Sie sind auf Seite 1von 35

Brotherbird.

com

Notes to the Poem


1 No one, that is, in the area of the foothills where Brother Bird lived. Brother Bird’s
position may also be unique in that his argument rests solely on the wording of the English
Bible (though the underlying Hebrew and Greek text bears the same eloquent testimony)

2 Matthew 3:10-12 10 And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore
every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. 11 I indeed
baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I,
whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:
12 Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into
the garner; but he will BURN UP the chaff with unquenchable fire.

3 Paul’s primary hermeneutic (method of interpretation) was simply “What saith it?”
(Rom. 10:8), “What saith the scripture?” (Rom. 4:3; 11:2, 4; Gal. 4:30), and “It is written”
(Rom. 1:17; 2:24; 3:4, 10; etc). For the Christian, the first appeal and final authority is the
very words of God in the very Word of God, the certain and sufficient answer to the question
“What is written?” (Luke 10:26; 20:17).

4 Malachi 4:1 For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the
proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall
BURN THEM UP, saith the LORD of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch.
(And verse 3 speaks of the wicked being “ashes under the soles of your feet.”)

5 Malachi speaks of “that day” in similar fashion to many Old and New Testament writers:
“in that day when I make up my jewels; and I will spare them, as a man spareth his own son
that serveth him” (3:17). “The great and dreadful day of the LORD” (4:5) is consistent with
many New Testament passages referring to the final judgment at the coming of Christ (Acts
2:20; 1 Cor. 5:5; 1 Thess. 5:2; 2 Pet. 3:10). The contrast between the reward for the
righteous and the punishment of the wicked is dramatically clear (Cf. Mal. 3:18; 4:2,3). The
element of fire is prominent as in many other passages of final judgment (see chart on inside
back cover). Does Malachi give any indication of conscious, eternal torment? To the
contrary, he states in lucid language that “the day that cometh shall burn them up.”

1
6 The duration of the result is everlasting, but the nature and extent of the punishment
itself is a final consumption that is equal to utter destruction, not endless torment. If
Malachi’s prophecy has already been fulfilled in past history in a temporal overthrow of
Israel’s enemies, it nevertheless has eschatological intimations (“the coming of the great and
terrible day of the LORD”) that anticipates and illustrates the final judgment.

7 2 Peter 2:6 And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ASHES condemned
them with an over-throw, making them AN ENSAMPLE unto those that after should live
ungodly.

Jude 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving
themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for AN EXAMPLE,
suffering the vengeance of ETERNAL FIRE.

8 As in the statement of John the Baptist, we see that though the nature of the fire is of
an unending quality, i.e. “eternal” (unquenchable- Matt. 3:12), the result of the fire is
nevertheless final: “ashes.” (will burn up- Matt. 3:12). Because of the assumed errors of our
traditional interpretation we have persistently read endless conscious torment into these
passages because of the adjective eternal modifying the noun fire, and have remarkably
failed to see that the result is clearly pronounced final by the end product of the consumptive
fire, which is ASHES. The wording is not “eternal torment” but “eternal fire”- it is not
“everlasting suffering,” but “everlasting destruction”- it is not “unquenchable chaff,” but
“unquenchable fire.” John tells us what we readily should understand – that if a fire cannot
be put out, then what’s in it would certainly burn up, especially chaff! Eternal fire turned
Sodom and Gomorrah to ashes, and Christ will “BURN UP the chaff with UNQUENCHABLE
FIRE.”

9 Let it be reiterated that the judgment on Sodom and Gomorrha that destroyed “all the
inhabitants” (Genesis 19:24, 25), though temporal and earthly in scope, is asserted to be “an
ensample unto those that after should live ungodly” and “set forth for an example, suffering
the vengeance of eternal fire.” There is no inference here of eternal torment. The fire is
eternal, but ashes are the everlasting result of a complete consumption and total
destruction. This does not preclude torment (“suffering the vengeance of eternal fire”), nor
demand instantaneous extinction, but it does exclude retribution that endlessly torments.

10 Please do not attach some worn-out yet sticky label of an aberrant doctrine or peculiar
cult to this view. What is presented here is not the conclusion of a modern sect that has its
own sacred book, special revelation, or exclusive Bible translation. The reasons proposed
are not the formulation of a liberal exegete who undermines the inerrancy and authority of
Scripture, nor the rumination of a sentimental philosopher who questions the supernatural on
the basis of humanistic rationale. Most of my Christian friends would classify my personal
beliefs as conservative, orthodox, and evangelical (on the new birth, deity of Christ, and
inspiration of Scripture, for example). See "About Us."

11 Someone asked, “If people were to think they will just burn up, then why would they
care about being a Christian?” The response: “If you were to convince professing Christians
that they would only burn up anyway, and then they would respond Just forget about it then-
Do you think they were really Christians to begin with?”

12 John 3:15,16 15 That whosoever believeth in him should not PERISH, but have
ETERNAL LIFE. 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that
whosoever believeth in him should not PERISH, but have EVERLASTING LIFE.

2
13 The most familiar verse in the Bible teaches
both the conditional immortality of believers,
and the ultimate end of unbelievers.

14 The Scriptures use of the word perish makes a persuasive case for conditional
immortality (eternal life as a gift to believers) and the complete everlasting destruction of the
lost. Paul writes to the Corinthians, “For the preaching of the cross is to THEM THAT
PERISH foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God” (1 Cor. 1:18).
“Them that PERISH” are in contrast to “us which are SAVED,” as it is in 2 Corinthians 2:15,
16: “them that are SAVED, and… them that PERISH.” To them that perish, Paul says “we
are the savour of DEATH unto DEATH,” but unto them that are saved, “the savour of “LIFE
unto LIFE,” reinforcing the connection of perish and death, and the contrast of perish and
life. A similar distinction is made of perish and life in John 3:15, 16: “not PERISH but have
ETERNAL LIFE… not PERISH but have EVERLASTING LIFE;” John 6:27: “meat which
PERISHETH… meat which endureth unto EVERLASTING LIFE;” and John 10:28: “I give
unto them ETERNAL LIFE; and they shall never PERISH.” Perish is contrasted with
remaining in Hebrews 1:10, 11: “They shall PERISH; but thou REMAINEST.” All of the above
texts emphasize the fact that the saved are distinct from “them that perish” in at least this
obvious difference: they do not perish.

15 Revelation 20:6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such
the second DEATH hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall
reign with him a thousand years.

Revelation 20:14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second
DEATH.

Revelation 21:8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and
whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake
which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second DEATH.

16 Matthew 25:46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the
righteous into life eternal.

WHAT IS THE PUNISHMENT? The traditional view only asks and answers one question
here: “How long is the punishment?” They should also ask “What is the punishment?” To
illustrate what I mean, I will ask you to fill in the blank: EVERLASTING ___________? You
say, “Punishment.” But, again, what IS the punishment? You say, “Torment.” And truly that
is how most people fill in the blank. They make of it punish-ing, which in their mind includes
torment and pain. BUT LET’S ALLOW SCRIPTURE TO FILL IN THE BLANK. The Bible
persistently says that the punishment is destruction (“who shall be PUNISHED with
EVERLASTING DESTRUCTION” – 2 Thessalonians 1:9; “whose end is DESTRUCTION” –
Philippians 3:19; “broad is the way that leadeth to DESTRUCTION” – Matthew 7:13; “the
wicked is reserved to the day of DESTRUCTION” – Job 21:30; “vessels of wrath fitted to
DESTRUCTION” – Romans 9:22; “And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not
hear that prophet (Christ) shall be DESTROYED” – Acts 3:23; “fear him which is able to
DESTROY both soul and body in hell (Matthew 10:28). Scripture consistently fills in the
blank with destruction, not torment!

THE PROCESS OR THE RESULT? Many have thought that endless torment is implicit in
terms that are describing as “everlasting” the result, not the process, of punishment and
destruction. The result of the punishment is everlasting; therefore it is everlasting

3
punishment. How long does the destruction last? It is everlasting! The punishment is
destruction, the destruction is everlasting- it is everlasting punishment! The book of Hebrews
gives three examples of the New Testament Greek aionos referring to the result and not the
process, the end and not the means: “And being made perfect, he became the author of
ETERNAL SALVATION unto all that obey him” (Heb. 5:9); “he entered in once into the holy
place, having obtained ETERNAL REDEMPTION for us” (9:12); “Of the doctrine… of
resurrection from the dead, and of ETERNAL JUDGMENT” (Heb. 6:2). It is not eternal
saving, eternal redeeming, eternal judging, eternal punishing, or eternal destroying- each of
these has a limited duration as to process, but an unlimited extent as to the end result. The
process of redemption was in what Christ once obtained, but the result of redemption is
eternal, therefore it is rightly called eternal redemption. The process of the judgment (the
judging) is not everlasting, but the result is (the judgment). The destruction is everlasting,
not the destroying.

SYNONYMS OF PUNISHMENT. Some synonyms of punishment are sentence, penalty,


consequence, and retribution. Punishment does not equal pain or torment; in fact, it doesn’t
even necessarily include pain or torment. The duration of “Capital Punishment,” such as
death by hanging, beheading, the electric chair, gas chamber, or lethal injection, is extremely
brief, and often with a minimum of pain (if any, as far as the physical sensation of it). Yet it is
a punishment, and a capital one at that! The result of capital punishment, however, is final
and permanent- it is everlasting.

EXAMPLES OF PUNISHMENT. While Scripture fills in the blank by telling us that the
punishment is destruction, it also tells us by its use of the word punishment that the word
should not be equated with torment or pain. Cain said that his punishment of being a
fugitive and a vagabond in the earth was greater than he could bear (Genesis 4:12-14).
Under Moses, death without mercy was the “punishment” alluded to in Hebrews 10:28,29; to
be destroyed the “punishment” of Ezekiel 14:9,10; and captivity in Lamentations 4:22.
Jeremiah makes this enlightening comment: “the punishment of the iniquity of the daughter
of my people is greater than the PUNISHMENT of the sin of Sodom, that was overthrown AS
IN A MOMENT, and no hands stayed on her”(Lamentations 4:6). Here is punishment that
happened “as in a moment,” of which Jude tells us was accomplished by “ETERNAL FIRE”
(Jude v. 7), and Christ says, “DESTROYED them all” (Luke 17:29) and Peter writes ended in
“ASHES” (2 Peter 2:6). Though the process of punishment happened “AS IN A MOMENT,”
the result of the punishment was “A PERPETUAL DESOLATION” (Zephaniah 2:9). How long
did it take to accomplish the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah? Not long at all- as in a
moment. How long will the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah last? Without end-
everlasting- a perpetual desolation.

THE CONTRAST TO LIFE ETERNAL. Another point to consider concerning this text is the
contrast of everlasting punishment to life eternal. As J. H. Pettingell writes, “It will be seen
that the contrast here is not between the everlasting happiness of the one class, and the
everlasting misery of the other – as traditionalists would have it, but between the Everlasting
Life of the one class, and the everlasting – punishment of the other – which, that the
antithesis or contrast may be carried out, must be the punishment of Death, from which there
is no resurrection – that is the Second Death” (Pettingell, J. H. , The Unspeakable Gift, 1884,
p. 225). This understanding of the contrast is in perfect harmony with the many times a
contrast is made to eternal life (see chart on this page). In contrast to the righteous receiving
life eternal, the wicked will be eternally dead – destroyed with an everlasting destruction in
which they perish, die the second death, are consumed in the lake of fire, burned up like
chaff, and are no more- truly an “EVERLASTING PUNISHMENT.”

4
17. 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10 7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, WHEN the Lord
Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, 8 In flaming fire taking
vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus
Christ: 9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the
Lord, and from the glory of his power; 10 WHEN he shall come to be glorified in his saints,
and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed)
in THAT DAY.

WHEN? The term “that day” appears, and the passage reveals when “them that know not
God” will be “punished”: “WHEN the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his
mighty angels,” and “WHEN he shall come to be glorified in his saints.” Paul specifies that
the everlasting destruction will be accomplished at the limited WHEN of THAT DAY. This
limited WHEN goes even further to contradict the conjecture of torment that continues
unabated through the infinite reach of a never-ending eternity.

18 To argue that destruction means endless torment is to twist the normal usage of this
word in Scripture. In fact, the traditional understanding does this many times, usually
subconsciously, to several words (such as perish, destroy, destruction, end, perdition,
consume, and death) that in their ordinary use would certainly indicate the final destruction of
the wicked, not their continual existence in conscious, everlasting torment (see notes 53-
56).

19 Those who usually react so vehemently are those who have not searched the
Scriptures on the subject. For this reason, the curt scribe of this tale has harshly connected
the two words shook and dusty.

20 Some of the opponents of Brother Bird’s view are genuine but guarded folks who have
absorbed endless torment as the unquestioned and unquestionable orthodox Scriptural
view. Anything else is liberal, and anything liberal is loathsome, and therefore the “liberal”
label is often all that is necessary to get such people to not bother to search the Scriptures to
see whether these things are so. To these Brother Bird says, “Relax! If endless torment is
true, no amount of argument can put it out of existence, but if endless torment is not true,
white knuckles clinching a cherished creed will not make it so. The important thing is this:
Do we love our God more than our religion, and do we love our Bible more than our
tradition? If so, then find out what the Word of God truly says, and stand right there!

