedness? Putting it another way, don't you believe
that they were consumed at the same time interval and with its resultant permanent
consequences?
I am convinced this model is demonstrating to us that the same fate awaits the unsaved
in the final judgment of God. There will be the same eternal fire that consumed
Sodom. That fire was unquenchable until its purpose was carried out. It
certainly lasted only that long and no longer. Excavations at the site of what is
believed to be the site of this event has revealed the ashes of materials and the residue
of sulfur; but no evidence of continuing fire. From this model we can know that when
those who suffer "the punishment of eternal fire," they will all be burned up in
a period just long enough to consume them and no time clock on each one to register when
he has had sufficient to make up for his sins.
When a serial killer is caught and all the horrible details of his murders are brought
to light, and he has been sentenced to death; there is usually a strong mounting of
sympathy to perform this act in the most humane way. It is often stated that
hanging and the electric chair are inhumane even though they require only a few seconds at
most. Yet we will see no inconsistency at all to the viewpoint that some poor
alcoholic or adulterer, or liar among others that Paul states will never enter the kingdom
of God, if they remain in that state, will be burned in the flames of God throughout
eternity.
We admit that God is more loving and more compassionate than the best of us can ever
attain to be, yet how could the worst of us not feel more compassion than this for our
most detested enemy? We couldn't imagine torturing a poisonous snake endlessly and
would opt for a quick and painless demise.
It's not that God is not more compassionate and loving than we can ever be, because He
is. It's that this picture we have created in our minds of Him; roasting the sinner
in eternal fire in hell, is a story straight from the serpent. It has poisoned
millions of people's minds to have a wrong concept of God and turn from Him, to their
everlasting loss and to the serpent's delight.
Have you ever touched a hot oven, or stove burner, and withdrew your finger in a
fraction of a second experiencing severe pain? Think of this; if you would hold your
finger there for a minute -- for sure you would lose your finger and probably your
sanity.
Imagine one of your children who was a good person, but never could accept Christ
as his Savior; and, after his account was added up at the time of his demise in an
untimely car accident, he was placed among the unsaved. Also imagine that after a
million years of undergoing a constant torturing in the eternal fire, which is
immeasurably more intense than the oven or burner exposure, that he would cry out to God,
"How much longer must this continue?" And imagine that God would poke His
head back into the flames and say, "You haven't even gotten started yet!"
Something is sick about this scenario, and it's not God's way. The whole scenario
is sick and it is satanic! Anyone who holds to that belief cannot see God for the
loving, compassionate, and considerate God that He is. Christ, who came to reveal
what His Father was like, did not paint this type of picture -- not once!
While He was being tortured and put to death his last words were not, "I'll get even
with you for this! -- but, "Father, forgive them for they know not what they
do."
Can we honestly say that this type of God, as revealed by Christ, is consistent with
the popular misconception we get of Him from the serpent's version of the ever-burning and
everlasting torture in the eternal fires of hell?
The majority of Christians will assert that the Second Death consists of eternal
torment in hell fire. I believe all Christians are unified in the belief that Christ
suffered the Second Death in our place, to pay our debt for our sins. Yet
with all the pain and suffering that Christ suffered on the cross, it would be required to
continue on for eternity to satisfy the claims of an everlasting, burning hell for the
sinner.
It is obvious that Christ's sacrifice was fully adequate and that His agony and
suffering was terminated at His death. This fully satisfied the requirements of the Second
Death. The death of the wicked who are consumed in the lake of fire in the
judgment will also fully satisfy the demands of the law in his case. Before winding
up this topic I would like to consider a few troubling thoughts:
First, consider the most popular scenario that every sinner who dies unsaved goes
immediately into burning hell fire. This would mean that the first sinner who died
has been burning for 6000 years and current sinners who die will escape 6000 years of
burning. Does this sound fair? Consider the following passage of Scripture
which nullifies that concept.