21 On the subject of the final judgment and punishment of the wicked, Brother Bird
sincerely believes we have been mistaken in our understanding as to its nature and
duration. We have not willfully erred, but have unknowingly absorbed unscriptural tenets,
and read them into the applicable texts. We have unwittingly ignored the precise wording of
many other scriptures, holding to our assumed traditional interpretations instead of arriving at
a convinced conclusion after a fresh and personal search of the Word of God (see John
5:39; Acts 17:11; 2 Timothy 2:15).

22 Brother Bird has an extremely high view of Scripture that some would view as highly
extreme. He believes in the supernatural inspiration of the original text and its providential
preservation in the English translation. With him the issue is not whether to accept the
Bible’s teaching concerning endless torment, but whether or not the Bible actually teaches it.
In his own words: “I appeal to the Scriptures, and ask, ‘Have ye not READ?’ (Matt. 22:31)
‘What SAITH it?’ (Rom. 10:8) ‘WHAT IS THIS THEN THAT IS WRITTEN?’ (Luke 20:17).”

23 Unscriptural teachings are not always the imagination of a clever heretic, the invention
of a crafty cult, or the interpretation of a cunning scholar. Sometimes they are simply the

5
assumed errors of those who are sure they know what the Bible means but haven’t carefully
examined what it actually says. Such may be able to cite a few proof-texts, refer to a historic
confession or denominational creed, or take solace in the conclusions of esteemed exhorters
or revered expositors of the past or present. They are woefully unacquainted, however, with
the entire relevant texts concerning the subject. Christ often answered doctrinal queries by
asking, “Have ye not READ?” He once countered an objection with “What is this then that is
WRITTEN?” He would then quote what the Scriptures actually say as the authoritative
answer (Cf. Matt. 12:3, 5; 19:4; 22:29, 31; Mark 12:10; Luke 20:17).

24 Endless life, as many would quantifiably define “eternal life,” is not the possession of
immortal souls, but the gift of the immortal God. It is in distinction to the wages of sin: death.
“For the wages of sin is DEATH; but the gift of God is ETERNAL LIFE through Jesus Christ
our Lord (Rom. 6:23). Note particularly the contrasts: wages/gift; sin/God; death/eternal life.
By definition, wages are earned, but a gift is not. Sin pays harsh wages, while God bestows
a gracious gift. The harsh wages is death, the END OF LIFE; the gracious gift is eternal,
ENDLESS LIFE.

WAGES GIFT
of SIN of GOD
DEATH ETERNAL LIFE
end of life endless life

25 Death is a word universally understood and there is a death universal to all: “DEATH
passed upon all men” (Romans 5:12). But in this same discussion of Paul to the Romans,
the clear contrast is made between death and eternal life. This corresponds to Christ’s
words to Martha (John 11:25, 26): “Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he
that believeth in me, though he were dead (i.e. the universal death common to all men), yet
shall he live (i.e. be resurrected): And whosoever liveth and believeth in me SHALL NEVER
DIE” (i.e. shall not perish but have everlasting life). And Christ’s question ends with words
appropriate to this discussion: “Believest thou this?”

The brilliant legal master, John Locked ponders, “It seems a strange way of understanding a
law which requires the plainest words, that by death should be meant Eternal Life in misery.”
(Cited in J. H. Pettingell, The Unspeakable Gift, 1884, p. 322.)

26 Brother Bird has noticed that when someone does not have an adequate answer to the
conclusions above, they quickly resort to what they presume are the safe confines of
patented proof-texts. Actually many so-called proof-texts for endless torment, when
examined free of creedal dogmatism, often actually refute what they are cited to prove.
Because of the power of preconceived notions and absorbed assumptions, such texts are
seldom allowed to speak for themselves. Context is ignored and particular details are
shoved to the side as one phrase or line is lifted to bolster the unproven interpretation.

27 One of the most oft quoted proof-texts for endless torment is Christ’s thrice-repeated
statement “Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched” (Mark 9:44, 46, 48).
Many contend that this is unmistakably referring to conscious, eternal agony in “hell fire.”
What they fail to realize is that Christ is quoting a phrase from Isaiah 66: 24 that portrays a
scenario vastly different from that of never-ending retribution: “And they shall go forth, and
look upon the carcases of the men that have transgressed against me: for their worm shall
not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh”

6
28 Presumably Christ’s listeners would have recognized the source of the repeated
phrase. The context of Isaiah 66 describes the aftermath of a battle scene and pictures slain
carcases (vv. 16, 24)! The passage says the wicked “shall be consumed together” (v. 17),
but that the seed and name of the righteous shall remain “as the new heavens and the new
earth” (v. 22). If it is argued that Isaiah 66 is speaking of a temporal, earthly judgment, and
not the final one, it is still the context of the phrase “where their worm dieth not, and the fire is
not quenched.”

29 Brother Bird puts it this way: “It is inconceivable to me that Christ would quote a familiar
phrase from a well-known prophet, and use it to convey something entirely different from the
obvious meaning of its context. What would you think of a preacher who would take as his
text a verse that speaks of something limited in duration and final in result, but then use it out
of context to deliberate on something without end?”

30 “Their worm” shall not die, but continues to eat the burnt corpse until it is consumed;
the fire is not quenched- it cannot be put out, but continues to burn until it reduces the rotting
flesh to ashes. The observations of physical science tell us that even if it is impossible for
worms to get inside a sealed casket, there are enough worms in our own bodies (“their
worm”) to consume our decaying corpses from the inside out. Job uses an illustration from
nature to describe how the grave consumes the body: “Drought (no water - “that he may dip
the tip of his finger in water” – Luke 16:24) and heat (“their fire”?) consume the snow waters,
SO DOTH THE GRAVE those which have sinned” (24:19). Thus lack of water and presence
of heat expedite the consuming process. It is also known that dead bodies give off a
detectable heat as they decay, and tracing that heat through infrared sensors is a means of
locating a hidden corpse. Their worm and their fire describe the destructive agents that
devour the carcases of the slain of the Lord. “The Lord will come with fire… to render his
anger with fury, and his rebuke with flames of fire” (v. 15) to show “his indignation to his
enemies” (v. 14) who “shall be consumed together” (v. 17). Admittedly, this grotesque
description of the gory results of the “fire and sword” (v. 16) may be the depiction of a literal
battle scene to portray a figurative representation of the final judgment. Nevertheless, such
a picture reveals an ultimate punishment that ends in final consumption and complete
destruction, not endless torment. And it is the text Christ used to warn his listeners about the
fire of hell.

31 “the rich man also died, and was buried; And in hell he lift up his eyes…” (Luke
16:22,23). Brother Bird ceremoniously announces: “I now call a well-fed and fashionable
dead rich man to the stand. That’s right, I desire to cross-examine the star witness for
endless torment. This notorious character has been incessantly exhibited as proof-positive
for the traditional view of hell. Using the exact wording of his story in Luke 16:19-31, instead
of the assumed meaning in so much of the preaching on the passage, we will let this son of
Abraham answer some pertinent questions about whether his story is talking about a never-
dying disembodied soul or a very dead and buried body:”

BB: Did you find yourself in hell immediately after death?


RM: Very shortly thereafter.
BB: But was it immediately after your death?
RM: Well, not exactly immediately, but very soon.
BB: How soon?
RM: What does it matter? I died, and the next thing I know I’m in hell!
BB: Oh, it matters greatly. Was it a few minutes, or a few hours after your death?
RM: Well, it obviously takes more than a few hours.
BB: What takes more than a few hours?

7
RM: Preparation for burial, of course.
BB: Burial?
RM: That’s right.
BB: You mean you were buried before you found yourself in hell?
RM: Yes. I guess that is a minor detail that few have bothered to notice, but the
record is clear that I “died, and was buried; and in hell… lift up (my) eyes.” Just as I
died before I was buried, I was buried before I found myself in hell; the obvious
chronology is plainly stated.

NOTE: Herman Bavink awkwardly lumps DEATH AND BURIAL together with an immediate
arrival in hell: “the rich man, upon his death and burial, immediately arrives in Hades…
unbelievers from the moment of their death enter a place of torment… must… judgment
immediately after death” (Bavink, Herman, The Last Things, Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books,
1996, p. 36, italics mine). How does the rich man immediately arrive in hell upon death and
burial? If he did not arrive in hell until burial, then he did not arrive in hell immediately upon
death, unless he was buried as soon as he died!

John R. Rice states emphatically, “When a Christian dies, he goes without delay to be with
God (though Dr. Rice just said, “Lazarus died and immediately… found himself with…
Abraham”). So with the sinner on the road to Hell. The rich man died, was buried, ‘And in
hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments.’ There is no evidence here of any delay in
punishment… When a lost man dies, he goes immediately to Hell and torment, says the
Word of God” (Rice, “Hell, What the Bible Says About It” in Great Preaching on Hell,
Murfreesboro, TN: Sword of the Lord Publishers, 1989, p.17). Though Rice acknowledges
the little detail of “was buried” he nonetheless maintains that sinners go immediately
(“without delay… no evidence of any delay”) to hell upon death.

Family and friends of the rich man would have washed his body and anointed it with spices:
“Then took they the body of Jesus, and wound it in linen clothes with the spices, as the
manner of the Jews is to bury” (John 19:40). Time would have elapsed between death and
burial. Bavink and Rice, as others who read a disembodied spirit into the story, assume that
the immortal soul of the rich man went immediately into Hades at the death of his body. “And
was buried,” in their estimation, is merely incidental, and should not be so strictly interpreted
as a literal chronology. Though they clumsily allow “and was buried” to be squeezed
between death and hell, their interpretation is really that when the rich man died his spirit or
soul immediately lifted up its eyes in hell (? - Luke 24:39), and sometime later, incidentally,
his body was buried. “They insist that it was not ‘the rich man’ who died – that it was the rich
man’s body, and the rich man was not buried, only his body was buried,” Otis Sellers
summarizes (The Rich Man and Lazarus, Lafayette, IN: Truth for Today Bible Fellowship,
1962, p. 11).

The point is that the “and was buried” of the text, and the “immediately after death” of most
interpretations of it, do not fit together. But if the story is a satirical parable, then the dead
rich man could not be in the gravedom of Hades (equal to the Hebrew Sheol, see note 41)
until he was buried!

32 Brother Bird’s interview with the rich man continues:

BB: And was it you, you yourself, in the body, or was it an immaterial, disembodied
spirit?
RM: Well, most everyone has assumed it was my soul or spirit.
BB: But Jesus does not mention a soul or a spirit.

8
RM: No, He does not.
BB: But He does say that it was you, the rich man, who died, and you, the rich man,
who was buried, and you, the rich man, who lifted up your eyes in hell.
RM: Indeed He does.
BB: He makes no distinction between body, soul, and spirit, but simply identifies you
as the rich man.
RM: That is correct.
BB: But Jesus does say that you lifted up your eyes, and saw Abraham, and Lazarus
in his bosom.
RM: Yes.
BB: So you had eyes to see with, and a tongue that felt torment, and none of this
took place until after your corpse was laid in the grave.
RM: True, but what is the significance of that?
BB: In the same Gospel, it is recorded that Jesus urged his disciples after his
resurrection, “Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and SEE;
for A SPIRIT HATH NOT FLESH AND BONES, as ye SEE me have” (Luke 24:39). A
tongue is certainly flesh, and I doubt that real material water could cool the tongue of
an invisible, immaterial spirit. Fingers (Lazarus’) and bosoms (Abraham’s) are made
of flesh and bone as well. So was it not your buried body, and not your soul or spirit-
you, yourself, dead and in the grave?
RM: I can’t deny it.

NOTE: Closely compare the wording “and SEETH Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his
bosom” with Luke 24:39, “a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye SEE me have.” It is
obvious that Abraham and Lazarus were not invisible spirits, and there is no reason to
suggest that they took on the form of a body, or that they had a ghostly outline with apparent
but transparent features. Also, Isaiah 14 gives a clear illustration of a figurative conversation
of dead bodies, not ghoulish spirits: “HELL from beneath is moved for thee to meet thee at
thy coming: it stirreth up THE DEAD for thee” (v. 9). The figurative nature is quite evident
when FIR TREES REJOICE, and CEDARS SPEAK (v. 8); KINGS IN HELL GET UP OFF OF
THEIR THRONES, and ask the newcomer, “Art thou also become WEAK as we?” (v. 10).
Sheol is the figurative whole of the gravedom (“hell”) in verses 9 and 15, while it is the
individual and literal hole of the grave in verse 11 (See notes 41-47). Carefully read the
narrative in Isaiah 14 and ask yourself if Luke 16 is not a similarly allegorical story: (1) Hell
(Sheol in Isaiah 14; Hades in Luke 16) is the gravedom of the dead; (2) Dead bodies are
there (the rich man was first buried; the characters in the story had flesh and blood parts that
could be seen; worms covering the dead body and a cast out carcase is spoken of in Isaiah
14; (3) a conversation occurs between the dead.

33 If it is acknowledged that the story speaks of a buried body, then the context and point
of the story can be pursued and understood. Whether or not one calls it a “parable” (a short,
simple story from which a moral lesson may be drawn – Webster’s New World Dictionary) it
is an instructive story that should not be yanked from its context, but should be understood in
light of its point. Though many have unfortunately failed to notice, it does have a context,
and it does have a point. It was not Christ’s intention to give an isolated description of the
torments of hell as if it were an eschatological chapter in a book of systematic theology.
Lifting the passage from its setting has produced exhortations long on traditional oratory, but
short on scriptural exposition. A brief consideration of the situation surrounding the narrative
and some interesting but overlooked details of the account will go far in our comprehension
of its intended meaning.

Otis Sellers concurs, “When a speaker announces that the story of the rich man and Lazarus
is to be the text of his message, it would be well if someone would arise and say, ‘Now that

9
we know your text, will you tell us what your context will be.’ This story is as a rule placed in
a context of human opinion and traditions about heaven, hell, death, life, and future
punishment. It is seldom if ever left in the context that God has given to it” (Sellers, footnote
on p. 32).

34 That a parable may not contain a proper name is an arbitrary verdict without any
substantiation whatsoever. The incessant repetition of this “rule” does not give it any iota of
validity. Otis Sellers perceptively points out that the Scofield Reference Bible has this note in
the margin of Luke 16: “In no parable is an individual named.” But the same source
contradicts itself with this chapter heading for Ezekiel 23: “The parable of Aholah and
Aholibah.” Mr. Sellers writes, “If there is any single passage in the Word that is manifestly a
parable it is Ezekiel 23:1-4, and yet two names are given in it. ‘Thus were their names;
Samaria is Aholah, and Jerusalem Aholibah.’ I think it would be well for all to read this
portion, then cease forever the puerile argument that Luke 16:19-31 cannot be a parable
because a man is named in it” (Sellers, p. 19).

The names used in Luke 16 reinforce the understanding of this story as a satirical parable-
ABRAHAM and MOSES, to rebuke mammon worshippers who assumed that their kinship to
one and allegiance to the other made them right with God, and LAZARUS, to most likely
rebuke those who hadn’t or would not believe though Lazarus had risen from the dead.

35 Matthew 18:23: Therefore is the kingdom of heaven likened unto a CERTAIN king…
Matthew 21:28: But what think ye? A CERTAIN man had two sons…
Matthew 21:33: Hear another parable: There was a CERTAIN householder…
Matthew 22:1,2: And Jesus answered and spake unto them again by parables, and said, The
kingdom of heaven is like a CERTAIN king…
Mark 12:1: And he began to speak unto them by parables. A CERTAIN man…
Luke 12:16: And he spake a parable unto them, saying, The ground of a CERTAIN rich
man…
Luke 13:6: He spake also this parable; A CERTAIN man…
Cf. Luke 7:40,41; 10:30 ff.; 14:16; 15:11; 19:11,12; 20:9. In fact, Luke 16 begins with another
story of “a certain rich man…”

36 Brother Bird elaborated: “The discourse actually begins in verse 15: “And he said unto
them…” them being the Pharisees who had heard his earlier story of another “certain rich
man” (16:1) addressed to his disciples. Christ concluded the first story with an admonition
concerning riches that ended with the stern reproach, “No man can serve two masters… Ye
cannot serve God and mammon” (v. 13). This brings us to the context and point of the story
of the rich man and Lazarus: “And the Pharisees also, who were covetous, heard all these
things: and they derided him. And he said unto THEM…” (vv. 14, 15). Covetous Pharisees
who scorned the previous message but who justified themselves before men is what
prompted Christ’s second speech that ends with the story in question. The consequences of
covetousness are a primary aim of our Lord’s remarks (but when have you ever heard a
sermon that included this story in this context and emphasized this point?)

This same group of self-righteous hypocrites persistently touted their kinship to “Father
Abraham” (Cf. Matt. 3:9; John 8:33-39, 53), and gloried in their strict adherence to the Law of
Moses (Cf. Matt. 23:2; John 9:28, 29). The story exposes both claims as worthless for those
who serve mammon and not God. The rich man calling Abraham “Father,” and Abraham
answering “Son,” was a potent means of stressing this reality. If it was an actual account,
how did the rich man immediately know it was Abraham? How did he so quickly carry on
such a coherent conversation in the midst of extreme agony and intense pain? The
evocative language, and the parallel contrasts of the principal characters, reveals the

10
allegorical grain of this illustrative picture. It is a picture portrayed by the poignant strokes of
Christ’s bold brush. It is a story with a point, a point it makes very clear.

37 Consider that Lazarus’ raising had caused such a stir and attracted such a crowd
(“MUCH PEOPLE of the Jews therefore knew that he was there”- John 12:9) that it would
have been well-known news far and wide, especially by the inquisitive and suspicious
Pharisees (“the people also met him, for that THEY HEARD that he had done this miracle.
The Pharisees therefore said among themselves… the world is gone after him”- 12:18, 19).
The chief priests had even plotted to put Lazarus to death: “But the chief priests consulted
that they might put Lazarus also to death; Because that by reason of him many of the Jews
went away, and believed on Jesus” (John 12:10,11).

38 We do not know if the Lazarus of Bethany was or ever had been a beggar, but he had
certainly risen from the dead. And whether or not he had sores, he had definitely been sick,
a sickness that led to his apparently untimely death. Incidentally, he is introduced in John
11:1 as “a certain man… named Lazarus,” almost identical to the introduction of the beggar
in Luke 16. Furthermore, he is the only identifiable Lazarus in the Biblical record. Christ
“became poor” (2 Cor. 8:9), came “to preach the gospel to the poor” (Luke 4:18), and “the
common people heard him gladly” (Mark 12:37). The sibling trio of Bethany was evidently
some of these “blessed” (Luke 6:24) common, poor folk (Cf. Mark 14:8; John 12:7).

39 Abraham’s statement “neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead”
(Luke 16:31) was remarkably fitting considering the response of the Pharisees to the
resurrection of Lazarus: “The people therefore that was with him when he called Lazarus out
of his grave, and raised him from the dead, bare record. For this cause the people also met
him, for that they heard that he had done this miracle. The Pharisees therefore said among
themselves, Perceive ye how ye prevail nothing? behold, the world is gone after him” (John
12:17-19). Lazarus did come back from the dead, but the Pharisees were not “persuaded.”
Neither would they be when the Raiser of the dead arose from the dead Himself (Matt.
27:62-66; 28:11-15).

40 Carefully examine the exact wording of this text and ask yourself if it really says what
you have understood it to mean. Is it speaking of a departed soul or a buried body? Was
there an immediate entrance into hell, or an interval of time between death and torment? Is
there any thing in the story that reveals the duration of the torment, or has the assumption of
the endless agony of an immortal soul been read into it? Does it concern the final judgment
or the intermediate state? Carefully consider the context: to whom was Christ speaking, and
why? Is the story a definitive treatise on life after death, or an illustrative allegory that
rebuked the covetousness of mammon servers who flaunted their kinship with Abraham and
allegiance to Moses? Do you consistently interpret the passage, or do you subjectively pick
apart what’s literal or figurative, normative or illustrative, vital or incidental? For example, do
you treat the fact that he was buried first as incidental (see note 31), or that his tongue and
Lazarus’ finger were figurative (see note 32), or that it is not vital that Abraham explained
their opposite fates as based on what they had in this life? And is your interpretation in
harmony with the majority of the relevant passages concerning the subject? The
overwhelming preponderance (high proportion, vast majority) of the scripture texts relevant
to final judgment depict the punishment of the wicked as an utter destruction that is
everlasting in its result, but not its duration; that ends in consumption and does not continue
with endless torment; and is consistently expressed by unequivocal words such as perish,
corruption, and death. Christ’s story of the rich man and Lazarus does not contradict or alter
this preponderance.

11
41 When the New Testament quotes the Old concerning Sheol, the Greek word used is
Hades (Cf. Hosea 13:14 w/1 Cor. 15:55; Psalm 16:10 w/Acts 2:27). Strong defines Hades as
“the place (state) of departed souls: — grave, hell.” Hades occurs eleven times in the New
Testament, translated “hell” in every case except 1 Cor. 15:55 which uses “grave.” With
Sheol, sometimes the more specific grave- a literal hole in the ground dug for the purpose of
burying a body- is obviously meant. Sometimes the more general hell, a term representative
of the chambers of death, the abode of the dead, is the intended sense. Sometimes it is the
grave; sometimes it is the gravedom. Ezekiel 31 provides an example. Sheol is the grave
where “he (one man) went down to the grave,” and God “covered the deep for him” in verse
15, but in verse 16 and 17 Sheol is hell when God “cast him down to hell with them (more
than one) that descend into the pit… they also went down into hell with him unto them that
be slain with the sword.” Sometimes it is a hole of a grave; sometimes it is the whole of the
kingdom of the grave.

42 The Scripture does not distinguish Sheol as the specific abode of the damned, but
describes it as the general abode of the dead, wicked and righteous. Jacob anticipated
going to Sheol mourning his son Joseph (Gen. 37:35). Job wished to be hid there (Job
14:13). In a Maschil of Heman, the writer cries, “O LORD God of my salvation… my life
draweth nigh unto the grave (Sheol)” (Psalm 88:3). Hezekiah lamented that his days being
cut short would mean he would go to the gates of Sheol (Isa. 38:10). All of these texts are
cited as evidence of the universality of Sheol as the general abode of the dead, and not just
the limited, specific abode of the damned, especially since even righteous men spoke of their
anticipation of it.

43 Psalm 139:7,8 7 Whither shall I go from thy spirit? or whither shall I flee from thy
presence? 8 If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed IN HELL, behold,
thou art there.

David’s use of the word in his Psalms is a clear example. The hell that David describes is a
place where his soul would go, but not be left (Psalm 16:10), and where even God would be
with him (139:8). Interestingly enough, beds can be made there (139:8; Cf. Ezek. 32:25). It
is a place David was delivered from because God spared him from death at the hands of his
enemies (Cf. Psalms 18; 116).

44 Psalm 89:48 What man is he that liveth, and shall not see death? Shall he deliver his
soul from the hand of the GRAVE (Sheol)?”

The “preacher” of Ecclesiastes assumes the eventuality of Sheol for all of his readers:
“Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor
knowledge, nor wisdom, in the GRAVE (Sheol), WHITHER THOU GOEST” (Eccl. 9:10).

45 Jonah 2:2 And said, I cried by reason of mine affliction unto the LORD, and he heard
me; out of the BELLY OF HELL cried I, and thou heardest my voice.
Matthew 12:40 For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the WHALE'S BELLY; so
shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

46 It is found 65 times in 63 verses, translated “hell” and “grave” evenly by the King
James (30 verses apiece; “grave” doubling up in two verses for a total of 32 occurrences),
with “pit” the chosen word 3 times (Num. 16:30, 33; Job 17:16). Brother Bird comments: I
have the utmost confidence in the integrity of the word choices of the King James
translators. Their choices show the general and specific natures of hell and grave, especially
where both English words are chosen for Sheol in the same passage. In Isaiah 14 hell was

12
chosen for the broader concept of the abode of all the dead: “HELL from beneath is moved
for thee at thy coming: it stirreth up THE DEAD for thee, even all the chief ones of the earth;
it hath raised up from their thrones all the kings of the nations” (v. 9). In the same passage,
grave was chosen for the limited idea of the burial place of one man: “THY pomp is brought
down to the GRAVE… the worms cover THEE” (v. 11- See also Note 41 concerning Ezekiel
31). Though most if not all of the King James translators may have held to the traditional
view of endless torment, I believe their translation of Sheol is both accurate and consistent in
revealing whether a more specific, limited, and literal grave, or a more general, broader, and
figurative gravedom (hell) is meant.

47 In Proverbs 7:27 the house of the strange woman is said to be “the way to HELL, going
down to THE CHAMBERS OF DEATH.” In a similar passage, he who is fooled by a foolish
woman “knoweth not that THE DEAD ARE THERE; and that her guests are IN THE DEPTHS
OF HELL” (Prov. 9:18). Hell represents the deep chambers of death where the dead are.
Whether these chambers include conscious torment is not stated in these verses, but the
idea of hell as the abode of the dead is clearly expressed. The Bible often defines its own
terms by clear usage within an explanatory context. Hell is so defined in Scripture. Its clear
usage within an explanatory context reveals Hell to be a general, and oft times figurative,
term representative of “the chambers of death,” the gravedom, the shadowy deep pit of the
departed, the abode of the dead. Everything within the explanatory context of Isaiah 14
(dead; grave; worms; pit; lie; slain; carcase; burial) defines hell as the place of the dead, not
the torture chamber of the damned. In Ezekiel 32:18-32, the word hell is used twice; pit, six
times; grave or graves, six times; lie, five times; and slain, fifteen times. All of these words
are spiced among the contrastive phrase “land of the living” which is found six times. Not
only is hell defined within explanatory contexts by the language of death and the grave, it is
often paralleled with death (Psalm 18:4,5; 55:17; 116:3,8,9; Isaiah 28:15,18; Habakkuk 2:5)
linked with destruction (Job 26:5; Proverbs 15:11; 27:20; Matthew 10:28) and contrasted with
life (Psalm 16:9-11; Proverbs 15:24; 23:13,14).