Isa. 24:21 -- In that day (Second Coming of Christ) the
Lord will punish the powers of the heavens above (Satan and his angels) and the
kings on the earth below. (The wicked at the Battle of Armageddon)
They will be herded together like
prisoners bound in a dungeon,
They will be shut up in prison and be
punished after many days.
The moon will be abashed, the sun
ashamed; for the Lord Almighty will reign on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem, and before its
elders gloriously.
There can be no question that this is speaking of the demise of Satan and his angels,
(Powers of the heavens above) and these 10 kings each with his army at the Battle of
Armageddon. These are all herded together into a dungeon -- the bottomless
pit -- the grave.
We also know that they will remain there for 1000 years. Satan will be with them
and we are told that he will be bound for 1000 years. The point to be
realized, in line with our study, is that this large group placed in the grave at Christ's
Coming are to be punished after many days.
Many days are used in Scripture to refer to a long and often unspecified time. In
this case it is for 1000 years. For a certainty it can't possibly mean that they
immediately enter into ever burning hell as that would be immediate punishment.
Another group I know of insists that the burning is on the basis of God tallying up
their sins and setting the clock, so to speak, to burn them for the duration they deserve.
I sincerely believe their punishment is their eternal separation from God. When
they see the reward of the faithful and what all the wicked will be missing, this will be
their punishment. The eternal fire will be the execution and I believe it will be
swift and humane. What would be gained for Satan to burn for days, weeks or even
years? -- absolutely nothing! It won't bring about repentance or change
of character. After mankind is consumed, if in that group who holds to that view,
they will not remember any of the pain.
Then, who benefits from this torture in the flames, whether on the basis of metered to
our list of misdeeds or endlessly? We who have been taught through the Scriptures to
love our enemies, be kind to those who persecute us and hate us; characteristics which we
fall so far short of in being Christlike, do we benefit in any way from the torture of the
unsaved? Are we also to be punished forever as we watch our children, neighbors and
friends who have failed to be saved, suffer eternal torment in the fires of hell?
And can we ever rejoice in the gift of eternal life with Christ while continuing to
view this sordid scene?
I can see Satan endeavoring to carry out a program such as this, (but it might even be
too much for him) -- but God? -- NEVER!
So, which side is right in this discussion? I believe the texts used to promote
the concept of everlasting burning hell require more personal interpretation to make them
bolster this argument than that of their opponents who refute it.
Regardless, I believe God knew that both sides of this contention could be and would be
promoted in this debate. He could have made it so obvious that this couldn't happen,
but didn't. I believe He wanted each one of us to get to know Him as He is revealed
in the Scriptures. The best representation of Him in the Bible is how Christ
portrays Him in the New Testament.
After we carefully study His character and how He deals with His subjects, He leave it
with each one of us to carefully consider both sides of this debate and then cast our vote
with which side we feel is consistent with the character we equate Him with.
I, personally, would not relish the task of explaining to Him how I came to the
conclusion that presents Him as the promoter of ever burning Hell, as the better fit.
The Rich Man and
Lazarus
In this parable he presents not only an obvious Jew but a rich one at that. He
habitually dressed in purple (nobility) and fine linen (priestly attire), feasting on
Moses and the Prophets, but contemptuous of the beggar (Gentiles) who was unworthy of this
feast.
To the shock of the rich man, after he and Lazarus had gone to their rest, he finds
Lazarus where he expected to be and himself where he had expected Lazarus.
Christ paints this picture with what may be said as "outrageous" statements,
but well understood by the Jewish mind and perfect in describing the picture. I
doubt if these strokes from the brush were the heart of his message.
Consider this; the rich man in torment in the flames requests that Lazarus dip the tip
of his finger in water and "cool off my tongue." Do you honestly believe
that would be a logical request? Should we implement that by amending the
instructions in our fire department manuals? Hardly! Certainly this was a
tongue in cheek statement, but powerful to express a point.
How about the saved man in Abraham's bosom? Was that under the skin or just under
the shirt? Certainly not to be taken literally.