48 From Isaiah to Malachi we find the following words mentioned in dire warnings: Some
form of FAMINE (famine, famish, dearth, hunger, hungry, etc.) – 50+ times; DEATH (death,
die, dead, grave, slain, kill, etc.) – 220+; BUGS (pestilence, locusts, worms, caterpillars, etc.)
50+; WAR (battle, sword, enemy, etc.) – 290+; WOE – 50+; CAPTIVITY – 100+. All together
– 700+ compared to ZERO warnings about either the torments of hell or of endless existence
in hell. 700+ to ZERO.

WARNING OF THE PROPHETS

FAMINE 50+
DEATH 220+
BUGS 50+
WAR 290+
WOE 50+
CAPTIVITY 100+

TOTAL 700+

ENDLESS TORMENT 0

49 In the book of Acts we have this frequency of occurrences: GOSPEL – 6x; FAITH – 14;
REPENT/REPENTANCE – 10; GRACE – 10; CRUCIFIXION (references to Christ’s death) –

13
7; RESURRECTION – 15; SALVATION – 14; LORD - 102; JESUS – 67; CHRIST – 30;
PREACH/TEACH – 37; JUDGMENT – 1; HELL – 2; ENDLESS TORMENT – 0. The two
references to hell mention nothing of it being endless torment, but rather refer to David’s
prophecy: “He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left
in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption” (Acts 2:27, 31).

PREACHING OF THE APOSTLES

GOSPEL 6
FAITH 14
REPENT / REPENTANCE 10
CHRIST’S DEATH 7
RESURRECTION 15
SALVATION 14
LORD 102
JESUS 67
CHRIST 30
PREACH/TEACH 37
JUDGMENT 1
HELL 2

ENDLESS TORMENT 0

50 Paul speaks (including Hebrews) of God’s WRATH at least 13 times, and God’s
JUDGMENT 14, but not once of HELL or TORMENT. He speaks of IMMORTALITY 6 times,
twice of God’s intrinsic immortality, and four times of the immortality to be received by
believers. To the contrary however, Paul speaks of the future destiny of the wicked using
these terms: DESTRUCTION/DESTROY- 9x; END – 2; DEATH – 5; PERISH – 5;
CORRUPTION – 1; PERDITION – 3. A few examples: “vessels of wrath fitted to destruction”
(Romans 9:22); “whose end is destruction” (Philippians 3:19); “whose end is to be burned”
(as rejected “thorns and briars” - Hebrews 6:8) “who shall be punished with everlasting
destruction” (2 Thess. 1:9); “in them that perish… the savour of death unto death” (2
Corinthians 2:15,16- Cf. “them that perish” in 1 Corinthians 1:18; 2 Thessalonians 2:10);
“which. drown men in destruction and perdition” (1 Timothy 6:9); and “them who draw back
unto perdition” (Hebrews 10:39). And the writer of Hebrews contrasts “perish” with
“remainest”: “They shall perish, but thou remainest” (1:11).

WRITINGS OF PAUL

WRATH 13
JUDGMENT 14
IMMORTALITY 6
DESTRUCTION / DESTROY 9
END 2
DEATH 5
PERISH 5
CORRUPTION 1
PERDITION 1
HELL/TORMENT 0

14
53 The thrust of Brother Bird’s position has been to see what the Scriptures actually say-
to base conclusions on the exact wording of the text, and not on the dictum of an assumed
meaning inevitably colored by an absorbed dogma. To believe that God wrote it, and then to
propose that simple and clear words do not mean what they plainly and consistently say is to
accuse God of careless negligence or a limited vocabulary. To establish meanings of words,
the Bible is self-defining by its own clear usage within explanatory contexts. If the Divine
Author has used a word over and over again to mean one thing as is made obvious by its
context, then there must be plenty of reasons and an abundance of evidence to suggest that
the same word does not mean the same thing in a similar context! Suffice it to say that the
Creator of language uses His creation to clearly communicate, not to confuse.

54 The traditionalist view of endless torment maintains that the wicked experience the
SECOND DEATH but never really die, suffer the outcome of EVERLASTING
DESTRUCTION, but are never really destroyed, are CONSUMED yet endure conscious
torment, and PERISH yet continue to be. It is a dying that never results in death; a
destroying that never ends in destruction; a consuming that never ultimately consumes; a
perishing of which nothing perishes; and an end without an end. Not only do such
interpretations alter the normal sense of these words, they actually turn them inside out to
give them an opposite meaning.

55 The Scriptural use of the word perish is clearly in contradistinction to the prospects of
the saved who will be resurrected to LIFE, and is so forcefully employed to mean the END
OF LIFE, that it is remarkable that its use has not caused more students of the Bible to
conclude that the wicked dead will not be kept alive to be tormented, but will die, utterly
perish, be consumed burned up, and destroyed. The result is everlasting through the means
of an eternal, unquenchable fire, but the torment of the destruction is not without end, for
total destruction is the end for them that perish. The normal usage and understanding of
perish in both the Old and New Testaments, the other words translated from the Hebrew and
Greek root words, and the contrastive nature of the word to the expectation of the saved,
leads inescapably to the conclusion that perish says what it means and means what it says:
a final end of life, a total destruction, and not continued existence in conscious torment.

56 Even when God’s Word uses figurative or allegorical language, the meaning is true to
the figure; the sense is consistent with the allegory. The figure of water is used for the Word
in Ephesians 5:26: like water, the Word cleanses. The figure of light is used for the Word in
Psalm 199:105: like light, the Word reveals. Water and light are understandable figures of
God’s Word. The sense is consistent, and the meaning is true to the figure. Scripture is
teeming with references to fire as an agent of punishment. Fire, figurative or literal, is the
inspired word used to communicate, not to confuse. It is not a foggy concept, nor a
mysterious expression. Fire is something we understand. We know what it is, and we know
what it does. Fire consumes! By examining the abundant occurrences of fire in Scripture,
we learn that GOD IS A CONSUMING FIRE, and FIRE CONSUMES. Water cleanses; light
reveals; and fire consumes. We learn that while the fire itself may burn on, whatever is in the
fire will burn up. But fire as an instrument of torment that never consumes anything in it is
contrary to our understanding of fire. As such, it is neither a literal truth nor a true figure.
Such a fire is not a fire that we know anything about (The only understanding of fire that is
left intact with such an interpretation is the understanding that fire causes pain). And if it is
meant figuratively, as some maintain, then it is a use of fire that we do not comprehend- it
uses fire to illustrate something (endless torment) that is not consistent with the nature of fire
(fire consumes). Water cleanses; light reveals; fire consumes. The divinely chosen word,
fire, used to describe the element of punishment, whether used literally or figuratively, is

15
literally true, or true to the figure. Either way, it is a fire that does what we consistently
understand fire to do, and what Scripture persistently says it does- it consumes.

57 God is described in Scripture as “a consuming fire” (Deuteronomy 4:24; 9:3; Hebrews


12:29). There are a multitude of references that speak of “the fire of God,” and “the fire of
the LORD,” most often in connection with judgment. When God used fire to punish anyone,
the fire always consumed. Always! The only exceptions to fire not consuming its contents is
when God appeared to Moses “in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush” (Exodus 3:2, ff.)
and the three Hebrew children in the fiery furnace. These are indeed remarkable exceptions,
but no one maintains that the bush or the three were being punished or experienced any
sensation of the fire. One was the fire of God, but not of judgment; the other was a fire of
judgment, but not of God. These exceptions indicate that God can appear in a fire that does
not consume its contents, and is able to protect His own from a fire’s consuming power, but
when the God of fire, or the fire of God is referred to in connection with judgment and
punishment, it always, without exception, indicates a fire that consumes, devours, and
destroys. Our God is a consuming fire, and the fire of God consumes. It is this God and this
fire that the Scripture repeatedly and consistently says will consume the wicked at the final
judgment (Deuteronomy 4:24; 9:3; Psalm 21:9; Malachi 4:1; Matthew 3:12; 13:40; 2
Thessalonians 1:8, 9; Hebrews 10:27; 12:29).

58 The Divine Intelligence paints vivid and lucid word pictures that are unmistakable:
unquenchable fire burns up the chaff (Matthew 3:12), devours the stubble (Isaiah 33:11, 12;
Malachi 4:1); turns the ungodly to ashes (2 Peter 2:6; Jude v. 7), consumes the wicked
(Psalm 37:20; Ezekiel 22:31), and destroys those who know not God (2 Thessalonians 1:9).

59 We know what fire is, and we know what it does, and in every depiction of final wrath
and judgment, the items drawn (chaff, tares, stubble, briars, thorns, lime, dry branches) are
not only flammable, but are some of the most highly combustible materials imaginable! But
consider that other options were available: God’s preserved Word is pictured as silver tried in
a furnace (Psalm 12:6,7); our faith as gold tried in fire (1 Peter 1:7; Cf. Job 23:10; Zechariah
13:9; Revelation 3:18); gold, silver, and precious stones as being revealed by fire (1
Corinthians 3:12-15); Christ’s feet being “like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace”
(Revelation 1:15); the unburned but burning bush in the wilderness (Exodus 3:2,3) and the
unconsumed three Hebrew children in the fiery furnace (Daniel 3:22-29)- thus the sacred
paintbrush did not lack a sufficient palette to describe endless torment. But when God chose
to depict how it would be for the wicked at the final judgment, He painted a picture of
complete consumption, not endless torment. When supporters of endless torment explain
their theory, however, they inevitably use the pictures God didn’t (such as the burning bush),
and completely avoid any of the vivid pictures God did employ. Strange? Yes, but oh, so
revealing!

60 Isaiah 5:24 Therefore as the fire DEVOURETH the STUBBLE, and the flame
CONSUMETH the CHAFF, so their root shall be as rottenness, and their blossom shall go up
as dust: because they have cast away the law of the LORD of hosts, and despised the word
of the Holy One of Israel.

Isaiah 33:11, 12 Ye shall conceive CHAFF, ye shall bring forth STUBBLE: your breath, as
fire, shall DEVOUR you. And the people shall be as the burnings of LIME: as THORNS cut
up shall they be BURNED in the fire.

16
Malachi 4:1 For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea,
and all that do wickedly, shall be STUBBLE: and the day that cometh shall BURN THEM UP,
saith the LORD of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch.

Matthew 3:12 Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his
wheat into the garner; but he will BURN UP the CHAFF with unquenchable fire.

Matthew 13:40 As therefore the TARES are gathered and BURNED in the fire; so shall it be
in the end of this world.

John 15:6 If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a BRANCH, and is WITHERED; and
men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are BURNED.

Hebrews 6:8 But that which beareth THORNS and BRIERS is rejected, and is nigh unto
cursing; whose end is to be BURNED.

61 A fire that cannot be put out does not mean that what is in the fire will not burn up! It
actually means just the opposite: “He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire” (Matthew
3:12). If the fire could not be put out, how would the chaff keep from burning up? If Old
McDonald’s barn caught fire, and firemen could not put it out (unquenchable fire), would
anyone foolishly suppose that the barn would keep burning? No, they would obviously
understand that the barn completely burned up.

62 God’s fire, the unquenchable “eternal fire” does not need the fuel of its prey to exist.
For example, when the fire of God has fallen, it was already burning before it had its target
as fuel. For temporal, earthly fires, “where no wood (as fuel) is, there the fire goeth out”
(Proverbs 26:20). But the eternal fire is not a temporal, earthly fire. Neither does fire that
cannot be put out mean that it never goes out. It cannot be extinguished, but it does not
keep burning when it has consumed its prey. For example, the fire that destroyed Idumea
(Isaiah 34) could not be quenched and the smoke resulting from its consuming power “shall
go up for ever” (v. 10), but no one would suppose that a fire is still burning in Idumea, or that
the inhabitants are to this day enduring its torment.

63 I have yet to read any attempt to reconcile “burn up” with endless torment. Someone
wondered aloud if perhaps “chaff” in Matthew 3:12 didn’t mean the wicked at all, but perhaps
“burn up the chaff” was talking about something like “dross” being removed from gold (the
word “purge” is in the verse). The wonderer then read the context and decided against such
a conjecture. The wicked or ungodly are identified as chaff as follows: “as chaff that the
storm carrieth away” (Job 21:18); “The ungodly… are like the chaff which the wind driveth
away” (Psalm 1:4); “Let them be as chaff before the wind” (Psalm 35:5); “as… the flame
consumeth the chaff” (Isaiah 5:24); “as the chaff of the mountains before the wind” (Isaiah
17:13); “as chaff that passeth away” (Isaiah 29:5); “Ye shall conceive chaff… your breath, as
fire, shall devour you” (Isaiah 33:11); “as the chaff that is driven with the whirlwind out of the
floor” (Hosea 13:3); and the various kingdoms of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream were “like the
chaff of the summer threshingfloors; and the wind carried them away” (Daniel 2:35).

64 The identification “fire and brimstone preachers” is not meant to belittle sincere men
who warn folks of what they genuinely understand to be the fate of the wicked, namely,
endless torment. But there are others who speak in uncouth terms and Unchristian tones
who are not worthy to be called “preachers.” I’ve heard them, and you probably have to.
“You’ll split hell wide open.” “They’ll fry like a sausage.” “Somebody’s gonna have some hell
to pay!”

17
65 Even now, no one has tried to explain how “burn up” doesn’t contradict endless
torment. Any attempt to reconcile PERISH with the traditional theory has feebly centered
around broken wine bottles, and remarkably, LIFE and DEATH aren’t life and death in their
normal, natural, and primary sense, but words in an unknown tongue that speak of different
states of existence. Those who believe the Bible teaches that immortality is a gift to those in
Christ, and that all others perish, have repeatedly and painstakingly attempted to answer any
challenge. Their opponents, however, generally box and label any other view as cultic or
liberal, and then run and hide behind a few isolated “proof-texts” that are either lifted out of
context (such as 2 Thessalonians 1:8, 9, and Revelation 14:11), or that say nothing of
endless duration (Mark 9:44; Revelation 20:15; Luke 16:23). If the traditional theory of
endless torment is what the Scripture teaches, then why are its supporters so evasive when
it comes to explaining the plain words and clear pictures of Scripture? Will Christ burn up the
chaff or not? Will the wicked perish? Will their end be destruction? Is having a part in the
lake of fire the second death? If you believe you have the truth, then face these questions
fairly and squarely!

66 Saying something over and over again does not make it true. Quit harping, and start
searching. It seems that such defense tactics of the supporters of endless torment stem
from their inability to answer the questions posed in note #65. More words and louder words
do not suffice to take the place of clear words and Scriptural words. Just who are tormented
day and night? Where does it take place? In whose presence? How does Scripture use the
phrase for ever? Exactly what is described as for ever? Search and see if any of the
answers to these questions contradict the consistent and clear utterances of all the relevant
texts on the subject. Connect the dots and see the overall picture of the persistent teaching
of Scripture, and that is that the wicked perish, die, are destroyed, and are no more, and that
fire consumes, especially an unquench-able fire whose object is such combustible materials
as chaff, tares, and stubble.

67 As to the Hebrew and Greek, they speak in as clear a manner as does our good old
plain English Bible, as a perusal of Strong’s Concordance will attest. It would take a crafty
theologian and a creative lexicon indeed to make the wording of the Hebrew and Greek to
testify on behalf of endless torment, and then it would require an interpreter of an unknown
tongue to explain it.

Greek specialist Dr. R. F. Weymouth weighs in: “My mind fails to conceive of a grosser
misrepresentation of language, than when five or six of the strongest words which the Greek
tongue possesses signifying destroy or destruction are explained to mean ‘maintaining an
everlasting but wretched existence.’ To translate black as white is nothing to this.’ (Cited in
Pettingell, J. H., The Unspeakable Gift, 1884, p. 322.)

It is also illuminating that of the various Hebrew words translated “perish,” the English words
most often used (in a convincing high percentage) for the same word are forms of the root
“destroy” (destroy, destroyeth, destroyed, destruction) as in the destruction of the world
through the flood and of Sodom and Gomorrah by fire and brimstone.

68 In my own personal search of the Scriptures on this subject, the unraveling of what I’ve
always been taught, and likely the hemming, if you will, of what has predominantly been set
forth, is the issue of the immortality of the soul. While perusing Bible commentaries and
dictionaries, it soon became evident that many writers had postulated the immortality of the
soul as the starting point of any discussion on death, the intermediate state, and final
judgment.

18
The eloquent William Elbert Munsey lays his foundation: “Man is immortal… That man is
immortal is the recognized and fundamental truth in the Bible, and in every system of
religion… Man, good or bad, is immortal, so you all believe” (Munsey, Eternal Retribution, p.
70). Loraine Boettner suggests (without offering any substantiation), “In general the Bible
treats the subject of the immortality of the soul in much the same way that it treats the
existence of God, - such belief is assumed as an undeniable postulate” (Immortality,
Eerdmans, 1956, p. 78).

That immortality of the soul is assumed is undeniable – but not on the part of Scripture, but
on the part of writers like Munsey and Boettner. If “the Bible treats the subject of the
immortality of the soul in much the same way that it treats the existence of God” then where
are such similar declarations as “In the beginning God” (Genesis 1:1), “he that cometh to
God must believe that He is,” (Hebrews 11:6), or “I am God, and there is none else” (Isaiah
45:22)? The Scripture nowhere teaches, assumes, or takes for granted the immortality of
the soul. To the contrary, it states unequivocally that only God hath immortality (1 Timothy
6:16), that souls die (Ezekiel 18:14), can be destroyed by God in hell (Matthew 10:28), and
that immortality is not an intrinsic possession of the soul, but is a sought-after goal, and if
obtained is given by God (“Who will render… to them who… seek for… immortality, eternal
life” -Romans 2:6, 7).

69 For me, the nagging question that begged an answer was “Where does the Bible teach
the immortality of the soul?” What saith the Scripture? I began asking friends who were
students of the Word. In accord with the commentaries and dictionaries, there was no clear
verse cited, but the theory was often maintained as an undeniable funda-mental. Some
feebly suggested that perhaps the worm that “dieth not” was the immortal soul. Others drew
back as if in fear of being infected by such a heretical inquiry. But I want to know where it is!
If “the Scripture clearly teaches it,” then no less than chapter and verse will do. And for
something of such unquestioned status with numerous auxiliary implications, it should be
chapters and verses, as in many. But is there any? And where are they?

70 Apologists for conditional immortality contend that the traditional view on the
immortality of the soul and its corresponding relationship to final punishment is rooted in the
impact of pagan philosophy (such as that of Plato) on many influential Christian thinkers and
writers. These subsequently bequeathed the assumed underpinning on centuries of
unsuspecting and unquestioning believers who were fighting too many other theological
battles to successfully debunk the standard shibboleth on final punishment (though
conditionalist apologists document many persistent voices of dissent).

71 The concordance is of no help here. Some try to proof innate immortality from the fact
that God “breathed… the breath of life; and man became a living soul” (Genesis 2:7), but fail
to notice that God breathed that breath “into his nostrils,” not his spirit, or that the Hebrew
word nephesh, translated soul in 2:7, is the same word translated creature in 1:21 (“every
living creature that moveth”), and the word “living” that describes soul and creature is the
same word in Hebrew (chay) as well. And it is this same nephesh that will muwth: “the soul
that sinneth, it shall die” (Ezekiel 18:14, 20). And it is important to note that man “became a
living soul,” not that his body received a living soul.

Also, the exact same wording of “the breath of life” is used in Genesis 7:21, 22 to speak of
the animals as well as man: “And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and
of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every
man: All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died. In
Genesis 6:17 God says, “I do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh,

19
wherein is the breath of life.” Again in Genesis 7:15: “And they went in unto Noah into the
ark, two and two of all flesh, wherein is the breath of life.”

Scripture is its own best commentary. The Apostle Paul gives us his interpretation of “living
soul” in 1 Corinthians 15. “And so it is written, the first man Adam WAS MADE A LIVING
SOUL; the last Adam was made a quickening (life-giving) spirit” (v. 45). How does Paul
understand living soul? What does he write down under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit for
succeeding ages to read? “Howbeit that was not first which was spiritual, but that which is
natural… the first man is of the earth, earthy… flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of
God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption” (46-50). In other words, Paul uses words of
mortality to describe the first Adam, the living soul: NATURAL, EARTHY, FLESH AND
BLOOD, CORRUPTION. The second Adam, the quickening spirit, is contrasted as spiritual,
heavenly, and as giving victory over death by giving immortality to the mortal. Thus Paul
uses the very term, living soul, which many theologians use to support the tenet of the soul’s
immortality- the very same term he uses to introduce his description of man’s mortality. If
Paul believed in the immortality of the soul, and if he had any inkling that “living soul” was an
indication of it, he sure picked an odd time to use the term, and he certainly missed the
perfect opportunity to explain it as such.

72 1Timothy 6:15-16 Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only
Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; Who ONLY hath IMMORTALITY, dwelling in
the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom
be honour and power everlasting. Amen.

The fact that man was created in God’s image no more makes man immortal than it makes
him invisible, or omnipotent. Romans 1:23 contrasts “the glory of the uncorruptible God” and
“an image made like to corruptible man.” In 1Timothy 1:17, immortal is listed between
eternal and invisible, adjectives that exclusively describe “the only wise God.” One of Job’s
miserable comforters asks a question that expresses an understood difference between man
and God, “Shall mortal man be more just than God?” (Job 4:17). Only God hath immortality!

73 This text confirms that neither man nor his soul has intrinsic immortality, but that
immortality is the exclusive possession of God. As one friend conceded, “Only is rather
exclusive.” Christ explained this intrinsic immortality of the Godhead, “For as the Father
hath life in himself: so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself… And ye will not come
to me that ye might have life” (Read the entire context- John 5:17-40). The Father hath life
“in himself.” Once we understand that only God hath immortality, we begin to see other
pertinent matters in clear focus. One such matter is the clear teaching of Scripture that
eternal life is “the gift of God through Jesus Christ our Lord” (Rom. 6:23), not the inherent
possession of immortal souls.

74 The first reason to believe that a worm is a worm is that the context of the passage
Christ quoted (Isaiah 66:24- see notes 27-30) speaks specifically of carcases on a
battlefield, carcases that would be seen and abhorred by others. There is no contextual
reason, or any collaborative evidence elsewhere, to imagine that the worm is the soul or the
conscience, as many have conjectured. There certainly should be a valid reason if one
suggests their worm is not a worm.

By comparing Scripture with Scripture, however, we can discern that worm does indeed
mean worm. Job laments, “If I wait, the grave is mine house: I have made my bed in the
darkness. I have said to corruption, Thou art my father: to the worm, Thou art my mother,
and my sister,” and speaks of going “down to the bars of the pit, when our rest is in the dust”
(17:13, 14, 16). Later Job testifies of the resurrection of the body even after its consumption

20
by worms: “For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon
the earth: And though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God”
(19:25, 26). Job also bemoans the common death experienced by people of varying
circumstances: “They shall lie down alike in the dust, and the worms shall cover them” (Job
21:26). “Drought and heat consume the snow waters: so doth the grave those which have
sinned,” Job elaborates, “The womb shall forget him; the worm shall feed sweetly on him; he
shall be no more remembered” (24:19, 20). Isaiah connects worms with the grave: “Thy
pomp is brought down to the grave, and the noise of thy viols: the worm is spread under
thee, and the worms cover thee” (14:11). Isaiah also makes this contrast: “the moth shall eat
them up like a garment, and the worm shall eat them like wool: but my righteousness shall
be for ever, and my salvation from generation to generation” (51:7, 8). And then inspired
Doctor Luke tells us that the gruesome result of Herod’s pride has to do with physiology, not
psychology: “And immediately the angel of the Lord smote him, because he gave not God
the glory: and he was eaten of worms, and gave up the ghost” (Acts 12:23). The consistency
of these texts reveals the truth that real worms devour dead bodies.

This is in harmony with Mark 9 where Christ contrasts entering “into life” with going “into
hell.” The weight of the contrast is compelling: it is better to be missing a body part and
enter into life than have your “whole body cast” (as it is worded in Matt. 5:29, 30) into the
destructive power of hell fire, where God has the power “to destroy both soul and body”
(Matthew 10:28). Entering into life with offensive body parts removed is far superior and
infinitely to be preferred over having a “whole body” destroyed in hell- never ending life over
everlasting death. The contrast is not between life and torment, as has been supposed, but
between immortality and perishing, remaining or being consumed, entrance into the kingdom
of God or being cast into hell fire (v. 47), eternal glory or everlasting destruction, life eternal
or the second death, delivered from woe or devoured by worms. Isn’t that a convincing
contrast and compelling reason to choose life no matter the cost to the temporal body!

75 Christ states plainly that there is a “resurrection of life,” and a “resurrection of


damnation.” 1 Corinthians 15 is the classic passage on the resurrection of believers, the
resurrection of life. Paul says emphatically: “flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of
God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption” (v. 50). For “this corruptible must put on
incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. So when this corruptible shall have put
on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass
the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory” (vv. 53, 54). It is incredible how
many writers attempt to make this resurrection of life (mortality putting on immortality)
universal to the righteous and the wicked. It is impossible to understand how obtaining an
immortal body to endure endless torment could be understood as “victory.” And the context
speaks of “the image of the heavenly” and inheriting “the kingdom of God.”

Paul uses the inclusive pronoun “we” (“We shall not all sleep… we shall all be changed…we
shall be changed” –vv. 51, 52) and addresses his readers as “brethren” (vv. 1, 50) and “my
beloved brethren” (v. 58). He writes of those “which are fallen asleep in Christ” (v. 18), and
“they that are Christ’s” (v. 23). This resurrection is obviously the resurrection of believers, the
resurrection of life.