Even the word Hades, where the rich man found himself, was from the Greek writings
where they considered anyone there to be in a state of eternal torment. I believe
this also to be a tongue-in-cheek expression, fully understood to fit the story in the
Jewish mind, but like the other strokes of the brush, not to be taken literally.
Now near the close of this parable Christ brings out the point that is the central
pillar of His parable. When the rich man asks that Lazarus go to his father's house
and warn his five brothers so they won't end up where he is, Abraham suggests that his
brothers read Moses and the Prophets (The Scriptures) and they will find the message.
But the rich man says that only if someone (Lazarus) goes to them from the dead
will they repent. Then Abraham says to him -- "if they won't listen to
Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be persuaded if someone rises from the
dead."
Jesus was trying to show them how fixed they were in their unbelief that even if
someone from the dead was to tell them, they still wouldn't change. I believe it
wasn't by accident that Jesus chose Lazarus as the name of the beggar that the rich man
wanted to be brought from the dead to warn his brothers. Notice the following
account, after Jesus had raised Lazarus (Mary & Martha's brother) from the dead:
Is the message this parable is teaching getting a little clearer? I'm sure it is
becoming more and more evident that it isn't to tell us how to bring relief to anyone in a
fire (tip of a finger in water to a parched tongue); or that the saved will reside in
Abraham's bosom; or that in Hades the inhabitants reside in eternal fiery torment.
Prior to this parable presented to the Jews, Jesus had expressed his frustrations in
trying to reach these hard-hearted Jewish leaders.
Lazarus was raised from the dead. He witnessed to his brothers (fellow Jews) and
Christ's point of the parable was verified. They not only rejected the message of
the one from the dead but schemed to put him to death, along with Jesus.
Let me further demonstrate from Scripture why it is unsafe to take any of these
parables apart and attempt to incorporate any isolated facet of the parable into
doctrine. In other words, to stray from the central theme which the parable is
teaching. Notice the parable that Jesus presents in His sermon on the kingdom of
heaven (Salvation) to the large crowd at the lakeside in Matthew 13:
The lesson that Jesus was teaching in this parable was that salvation requires
everything that we have. We can hold back nothing; we even have to give
ourselves. It is a total commitment to God. This parable makes this clear to
all. Now, let us see if we can use the parts of the parable to build unrelated
doctrine on.
1. The man is working on another man's field, or at least is digging around on a
field that belongs to someone else. He finds a hidden treasure. Shouldn't that
go to the man who owned the field, and if the owner was an honest man wouldn't he give a
portion of this great treasure to the man who discovered it? Instead he hid it
again. This could only be for the purpose of preventing the rightful owner, or
anyone else, from finding out the existence of this great treasure.
I'm sure that a good percentage of people would handle hidden treasure in this manner
if they discovered it on an unsuspecting neighbor's field, but is this facet of the
parable teaching us the correct way to handle hidden treasure which one finds on someone
else's field; regardless of the fact that the neighbor is unaware of the treasure?
Does this validate, by Scripture, the age-old saying of "finders keepers, but losers
weepers?" I don't believe so. I might add that when we discover salvation
we are not instructed to hide it again. We are told to share this good news with all
who will listen. This statement could be interpreted to do just the opposite.
2. Now the field belongs to him and the original owner is none the wiser of the
transaction that cost him the loss of a great fortune.
Since this is dealing with salvation, the story makes it plain that he sold everything
he had to raise the money to buy his unsuspecting neighbor's field. Therefore, one
can logically infer that salvation can be purchased, it's just a matter of raising the
amount of money required. Couldn't a good case for this concept be made for this
facet of the parable?
The following parable that Jesus presented was on the same theme.
Again, this reveals the unscriptural problems we create when we take all the parts of
Christ's parables literally as parts of the great truths that He was presenting. We
should have no problem in seeing the above text and realizing that this is not teaching
that the kingdom of God can be bought. But this is what we have done to the parable
of the "rich man and Lazarus." We have taken our eyes off of the lesson
that Christ was presenting and making doctrine out of the pieces of the parable.