What theologian or exegete would venture to claim that the wicked will be given glorified
bodies (v. 43) that bear the image of the heavenly (v. 48) at the resurrection? Believers are
given eternal life through Jesus Christ (conditional immortality). Unbelievers are raised to be
damned. Though all the dead will be raised (John 5:28, 29), and 1 Corinthians does speak
of the general “resurrection of the dead,” nowhere does the Scripture indicate that
unbelievers are given immortality, or an incorruptible or glorified body at the resurrection.

21
They are not raised to “life,” but to “damnation,” to be cast into the lake of fire, “which is the
second death” (Cf. Revelation 20:12-15; 21:8).

76 The gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord (Rom. 6:23); God hath
given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son (1 John 5:11); Whosoever believeth shall not
perish but have everlasting life (John 3:16); the water that I shall give… springing up into
everlasting life (John 4:14); everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you (John
6:27); that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him (John 17:2); ye will
not come to me, that ye might have life (John 5:40). Immortality is not the intrinsic
possession of souls, but rather the gift of the immortal God to those in Christ. Receiving
immortality is conditional on being in Christ. We do not receive it by our first birth in Adam,
but by our second birth in the second Adam, Christ! The truth of Scripture is LIFE IN
CHRIST!

77 John 10:27, 28 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I
give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out
of my hand.

78 Because the assumed belief in immortal souls is so prevalent, the language of


evangelism has been Heaven or Hell, not death in sin or life in Christ, which is the language
of Scripture. Now life in Christ will mean heaven for the believer, and death in sin will mean
to perish in the fire of hell, but not because souls are immortal, but because without the
immortality only given to those in Christ, the wicked will most assuredly perish! This is the
clear language of Scripture. Christ will give eternal life to mortal man, not merely allow
immortal souls to enter heaven. This is the consistent language of Scripture. Souls can and
will die. God is able to destroy both body and soul in hell.

79 Matthew 10:28 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.

In the Old Testament, the “living soul” of Genesis 2:7 is the same “soul that sinneth, it shall
die” of Ezekiel 18:4. It is the same word in English and Hebrew. It is a living soul, but it can
and will die. In the New Testament, the “soul” that God “is able to destroy… in hell” of
Matthew 10:28 is the same “soul” saved from “death” in James 5:20. It is the same word in
English and Greek. Man can’t kill that soul, but it can be saved from death, or be destroyed
by God in hell. So the truth of Scripture is not the immortality of the soul, but that only God
hath immortality, and souls can be destroyed and die.

80 There is no doubt that Hell sells tickets. Holding the threat of endless and
unimaginable torment over the heads of prospective converts has certainly produced results
in persuading people to make a profession of salvation, whether walking an aisle, praying a
prayer, or signing a card. But whether such a method produces true conversions, genuine
new births into the family of God, it is doubtful. Many a person has had sense enough to
know that they did not want to burn in hell, but neither did they desire to truly repent of sin
and follow Christ. In Medieval times, the potential of being stretched at the rack, enduring
the thumbscrew, or burning at the stake forced many a verbal confession and outward
conformity, but did it win the heart? This is not to impugn the motives behind zealous
witnesses elaborating on the endless agony of hell as they understand it, but it is to question
the foundation and fruit of such an emphasis in evangelism.

Heaven or Hell? is an easy question to ask and answer. But Sin or Christ? is an altogether
different proposition! And “repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ”

22
(Acts 20:21) is the requirement of the gospel. The New Testament presentation of the
gospel reveals the alternatives of death in sin, or life in Christ; a second birth or a second
death; utterly perishing or eternally enduring; everlasting life or everlasting destruction. So
Brother Bird scolds torment peddlers because he fears that many folks are responding to
their presentation out of nothing more than fear of pain, not out of true conviction, genuine
repentance, or sincere faith. And the nothing more of such a response generates something
less than true conversion.

This is not to say that some have not genuinely come to Christ out of an initial fear of hell,
but that the fear of hell itself will not save anyone. If the fear of hell could lead someone to
genuinely consider the claims of Christ and His gospel, then a true understanding of the
dreadful final judgment, and the awful prospect of being completely consumed and finally
destroyed would also lead to such consideration. As Paul “reasoned of righteousness,
temperance, and judgment to come, Felix trembled” (Acts 24:25). Such a presentation of the
teaching of Scripture concerning perishing would bring forth “a certain looking for of
judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries” (Hebrews 10:27).

81 Revelation 14:10 The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured
out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and
brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb:

Those who “drink of the wine of the wrath of God” are specifically those who “worship the
beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand” (v. 9). This does
not include or imply all unbelievers of all ages. Those who “have no rest day nor night” are
those “who worship,” not worshipped, the beast. And this passage is six chapters away from
the Great White Throne Judgment.

It does not say that the torment is for ever and ever, but that “the smoke of their torment
ascendeth up for ever and ever.” As in the case of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah,
Babylon, and Idumea, the destruction is final, and the torment of it has an end, but the
smoke bearing testimony to the destruction ascends up on and on (See note 86). “No rest
day nor night” does not demand eternal torment, and should not be so construed in light of
the weight of the rest of Scripture on the subject.

82 Matthew 8:12 But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness:
there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Matthew 13:40-42: As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in
the end of this world. The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out
of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; And shall cast them into a
furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

Matthew 13:49, 50: So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and
sever the wicked from among the just, And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall
be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

Matthew 22:13 Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him
away, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Matthew 24:50, 51: The lord of that servant shall come in a day when he looketh not for him,
and in an hour that he is not aware of, And shall cut him asunder, and appoint him his portion
with the hypocrites: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

23
Matthew 25:30 And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be
weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Luke 13:28 There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and
Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, and you yourselves thrust
out.

It is vitally important to note that the preceding verses are not speaking about a place of
weeping and wailing, but about a time of weeping and wailing. The “weeping and wailing”
does not give expression to endless torment, but rather to the grief and anger of those being
“cast out.” These passages do not say “where shall be,” but “there shall be,” specifying time,
not location- when, not where. Each of the above passages indicates that it is at the time of
the casting out (or “cutting asunder” in Matthew 24:50, 51) that the weeping and wailing
occurs. Luke 13:38 tells us exactly when the weeping and wailing takes place: “when ye
shall see…” Psalm 112 shows the same anguish of the wicked seeing the glories of the
righteous while facing their own doom of perishing: “Unto the upright there ariseth light in the
darkness… Surely he shall not be moved for ever: the righteous shall be in everlasting
remembrance… his righteousness endureth for ever; his horn shall be exalted with honour.
The wicked shall see it, and be grieved; he shall gnash with his teeth, and melt away: the
desire of the wicked shall perish” (vv. 4, 6, 9, 10). Notice in both cases that the gnashing of
teeth came as a result of seeing: “when ye shall see;” “wicked shall see.” Weeping and
gnashing of teeth does not speak, therefore, of the pain of endless torment, but rather of the
distress and terror, the sorrow and horror, of being cast into outer darkness while seeing the
righteous being received into the kingdom.

83 Peter mentions darkness as the eternal reservation of the wicked: “to whom the mist of
darkness is reserved for ever” (2 Peter 2:17). Does mist of darkness picture visible flames of
torment or the nothingness of irreversible destruction? In the passage above it is the end of
those who “utterly perish.” Jude refers to the same fate: “Raging waves of the sea, foaming
out their own shame; wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for
ever” (v. 13). In Christ’s teaching of the kingdom, “outer darkness” is the lot of those “cast
out” (see the references in note 82).

Darkness is also characteristic of the detention of the fallen angels awaiting judgment: “God
spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains
of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment” (2 Pet. 2:4); “And the angels which kept not their
first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under
darkness unto the judgment of the great day” (Jude 1:6). The poetry of the Old Testament is
replete with references connecting death with darkness (Job 3:5; 12:21, 22; 28:3; 34:22; Ps.
107:10, 14; Isa. 9:2; Jer. 13:16). Psalm 49 says that those who descend in death “shall
never see light” (v. 19).

84 Some traditionalists have made an attempt to reconcile “outer darkness” with the fire of
endless torment by reasoning that the hottest of all flames are black. Whether or not this is
credible science, as an explanation it seems to me to be contrived, sadistic, and
unconvincing. Such a thought may be creative apologetics, but it is not sound exegesis.
Others would contend that fire and darkness are only figurative anyway. But even if that
were so, what would they figure? Fire consumes, and mist of darkness and outer darkness
are not words that figuratively express endless torment.

85 Revelation 18:8 Therefore shall her plagues come in one day, death, and mourning,
and famine; and she shall be utterly burned with fire: for strong is the Lord God who judgeth
her.

24
Revelation 18:10 Standing afar off for the fear of her torment, saying, Alas, alas that great
city Babylon, that mighty city! for in one hour is thy judgment come.

Revelation 18:17 For in one hour so great riches is come to nought.

Revelation 18:19 …for in one hour is she made desolate.

Revelation 18:21 And a mighty angel took up a stone like a great millstone, and cast it into
the sea, saying, Thus with violence shall that great city Babylon be thrown down, and shall
be found no more at all.

The above verses clearly indicate that the duration of Babylon’s overthrow was limited (in
one day; in one hour), and that the result was that Babylon “shall be found no more at all.”
The phrase no more, or any more, is found eight times in Revelation 18 concerning the result
of Babylon’s overthrow. She “shall be utterly burned with fire” (18:8), and “the kings of the
earth shall lament for her, when they shall see the smoke of her burning” (18:9). Now here is
the important thing to note: though the duration of her punishment was limited, and her
torment had an end, yet we are told “her smoke rose up for ever and ever” (19:3).
Remember the pictures of the billowing smoke days after the terrorist attack in New York City
on 9-11-01? Even weeks later a residue of smoke lingered and ascended. Yet many of the
victims of the attack were nothing but ashes buried beneath tons of debris.

86 The smoke that rises up for ever and ever speaks of consumption, not endless
torment. Once again Scripture teaches this by its clear usage. The smoke of Babylon’s
desolation “rose up for ever and ever” (Rev. 19:3), yet her destruction took only “one hour”
(Rev. 18:10, 17, 19; see note 85). Isaiah tells us that the destruction of Idumea will include
unquenched fire and unending smoke (“it shall not be quenched night nor day; the smoke
shall go up for ever”), but that this bears witness to its utter destruction (“from generation to
generation it shall lie waste; none shall pass through it for ever and ever”- 34:10). What is
smoke but the evidence of consumption- the testimony of destruction by fire? “They saw the
smoke of her burning” (Rev. 18:18). Can there be smoke without consumption?

Sodom was “overthrown as in a moment” (Lamentations 4:6), yet Abraham saw the smoke
from the destruction of Sodom go “up as the smoke of a furnace” (Gen. 19:28). “But the
wicked shall perish, and the enemies of the LORD shall be as the fat of lambs: they shall
consume; into smoke shall they consume away” (Psa. 37:20). Cremate the body of a 200-
pound man, and his ashes will weigh less than 10 pounds. His body has been “reduced to
ashes”- his body has been burned up. Scripture’s use of smoke and ashes powerfully speak
of final, everlasting destruction by fire, not endless torment in fire.

87 Deuteronomy 15:17 Then thou shalt take an aul, and thrust it through his ear unto the
door, and he shall be thy servant for ever. (Cf. Exodus 21:6).

Many feasts and ordinances given to Moses were said to be “a statute for ever,” with the
qualifying phrase often added at the end “throughout your generations” (for example,
Leviticus 23:14, 21, 31, 41; Numbers 10:8; 18:23). The pile of twelve stones set up beside
the Jordan River were to be “a memorial unto the children of Israel for ever” (Joshua 4:7).
Even if they had survived to this day, would they be a memorial throughout the unfathomable
recesses of eternity? “Joshua burnt Ai, and made it a heap for ever, even a desolation unto
this day” (Joshua 8:28). Hannah desired to take little Samuel to the tabernacle in Jerusalem,
“that he may appear before the LORD, and there abide for ever” (1 Samuel 1:22). Achish,
the king of Gath, trusted David’s feigned loyalty, proclaiming, “he shall be my servant for

25
ever,” and “said to David, Therefore will I make thee keeper of my head for ever” (1 Samuel
27:12; 28:2). The old men counseled Rehoboam, “”If thou wilt… speak good words unto
them, then they will be thy servants for ever” (1 Kings 12:7). Gehazi was told “the leprosy
therefore of Naaman shall cleave unto thee, and unto thy seed for ever” (2 Kings 5:7).
Jonah cried from the belly of the great fish, “I went down to the bottom of the mountains; the
earth with her bars was about me for ever” (Jonah 2:6). The point of all these references is
to show that the phrase for ever does not always mean without a final end. It may, and most
often does, mean eternally, but only as indicated by the context.

88 If you said, “We’ll be traveling out of town for two weeks,” you would be expressing a
definite time duration of your trip. “For two weeks” is a prepositional phrase, for being the
preposition. If you said, “He lived in that house for thirty years,” again you would be using a
prepositional phrase that expresses a specific length of time. But if it be said that something
will be “for ever,” that is a prepositional phrase that expresses an indefinite amount of time,
that may or may not mean without end.

How long will the man with the hole bored in his ear be servant to his master? A definite time
limit could not be stated. How long will he or his master live? How long will the smoke
bearing evidence to consumption ascend upward? On and on? Yes. A long time? Yes, but
not without end. A definite time that the smoke will cease to ascend could not be specified,
therefore it is perfectly understandable to express it with the prepositional phrase “for ever
and ever.”

Such usage has survived in our language even to this day. “How long did it take you to get
through that line?” someone may ask. “Oh, for ever,” may be the exasperated reply. For
ever? Yes. Eternally? No, but for a long and indefinite period of time. “He’s for ever talking
about his hunting dogs,” a neighbor complains. Really? Yes. He never stops talking about
them? Well no, but he talks about them a lot, and who knows when he’ll stop talking about
them. Thus, ever is certainly indefinite, but not necessarily eternally! (Be sure to read note
87)

89 Psalm 146:4 His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his
thoughts perish.

Numbers 24:20 …his latter end shall be that he perish for ever.

Psalm 92:7 When the wicked spring as the grass, and when all the workers of iniquity do
flourish; it is that they shall be destroyed for ever:

90 Proverbs 10:25 As the whirlwind passeth, so is the wicked no more: but the righteous is
an everlasting (please note the contrast) foundation.

This is consistent with many other passages that indicate the wicked will be completely
destroyed, relegated to nothingness, darkness their everlasting reservation: “the day that
cometh shall burn them up… that it shall leave them neither root nor branch” (Mal. 4:2);
““For evildoers shall be cut off: but those that wait upon the LORD, they shall inherit the
earth. For yet a little while, and the wicked shall not be: yea, thou shalt diligently consider his
place, and it shall not be. But the meek shall inherit the earth” (Ps. 37:9-11). The prayer and
expectation of Psalm 105:34 is “Let the sinners be consumed out of the earth, and let the
wicked be no more.”

91 Acts 28:24 And some believed the things which were spoken, and some believed not.

26
It seems amazing, and somewhat amusing, that those who believe in a destruction that
doesn’t destroy, an unquenchable fire that doesn’t burn anything up (even chaff, tares,
thorns, briars, and stubble), a consuming in which nothing is consumed, an end without an
end, a death in which nothing dies, and a perishing in which nothing perishes- that those
who handle plain language in such fashion would dare say that Brother Bird is “twisting up
the Word.”

92 There are many who do not want to risk going to hell, but, nevertheless, have no
intention of following Christ. Will Heaven be predominantly populated with those who simply
did not wish to go to hell? So just because unbelievers would hope that endless torment is
not so, does not mean that convincing them that it is would win their hearts for Christ (neither
will they be persuaded- Luke 16:31). And neither the flimsy hopes of unbelievers, nor the
firm dogmatism of scholars, can make it one whit true or false.

93 It has truly been refreshing to hear the hearts of some true believers who have at least
hoped that no one would have to endure endless agony. Their love for the Lord and for
others was not lessened in the least by whether or not the torments of hell would be
endless. In fact, their love for God and compassion for men caused them all the more to
hope for final destruction instead of perpetual torture. And those who have come to
understand it thus have expressed that such an understanding has only increased their love
for a God so gracious to give eternal life to those who would otherwise surely perish.
Unfortunately, all professed believers don’t feel that way. One Christian Brother said to
another, “Well, I sure hope that endless torment is not so.” The other, a defender of immortal
souls and eternal misery, responded, “Why would you hope a thing like that?” The first,
dismayed by such a reaction, replied, “Why would you not?” We do well to remember, “he
shall have judgment without mercy, that hath shewed no mercy; and mercy rejoiceth against
judgment” (James 2:13).

94 “If any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to
know. But if any man love God, the same is known of him” (1 Cor. 8:2, 3). Those referred to
in the poem know enough to know they don’t know it all. Most often their lack of certainty is
not because they are ignorant of God’s Word, but rather because they are intimately familiar
with it. This familiarity makes them aware of the repeated use of words like perish,
destruction, death, consume, end, devour, etc. They have noticed the repeated contrasts of
death and perish with everlasting life. And this familiarity also makes them aware of the
conspicuous silence of the prophets and apostles concerning an endless duration of
torment. They know enough to know it is valid to ask, “Do any of the 154 usages of a form
of the word perish ever express a process without an understood end?” They know enough
to know it is valid to ask whether immortality comes from Adam or Christ, a first birth or a
new birth, the nature of the soul or the gift of God. They know enough to know that “only
God hath immortality,” that He can “destroy both body and soul in hell,” that Christ will “burn
up the chaff with unquenchable fire,” and that the lake of fire “is the second death.” They
know enough to know these are credible points, and they know that Brother Bird believes
what he does because of a firm confidence in the perspicuity (it means what it says) of
Scripture, and not because he has embraced the tenets of a clever heretic, crafty cult, or
cunning scholar.

95 Jonah was angry that God was not going to destroy Nineveh after all. The Lord asked
His fuming prophet, “Doest thou well to be angry?” Jonah defended his fury, and God gave
him an object lesson on compassion using a worm and a gourd. “Then said the LORD, Thou
hast had pity on the gourd, for the which thou hast not laboured, neither madest it grow;
which came up in a night, and perished in a night: And should not I spare Nineveh, that great

27
city, wherein are more then sixscore thousand persons that cannot discern between their
right hand and their left hand; and also much cattle? (Jonah 4:10, 11). Charles Spurgeon,
the celebrated preacher of Victorian England, maintained and propagated the traditional
dogma, but I remember reading a snatch of his that expressed the sentiment that he would
not react like Jonah if the judgment of the wicked were not as he had understood it.

96 It is the hope of this endeavor to stimulate more study in the Word. Surely even the
proponents of endless torment would welcome more study in the Word (see notes 19-23).
“These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all
readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so” (Acts
17:11).

97 But, alas, some neither welcome, nor encourage more study in the Word. It should be
apparent that if their theory is truly the doctrine of Scripture, then they should promote more
study in the Word as the best means of defense of their view. But they do not. And the
worst offenders in this regard are those in positions of leadership who fear the peers and
desire to retain their approval. Nicodemus wisely asked, “Doth our law judge any man,
before it hear him, and know what he doeth?” (John 7:51). Apparently the law of earthly
kingdom builders does judge a man before it hears him. Earthly kingdom builders are afraid
to hear him, whoever he may, usually in fear that such a hearing may either reveal that he is
possibly right, or expose their pitiful inability to prove him wrong. It is far safer to gag and
slander him. This is no exaggeration. It is the norm of past history and the status quo of
present reality.

98 While able and articulate defenders of the traditional dogma of endless torment have
written thoughtful and thorough works, many, if not most, knee-jerk protectors of accepted
doctrine tend to bluster and bristle, protest and rant, and suppose that by quoting one or two
“proof-texts” that they have ended the argument and won the day.

99 A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject (Titus 3:10).
It must be much easier to identify a heretic than it is to admonish one. One of the
qualifications of an elder is that he will hold fast the faithful word, and be able by sound
doctrine both to exhort and convince the gainsayers (Titus 1:9). I have found that most men
will libel and label heretics instead of admonishing them in direct proportion to their lack of
knowledge of the Word- their own inability to search and then teach the truth of the
Scriptures. For example, a pastor may not have a real clear grasp of a Biblical subject, but
he knows what he’s always been taught, is familiar with a few proof-texts, and knows what
he better espouse if he is to continue in the good graces of his particular circle of peers.
Such a man, when confronted with “heresy,” finds it more expedient to either speak with sad
pity or angry disgust about the heretic than he does to rescue the offender and protect the
flock from his error by a careful and thorough exposition of the relevant texts on the subject.
“Did you hear what Brother Openmind believes now? Isn’t that sad?” he piously moans. Or
“I was afraid Brother Freespirit was going to end up dappling in that rubbish. Well, he better
keep that stuff away from here!” Now wasn’t that a lot easier than studying?

Someone has well said, “The hardest thing to do is not to learn a new truth, but to unlearn an
old error.” Old errors die hard in the white-knuckled clasp of defenders of the status quo.
Sadly, most men are not free enough in mind and spirit to make a fresh search of Scripture
to see if whether what they have long been taught is so (Acts 17:11). Scripture must yield to
the final authority of pragmatism. So if you don’t know enough to answer a heretic, or don’t
care enough to bother, just label him, libel him, and be done with him. Little men have

28
always stooped to such low means to protect their little kingdoms. The longer I live, the less
I’m impressed or disappointed, and I’m certainly not surprised.

100 John 12:42, 43 Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on him; but
because of the Pharisees they did not confess him, lest they should be put out of the
synagogue: For they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God” (John 12:42, 43).
Nothing has changed in this department: AMONG THE CHIEF RULERS- the pressure is too
great for those in positions of leadership; BECAUSE OF THE PHARISEES - the peers are
too important for those who crave their acceptance; LEST THEY SHOULD BE PUT OUT -
the price is too high for those intent on keeping their position; THEY LOVED THE PRAISE
OF MEN MORE THAN THE PRAISE OF GOD - the praise is too much to give up for
pleasing God. Once in a long while a rare bird like Paul will take wing: “For do I now
persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be
the servant of Christ” (Galatians 1:10).

101 Luke 9:53-55 53 And they did not receive him, because his face was as though he
would go to Jerusalem. 54 And when his disciples James and John saw this, they said,
Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, even
as Elias did? 55 But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of
spirit ye are of.

102 If you have never shed a tear over Hell, then please don’t try to convince me you
believe in it. If you can teach and preach on Hell with an arrogant air, or explain your
orthodoxy on the subject as if you are reciting the alphabet, then take your pretense
elsewhere and don’t imagine that anyone should have confidence in the validity of your
belief, or the sincerity of your character. You may be technically “orthodox” but you are
spiritually unsound.

103 Yes, our God is holy, but His holiness compels His mercy to limit His wrath: “Sing unto
the LORD, O ye saints of his, and give thanks at the remembrance of HIS HOLINESS. For
HIS ANGER ENDURETH… (would those who hold to eternal torture wish to end the verse
here as proof that God’s holiness demands endless torment? But we read on and learn the
wonderful reason to sing:) “For HIS ANGER ENDURETH BUT A MOMENT” (Psalm 30:4, 5).
“His holiness” is hinged (“for”) to the merciful limitation of his anger, which “endureth but a
moment.” His “anger endureth but a moment,” but His “mercy endureth for ever.”

The defenders of endless torment assert that God is “a God of wrath.” This is not true. God
is NOT a God of wrath. There is a wrath of God, but God is not a God OF wrath. My
meaning is that though God can get angry, anger is not the essence of His character. There
is a difference between an act and an attribute. There is a difference between what God
does, and what He is. “God is merciful.” “God is just.” “God is good.” Is it ever said, “God is
wrath”? It does say that “God is angry,” yes, but it continues “with…”- this is what God does
as an act, not what God is as an attribute. It never says, “God IS anger.” John tells us “God
IS love,” but no inspired writer ever dares to impugn God’s character with the assertion that
“God is wrath.” Wrath may be a part of the Divine weather, and a final storm of it is to come,
but wrath is not the Divine climate.

104 Let me repeat: Yes, our God is holy, but His holiness does not induce His wrath to
continue unabated through the unfathomable reaches of eternity, but His holiness compels
His mercy to limit His wrath: “Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD; Now will I bring again the
captivity of Jacob, and HAVE MERCY upon the whole house of Israel, and will BE JEALOUS
FOR MY HOLY NAME” (Ezekiel 39:25). Our Great God’s jealousy for His holy name

29
provokes… His anger? No, His mercy! “I WILL NOT EXECUTE THE FIERCENESS OF
MINE ANGER, I will not return to destroy Ephraim: FOR I AM GOD, AND NOT MAN; THE
HOLY ONE in the midst of thee (Hosea 11:9). Why would God not execute the fierceness of
His anger? Because He is holy! Enough of the slanderous charge that imputes endless
wrath to Divine holiness! It is in THE HOLY OF HOLIES that we find THE MERCY SEAT!
And when we pray to our God, we should lift “up HOLY HANDS, WITHOUT WRATH” (1
Timothy 2:8), which is apt for Christ, our high priest who “ever liveth to make intercession” for
us is “HOLY, HARMLESS” (Hebrews 7:25, 26).

His holiness
does not compel
His wrath
to continue unabated,
but His holiness
compels His mercy
to limit
His wrath!

105 “The Scripture doctrine (conditional immortality), as we have felt constrained to declare
it here, removes, we believe, a great stumbling block from the path of believers. We are no
longer compelled to conceive of God as possessing two different natures; on earth tender
and beneficent, even repaying man’s ingratitude and wickedness by His mercies; but beyond
the tomb, unmoved by the endless tortures and excruciating pains of His enemies.”
Emanuel Patavel, The Problem with Immortality.

106 In an effort to reduce the charges against the goodness of God, many well-meaning
teachers and preachers have portrayed Him as passive relating to the endless torment of the
wicked. Hell was prepared for the devil and his angels, not man (Cf. Matthew 25:41), the
reasoning goes, and God has done everything within His power to keep anyone else from
going there. Unfortunately, many will share the same fate with the Satanic horde, the
explanation continues, but not by God, but in spite of His best efforts to the contrary. Some
even go so far to picture Satan as the ruler of hell, and the chief tormentor of its wretched
prisoners (Chick tracts, for example). God is the Judge who renders the verdict, but Satan is
the executor of the sentence. It is as though the Lord has allowed hell as a necessary
concession to the freewill of man and immortality of the soul, and is otherwise powerless to
change its design or shorten its duration. When stripped of its superficial sentimentality, this
view depicts a God who is not the all-powerful Creator and Sovereign Ruler of the universe,
but rather a limited opponent of Satan who will ultimately win the war, but with a much higher
casualty rate. In other words, Satan will be in hell, but so will the majority of all people who
ever lived.

Therefore this God of Endless Torment is either weak or he is cruel. Either he would change
it if he could (he is weak), or he could, but won’t (he is cruel). Please don’t be offended at
such an assertion. According to the theory of endless torment, either he would, but can’t, or
could, but won’t. It really is that simple (unless one would venture a third possibility- he can’t,
but he wouldn’t even if he could). But those who subscribe to either view have to rationalize
why he would, but can’t (what about OMNIPOTENCE?), or why he could, but won’t (what
about GOODNESS?).

107 It is not within the objective of this writing to differentiate or decide between Calvinism
and Arminianism. If there is a subject adherents of both wholly agree upon, it is endless
torment. The horrors of their hell have driven some of their “hyper” advocates (those who

30
follow each system to a logical dead end) into disastrous ditches- predestination to hell on
the one side (had picked some folks to go), and easy-believism on the other (If we’d just say
yes or no).

108 They are called noble because they, like the Bereans who were “more noble than those
in Thessalonica,” were willing to search the Scriptures to see “whether those things were so”
(Acts 17:11). These “questioned endless reason, and doubted endless rhyme” based on the
compelling results of their intensive search of the Word.

109 There have been many who have questioned the validity of endless torment on the
basis of sentimental philosophy and dubious interpretation. But many others, such as
Edward White, R. W. Dale, Henry Constable, Samuel Minton, and J. H. Pettingell, stood
firmly on the authority (what it says is true) and perspicuity (it means what it says) of
Scripture. They are called valiant rebels because it took sacrificial courage to stand for what
they were convinced was the truth of Scripture in the face of the creedal dogmatism of the
organizational establishment. They were “valiant for truth” (see Jeremiah 9:3), loved the
Lord and esteemed His word “concerning all things to be right” (Psalm 119:128).

110 Colossians 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through PHILOSOPHY and vain deceit,
after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
2 Corinthians 11:3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his
SUBTILTY, so your minds should be corrupted from the SIMPLICITY that is in Christ.

“Plato in their Credo” refers to the tendency of the defenders of endless torment to build
their case on the assumed dogma of the immortality of the soul, which is the teaching of the
Greek philosopher Plato, not the Scriptures. “The dogma of everlasting torment did not
creep into the Church until she yielded to the influence of Platonic philosophy” (E. Petavel,
cited in Pettingell, The Unspeakable Gift, 1884, p. 326). “We would express our conviction
that the idea of the immortality of the soul has no source in the Gospel; that it comes, on the
contrary, from the Platonists” (J. N. Darby, cited in Pettingell, p. 324). Henry Constable
writes, “The Christian fathers as a general rule adopted the Platonic dogma, ‘every soul is
immortal’ (see Tertullian, Resurrection, c. iii.). This became the motto upon the patristic
banner. On this point Plato took rank, not among prophets and apostles, but above all
prophets and apostles…This dogma of Plato was made the rigid unbending rule for the
interpretation of Scripture” (Constable, The Duration and Nature of Future Punishment,
pp. 276, 277).

Hippolytus (AD 238) builds a case on Plato: “For if ye believe that the soul is originated and
is made immortal by God, according to the opinion of Plato, we ought not to refuse that God
is able to raise the body which is composed of the same elements, and make it immortal.”
Constable exposes Tertullian’s reliance upon immortality of the soul: “No one knew better
than Tertullian the primary and proper meaning of the Latin verb pereo and that it meant ‘to
vanish,’ ‘to die,’ ‘to perish,’ ‘to be annihilated.’ Why would he not attach this meaning to it
when he was commenting upon the text of the Latin version? Here is his own account
(Tertullian, On the Resurrection, c. xxxiv): ‘We, however, so understand the soul’s
immortality as to believe it lost, not in the sense of destruction, but of punishment, that is, in
hell. And if this is the case, then it is not the soul which salvation will affect, since it is ‘safe’
already in its own nature by reason of its immortality; but rather the flesh, which, as all
readily allow, is subject to destruction’” (Constable, p. 18).

111 Brother Bird is persuaded that most theologians are lazy parrots- better at repeating the
stale suppositions of the assumed dogmas than they are at making a thorough search to

31
arrive at a fresh and personal conclusion. The history books actually tell us that the theory of
endless torment did not gain precedence until Tertullian (died AD 235), and that many others
such as Barnabas (died AD 90), Clement of Rome (100), Hermas (104), Ignatius (107,
Polycarp (147), Justin Martyr (164), Theophilus of Antioch (183), Irenaeus (202), and
Arnobius (303) taught final destruction and not endless torment (for documented evidence,
see Constable, Henry, The Duration and Nature of Future Punishment). To Augustine
belongs the infamy of solidifying endless torment as orthodoxy, and what he accomplished
for Catholicism, Calvin perpetuated for Protestantism.

112 For those of us who adhere firmly to the final authority of Scripture, salvation by grace
through faith, and a free church under the headship of Christ, we assuredly acknowledge
that the majority opinion of those professing the name of Christ at any one point in time is
hardly to be considered authoritative. So if we are to ask, “What has the church always
believed?” we do well to also inquire, “Which church?” and “Do we consider its
interpretations authoritative on every doctrine?” The reality is that God’s people have never
been fully agreed in their interpretations, and just as any individual must humbly consider the
voice of the many, the many need also acknowledge that no one group has ever had a
corner on all truth.

113 The year was 1517; the Roman Catholic Church was ascendant and dominant in
Europe; salvation through sacramental priestcraft was the prevalent understanding of the
populace. But Luther dared to assert that Scripture teaches the priesthood of every believer
and salvation by faith. When he nailed his 95 theses to the door of the Wittenberg Church, it
was little more than a challenge to scholars to debate the subject of indulgences (as far as
we know no one responded). But much, much more resulted from such an inauspicious
beginning.

114 Acts 24:14 But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call HERESY, so
worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the
prophets:

Edward White wrote to J. H. Pettingell: “At the present moment, they have somewhat
discredited you for ‘heresy’; but this is the name given to every divine verity, before it has
received the imprimatur of the leaders of orthodoxy. There is not a doctrinal truth now dear
to Protestants which has not been burned alive in this fire in the early days of its testimony.
But out of the fire the Lord has delivered all the truths vindicated at the Reformation.”
(“London, Nov., 1883,” used as an introduction to Pettingell’s The Unspeakable Gift, p. 17).

115 Edward White continues in his letter to J. H. Pettingell (see note 114): “The truth for
which, during so many years, we have labored together, will similarly triumph. This I firmly
maintain, because our conclusions are founded upon the application of the orthodox
principle of interpretation to Holy Scripture. Protestants learn their creed in every particular
except one, by applying to the Scripture the common sense rule of taking the plain and
obvious sense of the main current of Biblical expressions as the ruling sense. The one
exception is in all that relates to man’s nature and destiny. From first to last, the Protestant
Churches, imitating the Romish Church, have persisted in applying to Scripture, on this
matter, a non-natural or figurative law of exegesis. Man is thus declared by theology to be
an immortal being, and then, all that the Bible says on the mode of his gaining Eternal Life,
and on the punishment of those who reject God’s redeeming mercy, is tortured into unnatural
senses. This perverseness cannot hold out long against steady protest and brotherly
rebuke. Already a vast multitude of the ablest and most Christian minds are in full revolt

32
against such perversion, and their numbers are increasing daily in all directions.” (And what
was happening in 1883 is happening again today!)

116 Before attempting to versify the Scriptural case for Conditional Immortality, the author
had written a lengthy treatise on the subject. Unfortunately, he found it difficult to get any of
his peers to wade through it. Thus with a burning desire to be heard, he determined to use
the vehicle of a poem to interest folks in considering the argument for eternal life through
Christ only to believers, and the final destruction of unbelievers (“should not perish but have
everlasting life”- John 3:16). It is his sincere hope that a thoughtful poem will inspire honest
hearts to make a thorough search of the Scriptures on this subject, and it is his optimistic
anticipation that such a search would indeed lead to a reformation of the understanding of
this doctrine within the body of Christ.

117 Does Brother Bird really exist? Yes and no. While there is not one person named
“Brother Bird,” he is real, nevertheless. Some have assumed that he is the author of the
poem, but the scribe of this tale does not consider himself to be Brother Bird alone. Brother
Bird is an aggregate- he is representative of the cumulative personage of the author, several
of his dear friends who as “iron sharpeneth iron” have helped whet the edge of his axe, and
hone the gist of his thrust, and, to some extent, various authors on the subject, such as
Henry Constable and Edward Fudge. In this sense, every conversation “Brother Bird” has in
the poem is based on actual exchanges of at least one of these who collectively are “Brother
Bird.” Bird was chosen for several reasons: one, it has good rhyming partners (heard, word,
absurd, preferred, and perturbed); two, it is an epithet often given to someone considered
somewhat peculiar or eccentric (as in “he’s a real bird).

118 The pure and perfect Word uses plain and powerful words to express the final fate of
the wicked: perish, second death, destruction, end, consume, devour, corruption, burn up,
ashes, and be no more. The Creator of language carefully, consistently, and continually
employs His creation to define the end of the wicked as a final and everlasting destruction,
not an endless and conscious tormenting.

The Divine Intelligence paints vivid and lucid word pictures that are unmistakable:
unquenchable fire burns up the chaff, devours the stubble, turns the ungodly to ashes,
consumes the wicked, and destroys those who know not God. We know what fire is, and we
know what it does, and in every depiction of final wrath and judgment, the items drawn
(chaff, tares, stubble, briars, thorns, dry branches) are not only flammable, but are some of
the most highly combustible materials imaginable!

If the plain words and clear pictures are not enough, Scripture supplies examples. When the
fire of God has fallen from the God of fire in wrath, it destroyed its prey completely, and
consumed all in its path. Consider Sodom and Gomorrah, the followers of Korah, the
companies of fifty before Elijah, and Nadab and Abihu, to mention a few. Our God is a
consuming fire, and the fire of God consumes. How do we know? The Author of Scripture
tells us so, clearly and often.

But perhaps an even more eloquent expression on the subject than even the plain words of
death, the clear pictures of consumption, and the powerful examples of destruction, are the
defining contrasts to the positive truth of immortality given to believers in Christ: “I give unto
them ETERNAL LIFE, and they shall never PERISH” (John 10:28); “whosoever believeth in
him should not PERISH, but have EVERLASTING LIFE” (John 3:15,16); “For the wages of
sin is DEATH, but the gift of God is ETERNAL LIFE through Jesus Christ our Lord” (Romans
6:23); “broad is the way, that leadeth to DESTRUCTION… narrow is the way, which leadeth
unto LIFE” (Matthew 7:13,14); “But God will redeem my soul from the POWER OF THE

33
GRAVE: for he shall receive me… they shall never see light… like the beasts that PERISH”
(Psalm 49); “God hath given to us ETERNAL LIFE, and this life is in his Son. He that hath
the Son HATH LIFE; and he that hath not the Son of God HATH NOT LIFE” (1 John 5:11,12);
“the resurrection of LIFE… the resurrection of DAMNATION” (John 5:29); “reap
CORRUPTION… reap LIFE EVERLASTING” (Galatians 6:8). These illustrate, but do not
begin to exhaust, the persistent contrast the Scripture maintains between “THEM THAT
PERISH,” (1 Corinthians 1:18; 2 Corinthians 2:15; 2 Thessalonians 2:10), and those who do
not.

I am convinced that what has been presented in Peculiar Brother Bird is the truth of
Scripture! Yes, a neglected truth- yea, even a maligned truth- but ignored or condemned,
truth is patiently persistent, and to the true heart, ultimately persuasive. The doctrine of
endless torment is initially influential because it is generally assumed through gradual
absorption (hardly anyone remembers when they were first taught it). Most, if not all, who
endorse endless torment have never believed any different (nor examined the evidence of all
the relevant texts on the subject), while the most committed supporters of conditional
immortality formerly held to endless torment. How were they able to let go of such a long
held, and deeply ingrained tenet? They learned the truth, and the truth was compelling,
convincing, and conclusive. The chaff of error is not immortal, but will eventually burn up in
the unquenchable fire of eternal truth.

The prophet
that hath a dream,
let him tell a dream;
and he that hath
my word,
let him speak
my word
faithfully.
What is the chaff
to the wheat?
saith the LORD.

Jeremiah 23:28

34
Originally posted on homestead.brotherbird.com

35

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen