The
Conditionalist Faith 
of Our Fathers
VOLUME I
The
Conditionalist faith 
of Our fathers
The Conflict of the Ages Over 
the Nature and Destiny of Man
by
LEROY EDWIN FROOM
Professor of Historical Theology, Andrews University 
Author of Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers
VOLUME I
The Biblical Norm and the Origin, De­
velopment, and Penetration of Innate 
Immortality (900 B.C. to 
a.d. 500)
BIBLICAL RESEARCH LIBRARY
REVIEW AND HERALD
WASHINGTON, D.C.
PAINTING BY JES SCHLAIKJER, N.A. 
© 1 959 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
Moses Was the Inspired Chronicler of the Creation of 
Man, His Sinless State, His Fall, and His Restoration to 
Immortality Through a Divine Redeemer.
PREPARED UNDER assignment from 
the General Conference of Seventh-day 
Adventists, and approved by a representa­
tive group of more than sixty recognized 
scholars—theologians, Bible teachers, edi­
tors, historians, scientists, physicians, and 
librarians.
COPYRIGHT © 1966 BY THE 
REVIEW AND HERALD PUBLISHING ASSOCIATION 
WASHINGTON, D C.
Bible texts credited to Moffatt are from The Bible: A New Translation 
by James Moffatt. Copyright 1954 by James Moffatt. Used by permis­
sion of Harper and Row, Publishers, Incorporated.
Bible texts credited to Goodspeed are from Smith and Goodspeed, 
The Complete Bible: An American Translation. Copyright 1939 by 
the University of Chicago.
OFFSET IN U.S.A.
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CATALOG CARD NO. 64-17664
Acknowledgments
Acknowledgment is here made to the many helpers of my pen without 
whose skills and aid this volume could never have been produced. I take 
particular pleasure in recording indebtedness to numerous national, State, 
university, seminary, college, public, and private libraries and archives in 
both the Old World and the New.
Special mention must be made of the Library of Congress and its 
matchless Union Catalog facilities, the New York Public Library, the Har­
vard University, Aurora College, and New England School of Theology 
libraries in the United States; and overseas of the British Museum and 
the universities of Oxford and Cambridge in Britain, together with the 
matchless F. W. Seats private library of Gloucester. Also, scores of less 
famous institutions in various lands have contributed priceless items to 
the sum total of rare materials now brought together in the Conditionalist 
Faith volumes.
The gracious cooperation of librarians on both sides of the Atlantic 
will never be forgotten—like that of Robert H. Haynes, of Harvard, and 
D. S. Porter, of Oxford—who rendered invaluable aid through making 
special materials and facilities available and for checking on items in my 
absence.
Thanks are similarly tendered to the distinguished group of more 
than sixty readers of this work while still in manuscript, and for their 
helpful suggestions. These include especially Dr. Aubrey R. Vine, secre­
tary of the Free Church Council of Britain; Dr. Moses R. Crouse, of 
Aurora College; Dr. William G. C. Murdoch, dean of the Theological 
Seminary of Andrews University; and Robert L. Odom, editor of the 
magazine Israelite. Mention must also be made of specialists who served 
as readers of single chapters, as for example Prof. Dr. Oscar Cullmann, of 
Lausanne University and the Sorbonne, who with others checked on the 
chapter on the Dead Sea scrolls.
Gratitude is here expressed for the counsels of my guiding committee, 
of which Harry W. Lowe was the able secretary. Also to various members 
of the faculty of Andrews University, to Presidents Rittenhouse and Ham- 
mill, and Prof. Earle Hilgert, and particularly to Dean Murdoch, for his 
strong backing of this major research-writing project from the very first, 
and for moral support when the way was difficult.
Special obligation is here recorded for highly competent editing, veri­
fication, illustration, composition, and related processes that have brought 
this w'ork to completion. I am under special obligation to Merwin R. Thur- 
ber, book editor for the publishers, to Mrs. Blanche Clymer for verification
4
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
and copy editing, and to my former secretary, Mrs. Eunice Soper, for end­
less typing and stenciling of the manuscript in the process of development.
Lasting obligation is here registered for the munificent support of 
one of the chief friends of this enterprise—a professional man who wishes 
to remain anonymous, but without whose gracious help many features 
could not have been included that have enhanced the attractiveness and 
effectiveness of these volumes and made their strategic placement possible 
in key places around the globe.
Sincerest appreciation goes to my publishers, both the management— 
especially to C. E. Palmer and J. D. Snider—and their goodly group of 
printing artisans whose behind-the-scenes skills produced a mechanical 
excellence and format that have won high praise.
It is but fair to add that scores of individuals in Europe, Australia, 
North, South, and Inter-America served as lookouts, ever on the alert for 
elusive items, especially spotting contemporary Conditionalist statements 
of men who have broken with the traditional positions, whose important 
utterances are included in volume 2.
Basic to all else, tribute is here paid to my sponsors, the General 
Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, for authorizing and budgetary pro­
visions, and especially to President R. R. Figuhr, without whose firm 
faith in this enterprise the project would never have seen the light of day.
As nothing gives greater satisfaction to an author than to acknowledge 
publicly his indebtedness to those who have made his research-writing 
possible, that pleasure is now mine.
Contents
PROLOGUE
From Author to Reader____________________________________________________ 
9
1. Condition a lism Versus Immortal-Soulism------------------------------------- 
17
PART I—BIBLICAL NORM SET FORTH IN OLD TESTAMENT 
—EARLIEST COMPREHENSIVE EVIDENCE ON LIFE, DEATH, 
AND DESTINY
2. Man Created in the Image of Go
d_______________________________ 
29
3. Prohibition, Probation, Temptation, and Fa
l
l-------------------------- 
42
4. The Gospel of Genesis 3:15 Proclaimed __________________________ 
57
5. The Penalty of Death for Disobedience_______________________ 
69
6. Redemption in the Period of the Sacrificial Altar---------------- 
83
7. Eternal Destruction Is Decreed Doom of Wicked_______________ 
105
8. Prophetic Witness Concerning the “Last Things” ------------------ 
122
9. Technical Terms and Usages Preclude Innate Immortality — 
145
10. Weak Arguments Formulate Unworthy Platform ------------------ 
160
PART II—COMPREHENSIVE WITNESS OF THE NEW 
TESTAMENT—CONSUMMATING TESTIMONY OF CHRIST 
AND THE APOSTLES ON THE ORIGIN, NATURE,
AND DESTINY OF MAN
11. Christ’s Infallible Testimony on Life Versus Death_________ 
183
12. Coordinates All Aspects of Life, Death, and Destiny 
 
207
13. Christ's Great Parable of the Lost Opportunity_______________ 
234
14. Gravity of Ascribing False Teachings to Christ_______________ 
252
15. Christ’s Majestic Answer to the Penitent’s Plea _____________ 
270
16. Christ Portrays Doom of Wicked as Utter Destruction 
 
286
17. Theologian Paul on Life, Death, and Immortality ___________ 
303
18. Paul’s Leading Problem Passage 
(2 Cor. 5:1-9)_________________ 
324
19. Paul’s Other Problem Passages ___________________________________ 
348
20. Unique Witness of Epistles of Peter and John___________________ 
368
21. Revelation—Inspiration’s Supreme Portrayal 
of Human
Destiny 
_______________________________________________________________ 
388
22. Apocalypse Reveals Final Fate of Wicked _______________________ 
404
23. Greek Terms and Usages—“Psuche” 
(Soul); “Pneuma”
(Spirit) 
_______________________________________________________________ 
419
24. Terms and Usages: "Aion” and “Aionios”__________________________ 
431
25. Terms and Usages: “Immortal,” “Incorruption,” “Immor­
tality,” “Eternal Life” __________________________________________ 
445
5
6
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
26. Technical Terms: Sleeping, Waking, Resurrection------------------ 
466
27. Terms and Usages: Final Disposition of the Wicked------------------ 
486
28. Summing Up the Case for Biblical Conditionalism------------------------498
PART III—HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF INNATE- 
IMMORTALITY CONCEPT (900 B.C. TO THE TIME OF 
CHRIST)—RISE OF PLATONIC POSTULATE AND 
PENETRATION INTO JEWRY
29. Greek Philosophy Reaches Summit of Pagan Thinking 
 
529
30. Sophists React Against Conflicting Speculative Schools 
547
31. Plato—Pagan Fountainhead of Innate-Immortality Streams _ 
558
32. Pagan Philosophy’s Basic Arguments 
for Immortal-Soulism 
573
33. Immortal Human Souls Part of World-Soul____________________ 
585
34. Skeptical Reactions Erupt Against Platonism___________________ 
599
35. Pathetic Despair Predominant Among Roman Thinkers 
617
36. Alexandrian Jews Forsake Ancestral Platform_______________ 
632
37. Alien Note Injected Into Inter-Testament Writings -------------- 
657
38. Innate Immortality Established by Last Century b.c. ________ 
671
39. Majority Adhere to Historic Conditionalism ___________________ 
681
40. “2 Esdras” Maintains the Conditionalist View___________________ 
693
41. Neoplatonism’s Development—Jewish, Pagan, 
and Christian 
703
42. Philo Judaeus Fuses Platonic Philosophy With Judaic
Doctrine 
_____________________________________________________________ 
718
43. Dead Sea Scrolls—Permeated Throughout With
Conditionalism______________________________________________________ 
741
PART IV—HISTORICAL CONFLICTS COMPASS THE EARLY 
CENTURIES (A.D. 150 to A.D. 500)—POSITIONS OF SUB- 
APOSTOLIC AND ANTE-NICENE FATHERS, AND POST- 
NICENE DEVELOPMENTS EVENTUATE IN A 
THEOLOGICAL TRILEMMA
44. Subapostolic Writers Consistently 
Conditionalist __________ 
757
45. Immortality Bestowed at Advent; Wicked Destroyed ________ 
774
46. Immortality a Gift; Death Is Utter Destruction _________ 
 
785
47. Justin Martyr Augments Subapostolic Conditionalism ________ 
803
48. Justin on Final Annihilation of the Wicked ___________________ 
816
49. Tatian, Theophilus, and Melito—Continue Conditionalist
Witness________________________________________________________________ 
834
50. Gnostic-Manichaean 
Perversions 
Compel 
Restatement 
of
Truth _________________________________________________________________ 
853
51. Irenaeus 
of 
Gaul—Conditionalist Champion 
on 
Western
Outpost 
_______________________________________________________________ 
873
52. Irenaeus Voices Preponderant Belief of Church ---------------------- 
886
53. Novatian of Rome—Conditionalist Opponent of Cornelius — 
902
CONTENTS
7
54. Arnobius of Africa—Last Ante-Nicene Conditionalist
Spokesman ____________________________________________________________ 
917
55. Athenagoras—First Ecclesiastic 
to Assert Innate
Immortality _________________________________________________________ 
928
56. Tertullian—Projector of Eternal-Torment Corollary ____ 
947
57. Tertullian Holds Wicked Ever Burn but Never Consume 
959
58. Universal Restoration Substituted for Eternal Torment 
969
59. Rise and Spread of Neoplatonic Restorationism_____________ 
978
60. Origen—Projector of Universal-Restoration Theory ______ 
996
61. Origen’s Multiple Departures From the Faith ________________ 1012
62. Lactantius—Emitting Light Amid Encroaching Darkness 
1029
63. Athanasius—Then Conditionalism Into Eclipse ________________ 1053
64. Augustine—Immortal-Soulism's Hour of Supremacy __________ 1070
Appendixes_______________________________________________________________________1081
Bibliography___________________________________________________________________ 1087
Subject Guide_________________________________________________________________ 1099
Index of Personal Names 
J___________________________________________ 1119
Scripture Index_______________________________________________________________ 1123
Charts
Pictorial 
Chart I ___________________________________________ 524-527
Chart A—Pagan Greek Philosophers on the Immortality Issue 
532
Chart B—Roman Writers and Philosophers Follow Greek
Predecessors _________________________________________________ 
616
Chart C—Comparative Lists of Old Testament Books,
Showing Septuagint and Roman Catholic
Enlargements 
 634, 635
Chart D—Two Views of Life and Death in Jewish Inter-
Testament Writings___________________________________ 
658
Chart E—Paralleling Pagan and Christian Neoplatonic
Schools Center in Alexandria_____________________ 
702
Chart F—Three Concepts of Life and Death Among Early
Church Writers_________________________________________ 758, 759
edication
To All Who Seek the True Story of the Conflict 
of the Centuries Over the Nature and Destiny of 
Man as Revealed in the Unfolding Testimony of 
History, and Attested by the Unerring Witness 
of the Word, THESE VOLUMES ARE HUMBLY 
DEDICATED
From Author to Reader
A little more than a century ago the celebrated historian 
and theologian Dr. Philip Schaff predicted in his History of the 
Apostolic Church that eschatology would constitute the final 
area destined to engage the interest and concern of Christian 
scholars. The issues, he held, would revolve around the involve­
ments of eschatology. It was a profound observation, for all the 
faults and errors of traditionalism, in the area of our concern, 
have sprung from false concepts of eschatology.
It is significant that the major periods of church history 
have been called upon to unfold and place in clear light par­
ticular aspects of Bible truth to counteract a corresponding 
error. For example, it was necessary for the Nicene age to assert /. 
the doctrine of the eternal deity of Christ and the personality of 
the Holy Spirit—the doctrine of the Trinity—to counter the 
deviations of Arianism. In the Augustinian period the call was % 
to vindicate the doctrine of human sinfulness and divine grace 
—as against the vagaries of Pelagianism.
The doctrinal task of the Protestant Reformation was to 
recover the inward appropriation of salvation, especially the 
truth of justification by faith, or salvation as effected by Jesus 
Christ—in opposition to the Roman concept of legal righteous­
ness. In Wesley’s day the summons was to the doctrine of Free_4'- 
Grace in contrast to rigid predestinarianism that was then prev- 
alent. This process has gone on until the whole circle of Chris­
tian truth has been largely covered. And now in the nineteenth ^ 
and twentieth centuries the doctrine of the last things, or escha­
tology—death, judgment, the Second Advent, resurrection, and 
immortality—is indeed having its vital turn. That is the area 
of our immediate concern and the justification for and burden 
of this work.
9 
•
10
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
The time had clearly come for an examination in depth 
of the conflict of the ages over the nature and destiny of man. 
During the past century there has been a rising crescendo of 
discussion_ over this issue. And a growing demand has come 
from men of many faiths in various lands for someone to go to 
the bottom of this vital question that has agitated the minds of 
countless numbers of earnest Christians across the centuries— 
as well as intriguing the philosophers of pagan times prior to 
the Christian Era. These current appeals have urged that the 
salient facts be sought out and spread before the reader for 
candid examination and evaluation, holding that such a defini­
tive study is long past due.
This present work has been undertaken in response to that 
call. The search for the full facts has involved the combing of 
the greatest libraries of the Old World and the New, and the 
cooperation of librarians and other scholars in every quarter of 
the globe. The initial result of this combined endeavor has been 
the assemblage of an unprecedented Immortality Source Col- 
lection that has brought together the testimony of the key wit­
nesses across the years. The portrayal here presented is based 
on these original sources. And the tangible results of this com­
prehensive search are here submitted to the scholars of all faiths.
The role of the church historian in bringing forth a spe­
cialized history in a designated field—such as concerns the con­
flict of the centuries over the nature and destiny of man—is not 
an easy one. And his responsibility is great. The task calls for 
thoroughness of investigation, tenacity, candor, competence, 
and accuracy of conclusions. The historian must not be swayed 
by bias or prejudgment. He must get back of outward appear­
ances to inner causes. He must uncover the underlying princi­
ples and basic issues. Only thus can a true delineation be pro­
duced.
This we have sought to do in these two volumes. We have 
ferreted out the original writings and secured reliable transla­
tions, for such constitute the imperatives for this portrayal. We 
have used the most competent authorities for checking, and
FROM AUTHOR TO READER
11
for getting the biographical facts and historical setting for the 
presentation. We have traversed the centuries in order to com­
pass the whole story. Any evasion or suppression of the facts of 
history in this great dialogue of the ages could only lead to 
biased concepts and faulty conclusions. That could not be 
tolerated. Fidelity to fact has been our guiding principle.
We have been compelled to penetrate to the very heart of 
church history, and its inevitable clashes with the encroach­
ments of philosophy, which have exerted such a powerful and 
often fateful influence upon the course of mankind. The sub­
tleties of human philosophy have all too often had a sinister ef­
fect upon man’s concept of divine truth. Thus the theological 
views of the early church were altered by Greek Platonism, and 
those of medieval schoolmen changed by the logic and dialectics 
of Aristotle.
Relatively few have been able to emancipate themselves 
from the dominant philosophy and public opinion of their 
own age. But always there have been some, and these have 
often been intellectual giants. So the dictates of philosophy and 
the mandates of Bible doctrine have moved forward warily, side 
by side, alternately attracting and repelling one another. But in 
the end the transcendence of divine revelation will prevail, and 
the wisdom of the world will be lost in the wisdom of God.
The pursuit of historical truth led back to the source of 
truth in divine revelation, in contrast to the vagaries of human 
reason. It led through the agelong struggle between conflicting 
principles, and will terminate in the ultimate recovery and re­
establishment of the original truth. That constitutes the battle 
line of the centuries over the nature and destiny of man, as un­
folded in these pages. The tracement has been a fascinating and 
rewarding pursuit, bringing assurance and satisfaction to the 
seeker for truth.
Always, in every major epoch when truth is revived and 
comes to grips with error, there have arisen devout scholarly 
men who have championed unpopular truth and protested and 
unmasked error. This is the undeviating testimony of history.
12
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
God has had His witnesses and His warriors in every age, as He 
has today. And this principle embraces the conflict of the ages 
over the nature and destiny of man.
Many significant treatises of the past, having served their 
immediate purpose, were allowed to go out of circulation and 
sight. To recover them from the archives of the Old World and 
the New has been a tremendous task. Our first obligation was 
to retrieve these well-nigh lost witnesses that provide the vital 
testimony of their times, for they were the voices that repre­
sented their generation. And these men of the past prepared the 
way for the current widespread revolt against the traditional 
positions so long dominant. Those entrenched concepts sprang 
from Protestant retentions of papal errors, which in turn had 
been derived from the Platonic philosophy that penetrated the 
Christian Church in the third, fourth, and fifth centuries. That 
is the lineage.
But all the while, protesting against such grave digressions, 
there has ever been this line of stalwart dissentients—actually 
champions of positive Bible truth. This venerable procession, 
emerging from the past, constitutes the trek of the centuries in 
man’s noble march toward the ultimate restoration of the Con- 
ditionalist faith. These stalwarts transmitted the protest of the 
centuries against entrenched error, along with the recovery of 
apostolic truth on the nature and destiny of man.
The search for the basic issues disclosed three conflicting 
views, or schools of thought, regarding the destiny of the wicked 
— (1) that of Eternal Torment for the wicked, (2) Ultimate Res- 
toration for all men, and (3) Ultimate Utter Extinction of the 
incorrigibly evil. The ceaseless conflict between these views has 
occupied many of the finest minds of the centuries, because it 
is a question of both transcendent importance and deep per­
sonal concern.
Must it be either the eternal misery of the many or the 
enforced blessedness of all? Or does the true position lie be­
tween the two? Is there a position that harmonizes the justice, 
righteousness, and mercy of God? Is there a view that vindicates
both the character and the government of God, and meets the 
demands of reason? Is there a position that reconciles seemingly 
conflicting statements in Holy Writ? Yes, say the witnesses, 
there is. And this is borne out by the findings of history. This 
view has been held, then lost, and finally regained by the church 
during the passage of the centuries—and without impairing 
confidence in either God or man.
This is the story in a nutshell, as unfolded by the evidence. 
The fateful spark that set off the battle of the ages over the 
veracity of God as to the nature and destiny of man was ignited 
withiji the very gates of Eden. It was the sinister work of a 
malign tempter. Its success brought about the fall of man, 
changed his entire nature, and jeopardized his destiny. But 
this catastrophe resulted, in turn, in the provision of redemp­
tion through a divine Saviour-Substitute, who was pledged to
restore man’s lost righteousness and life, and ultimately to de­
stroy the tempter and end the cruel experiment of sin and ban­
ish death forever.
The conflict between truth and error, personalized in 
Christ and Satan and involving all mankind, loyal and disloyal, 
has raged across the centuries. But it will end with the declared 
triumph of Christ, the utter overthrow of Satan, sin, and sin­
ners, and the restoration of Paradise in the earth made new, 
where will dwell the immortalized saints forever. For this may 
be cited the pledge of God in His Word. It eventuates inji clean 
universe forever.
* * * * *
The first two of the four sections of volume 1 are devoted 
to the full Bible evidence—first that of the Old Testament, and 
then the fuller witness of the New. These have been covered in 
depth, as the Scriptures constitute the only norm by which 
to judge the historical departures that have developed. The 
remaining parts (III and IV) are historical. Part III portrays the 
telltale origin of the postulate of Immortal-Soulism, and its 
development into a devastating system under Greek Platonism, 
then its penetration into the Jewish faith with dire results. Part
FROM AUTHOR TO READER 
13
14
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
IV compasses the first five centuries of the Christian Era, de­
picting Platonism’s subsequent infiltration into the Christian 
Church, though it did not appear therein until about a.d. 187.
Then is traced the resultant split of the Christian faith, 
developing into three conflicting views, or schools, on man’s na­
ture and destiny. This permanent cleavage was consummated 
during the third, fourth, and fifth centuries, thus resulting in 
an irreconcilable theological trilemma. That epitomizes the 
scope of volume 1. The conflict characterizing the remaining 
centuries of the Christian Era has been among these three 
schools. And that, in a word, is the general scope of volume 2. 
But it all leads to a climax in the triumph of truth.
Washington, D.C. 
November 16, 1965.
LeRoy Edwin Froom
PROLOGUE
CHAPTER 
ONE
Conditionalism Versus Immortal- 
Soulism
I. Purpose and Scope of This Vital Quest
Life, death, and destiny! Here and hereafter! These are 
quandaries that have intrigued the mind of man ever since 
the dawn of history. Where did we actually come from? Why 
are we here? Where are we destined to go at the close of life? 
And what, especially, of this mystery of the hereafter? What 
actually is death—is it a beginning, or an end? These are some 
of the perennial and insistent questions asked by millions of 
lips that clamor for a satisfying and authoritative answer.
1. 
Fundamental Questions That Demand an Answer. 
—Just what is the nature of man—is he mortal, or immortal? 
And what of death—is it a cessation of life, or an entrance 
upon a fuller existence? Above all, what is our condition 
during death—is it one of consciousness, or unconsciousness? 
And where are we during that mysterious intervening state? 
What about man’s fate after death—is he suddenly trans­
ported to eternal bliss, or consigned to endless agony—or per­
chance to bleak obliteration—if his life has been evil? Is he 
actually to be summoned back from the dark unknown? If so, 
for what purpose and what end? Can we know? Does anyone 
know? Is there any source of trustworthy and authoritative in­
formation?
What are the answers to these haunting questions that 
have plagued the curious and the thoughtful across the years?
17
18
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
To find the answers to these and related questions is the pur­
pose of this quest, and the design of The Conditionalist Faith 
of Our Fathers. To what sources, then, shall we turn?
2. Sole Source of Reliable Information.—Philosophy 
can only proffer educated guesses. Logic can only reason in 
plausible circles. History cannot supply the answer—it only re­
cords the gropings of man after the answers that he craves. 
Paganism has weird and wildly clashing notions. Even the 
Christian creeds are in conflict. And the eerie utterances of 
Spiritualism, both ancient and modern, are filled with contra­
dictions that neutralize one another. It is a bewildering ca­
cophony of discordant voices. Where, then, and to whom can we 
turn?
There is only one dependable and inerrant source of en­
lightenment—God, who made man. We must turn from man to 
God. And there is only one reliable revelation, the inspired 
Word of God. To Holy Writ, then, we shall turn to seek the 
answers to these questions. But first, permit this personal word.
3. Author’s Personal Declaration 
of Faith.—Before 
proceeding further, it is only fair and proper that at this point 
in the opening chapter the author make a declaration of his 
religious faith, so there will be no misunderstanding as to the 
basis of his presentation. He is a conservative, evangelical Prot­
estant. He believes that the Bible is the inspired Word of 
God, is the sole and sufficient rule of faith and practice, and 
provides the answer to our questions.
He believes in the historicity and reliability of the Genesis^ 
recital of the origin of man on earth. The author is a creation­
ist, not a believer in the postulates of evolution. And he is a 
literalist as regards the record in the opening chapters of the 
first book in the Sacred Canon. He accepts the episodes nar­
rated in Genesis 1 to 3 as actualities, not as legendary myths. 
This will give point to the positions hereafter set forth, and 
avoid misunderstandings or ambiguity as to the basis of his 
statements.
CONDITIONALISM VERSUS IMMORTAL-SOULISM 
19
4. Scope of the Ground Covered.—First, the Biblical 
evidence will be studied in depth, the Old Testament evi­
dence, and then the New. Next, the historical origin and devel­
opment and worldwide spread of Immortal-Soulism will be 
examined, and its penetrations into the Jewish and Christian 
faiths presented with documentation. And then the conflict 
of the centuries between the three schools of the theological 
trilemma that developed will be set forth with covering data 
—the conflict over the nature and destiny of man as it advanced 
across the Christian Era. And finally will come the revival of 
Conditionalism in increasing volume and tempo during the 
past three hundred years. Thus the sweep of the ages will be 
brought into view, and the over-all picture set before us. That 
is the conspectus of the Conditionalist Faith volumes.
But before proceeding we should first define the key 
terms, “Conditionalism” and “Conditionalist,” appearing in 
the title and thereafter throughout this work.
5. Basic 
Definition 
of 
Conditionalism.—Conditional­
ism is th<e Christian doctrine that immortality, or everlasting 
life, is offered to man only upon God’s terms and conditions. 
Immortal-Soulism, on the other hand, holds that man was cre­
ated with a soul, which has a separate existence from the body, 
and that it is innately and indefeasibly immortal. Condition- 
alists believe that the man who does not accept God’s condi­
tions for life will be ultimately deprived of life, totally de­
stroyed. Immortal-Soulists, on the other hand, believe that the 
man who disobeys God and persists in his rebellion will be cast 
into an eternally burning hell-fire, where he will be tor­
mented forever, since his soul cannot die.
Conditionalists believe that at the death that meets all 
mankind, good and bad alike, man rests in the grave until 
the resurrection, when all men will be raised, some to 
life everlasting and some to receive their punishment. During 
the interim they believe man is unconscious of the passing of 
time and knows nothing of events occurring on earth. Immor­
tal-Soulists believe that at death man goes to some place of
20
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
conscious existence. Some believe that all men go at once to 
their eternal reward or punishment, the good to Heaven and 
the bad to Hell.
Others believe that some at least go to Purgatory, because 
they are not yet good enough for Heaven or bad enough for 
Hell. Here they are allowed to suffer for a time to purge them 
of their remaining sins, and then they are admitted to Heaven. 
Still others believe that there is no Hell, and all men will 
eventually reach the abode of bliss.
II. Consistency and Obvious Soundness of Conditionalism
The key to the problem of life, death, and human destiny, 
as held by the conflicting schools of Conditionalism and Im- 
mortal-Soulism, is obviously to be found in the Biblical story 
of man’s creation and fall, and his redemption provided in 
Christ. Adam and Eve went tragically astray. Yielding to the 
tempter’s enticing promise, they stifled the voice of God. The 
allurement of superior wisdom, sensuous enjoyment, and the 
glamour of supposedly natural, inherent immortality (to be 
enjoyed in disobedience) led them swiftly and inexorably into 
the way of death.
As a result all seemed hopelessly lost. But unexpectedly, 
hope was proffered to distraught man. All might yet be recov­
ered. Men might still find their way back to God and their lost 
estate, with Paradise and life regained through a Redeemer. 
Confession, faith, obedience, and resistance to temptation 
marked out the road back to the way of life. God would com­
pletely save contrite sinners who love, serve, and obey Him.
1. 
Adam’s 
Potential 
for 
Immortality 
Was 
Condi­
tional.—Here is God’s good news: Although man was not cre­
ated unconditionally immortal, and is not today born immor­
tal, yet he may become so—if he follows the provisions of God. 
According to the unfailing promise of the Almighty, he 
may require an immortality beyond the reach of death and 
time and destruction. That is the high privilege to be granted
CONDITIONALISM VERSUS IMMORTAL-SOULISM 
21
to the righteous—a favor conferred on the penitent believer. 
But it is always conditional.
The righteous will live again, forever; but the impenitent^ 
will finally be destroyed—likewise forever. Life is thereby 
conditional. These are the final endings of the two ways of 
life and death. That is the essence of Conditionalism, or Con­
ditional Immortality. And such is the picture that grows in­
creasingly clear and luminous in the dawning light of the Gene­
sis introduction to the Old Testament.
So long as Adam remained in the Garden he was allowed 
to eat of the fruit of the tree of life. But, as mentioned, his 
potential for immortality was conditional. When once he 
made a breach in God’s protective and enabling conditions, he 
became subject to the death penalty. The primal pair was cre­
ated “very good”—with a view to immortality. But they were 
not imperishable. They did not have an inherent, natural, and 
indefeasible immortality—that is, incapable of being annulled 
or made void.
It was indeed possible for Adam not to die. The possibility 
of immortality was within his reach. But he forfeited it. And 
holiness still comes by an act of free dioice or decision, with 
death as the sequel to willful transgression. So immortality 
for Adam was clearly relative, or conditional, and the sin of 
disobedience made him mortal—subject to death and destined 
to die.
2. 
Conditionalism Harmonizes Divine Goodness With 
Human Freedom.—Conditionalism provides a synthesis that 
coordinates the various doctrines of the gospel. The truth of 
Conditionalism is founded on positive Biblical declarations, 
not on negatives and inferences. N egations_and inferences—N 
not to mention parables or figurative or symbolic expressions— 
can never be a safe or satisfying foundation for any doctrine, 
much less a system of fundamental doctrine. The Creator 
gave man existence and offered him immortality. Moral rea­
soning likewise favors the hypothesis of attainable or condi­
tional immortality. And every moral being is subject to certain
22
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
conditions of existence. Thus Moses said: “I have set before 
thee this day life and good, and death and evil” (Deut. 30:15). 
Again, this law ‘‘is your life: and through this thing ye shall 
prolong your days” (Deut. 32:47). ‘‘But if thine heart turn 
away . . . ; ye shall surely perish, ... ye shall not prolong your 
days” (Deut. 30:17, 18V
Thus it is that the doctrine of Conditionalism reconciles 
and harmonizes divine goodness with human freedom. Com- 
pulsory immortalization of the wicked would be unworthy of 
the goodness and power of God, and tragic to the human 
recipient. Conditionalism is a return to the primitive gospel 
—the gospel of Eden. And it is making marked gains in ad­
vocates, as attested by the evidence set forth in volume 2.
The tremendous truth of “life only through the redemp-_ 
tive work of Christ” throws a flood of light upon the whole 
scope and system of revealed truth. It makes, as it were, a new 
book of the Bible. The gospel promise in Eden becomes lumi- 
nous. The types and shadows of the Old Testament, and its 
sanctuary system and services, take on a meaning not before 
observable. And the moral law, which in its negative and 
prohibitory form failed to “make the comers thereunto per­
fect” (Heb. 10:1), much less to give them spiritual life, takes 
on its higher spiritual meaning under the gospel. All is ex- 
\ ^/pressed in the one word “love”—love as the source and essence 
of spiritual recovery and everlasting life. That is the larger 
picture. “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only be­
gotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not per­
ish, but have everlasting life” (John 3:16).
That is the heart of the gospel, the essence of revelation, 
the hope of man.
3. 
Conditionalism 
Attested 
Biblically, 
Logically, 
Historically.—This, then, is our statement of purpose: Evi­
dence will be submitted to support the contention that Con­
ditionalism is (1) sound Biblically, both in the English ren-
*Cf. Deut. 4:40; 5:33; 6:2, 24; Ps. 21:4; 94:23; Prov. 3:1, 2, 16: 9:11. “The fear of 
the Lord prolongeth days; but the years of the wicked shall be shortened 
(Prov. 10:27).
CONDITIONALISM VERSUS IMMORTAL-SOULISM 
23
dering and even more so in the original Hebrew and Greek 
phraseology. It is (2)jound according to the inexorable canons 
of logic. And it is (3) sound according to the unimpeachable 
testimony of history.
It was designed by God for man; lost through the historic 
deception visited on the race by Satan in Eden; and uniformly 
cherished by God’s ancient chosen people until shortly before 
the time of Christ. And when Immortal-Soulism was adopted 
from Greek Platonism by the Alexandrian wing of the Jews, it 
was chiefly through Philo. But Conditionalism was maintained 
by Christ and the apostles, and sustained by the Apostolic Fa­
thers and the earliest of the Ante-Nicene Fathers—and on 
with a continuing line for centuries, as we shall see.
On the contrary, Immortal-Soulism was not adopted in 
Christian thought until certain North African Platonic Church 
Father-philosophers espoused it after nearly two hundred 
years of the Christian Era had passed. But this segment, split 
in the subsequent century into two antagonistic schools, divided 
over Eternal Torment and Universal Restoration.
Thus by a.d. 400 the Christian Church was divided into 
three distinct schools of eschatology—creating an astonishing 
theological trilemma that has persisted ever since. Though not 
widely held, Conditionalism persisted through the Middle 
Ages and underwent a distinct revival, beginning with the six­
teenth-century Protestant Reformation. From then on, despite 
the preponderant Catholic and majority Protestant views, 
Conditionalism has gained steadily. And now, as never be­
fore, it is receiving attention and winning adherents among 
scholars of all faiths. That, in a word, is a thumbnail historical 
preview of the ground to be traversed. No position could be 
better sustained, as the facts to be surveyed will disclose.
III. Eternal Torment Involves Pagan “Dualism” Postulate
There is yet another angle to this question that must not 
be overlooked. The postulate of an eternal Paradise and an 
eternally coexistent Hell—introduced from Platonism into
24
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
the religious thinking of sections of Judaism and Christianity— 
presupposes the metaphysical Dualism of two eternal and in­
compatible principles (that always were and always will be), 
which notion sprang out of pagan ethnic religions, such as 
Persian Zoroastrianism. But such a concept is utterly foreign 
to Scripture, both Old Testament and New alike. Contingent 
A 
evil may be explained by the positive exercise of liberty and 
\ will. But unless one accepts the dogma of an eternal Dualism, 
■^jthe presence of evil involves a beginning, and consequently 
.and logically and inevitably cabs for an end. Eternal sinning 
and eternal suffering are contrary to the testimony of Holy 
\yrit.
To hold that the final result of the wrong exercise of hu- 
man freedom means the perpetual revolt and eternal suffering 
of a given number of creatures, automatically involves the 
notion of the eternal duration of an evil principle and a 
state of unending rebellion against God and good—and thus an 
infinity of evil as eternally opposed to the infinity of good. 
But to hold such a theory is to inject an alien pagan Dualism 
into the true concept of the Supreme Being. According to Scrip­
ture there is only one Absolute, Infinite, Omnipotent One— 
God, the eternal I AM, “ Who only hath immortality” (1 Tim. 
6:16). And the day is verily coming, according to Holy Writ, 
when He will be “all in all'’ (1 Cor. 15:28). Opposition will 
have ceased and passed forever.
The deducible conclusion from such an inspired postu­
late is that of the end, or ultimate extinction, of the devil and 
the principle of evil, and of all who persist in following him. 
When God is “all in all” sin and death will be no more, and 
there will be no place for any beings, celestial or human, who 
are without right moral relation to God. The concept of the 
\ 
Eternal Torment of the wicked involves a shocking calumny 
^ against both the justice and the very nature of God, as revolting 
upon mature thought as it is dangerous and un-Biblical. And 
is, the dogma of indefeasible immortality for man is to assign 
to the soul the impossibility of neither beginning nor end, such
CONDITIONALISM VERSUS IMMORTAL-SOULISM 
25
as the Neoplatonic Christian philosopher, Origen of Alexandria, 
held, which is perilously akin to pantheism, the original 
source of this perverted concept.2
As might be assumed, Old Testament eschatology is sim­
ple, logical, and majestic, without a single element detrimental 
to the loftiest concepts of Deity and the divine philosophy of 
history, and with nothing to revolt the moral senses—nothing 
of the weird extravagances replete in pagan speculation and 
myth. And the New Testament evidence only intensifies this 
noble view.
2 See Historical Section, Part IV, pages 969-977.
PART I 
Biblical Norm Set Forth in 
Old Testament
Earliest Comprehensive Evidence on 
Life, Death, and Destiny
CHAPTER 
TWO
M an Created in the Image of God
We begin our Biblical survey with Genesis. It is the bed- 
rockjapon which all subsequent revelation rests, and is founda­
tional to all that follows thereafter. We shall therefore search 
into the all-inclusive declarations of Genesis 1 to 3 with con­
siderable detail, for this is the core, yes, the throbbing heart of 
all that follows in the conflict over the destiny of man.
According to the uniform testimony of Sacred Scripture, 
the heaven and the earth with its inhabitants, were brought 
into being by fiat creation:
“In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth” (Gen. 1:1). 
“By the word of the Lord were the heavens made; and all the host of them 
by the breath of his mouth” (Ps. 33:6). “For he spake, and it was done; 
he commanded, and it stood fast” (v. 9).
The first chapter of Genesis describes the creation of living 
creatures after the earth and the vegetation had been set in 
order:
“God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature 
that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament 
of heaven. And God created great whales, and every living creature that 
moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, 
and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good. . . . 
And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, 
cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it 
was so. And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, . . . and every
I. Introductory Survey of Record of Creation
29
© 1953 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
HARRY ANDERSON, ARTIST
Man, the Crown of Creation, Placed Amid the Beauties and Perfection of Eden, 
Was Without Bent to Sin and Had the Potentiality of Endless Life and Happiness
Without a Shadow.
30
.• .v
MAN CREATED IN THE IMAGE OF GOD 
31
thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it 
was good. And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our like­
ness. ... So God created man in his own image . . . ; male and female 
created he them” (vs. 20-27).
Chapter two recapitulates the story of creation with addi­
tional details:
‘‘The Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed 
into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul” (v. 7). 
“And out of the ground made the Lord God to grow every tree that is 
pleasant to the sight, and good for food” (v. 9). “And out of the ground 
the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air”
(v. 19).
In this recital three expressions call for special notice at 
the very beginning of our survey, “God created man in his own 
image,” “man became a living soul,” and “breath of life.”
II. Creation in “Image of God” Not a Valid Argument
1. 
“Image of God” Does Not Connote “Immortality” 
for Man.—The contention is frequently put forth that man 
possesses natural, innate, and really indefeasible immortality 
because of the phrase appearing in Genesis 1:27—“God created 
man in his otvn image, in the image of God created he him.” 
There are, in fact, five such declarations in the Inspired Chron­
icle:
“And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness” 
(Gen. 1:26).
“And God created man in his own image, in the image of God 
created he him” (v. 27, twice).
“God created man, in the likeness of God made he him” (chap. 5:1).
“In the image of God made he man” (chap. 9:6).
These texts do not, of course, state in what respect God 
created man in His own image. That specification is left un- 
i 
defined. However, it is a recognized principle of sound exege- / 
sis that the certain must not be interpreted in terms of the un- I. 
jcertain. Nor should violence be done to the preponderant wit- p 
ness of Scripture or even to the logical demands of reason.
An inference might possibly be drawn here as to the im-
biblical research library
32
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
mortality of man—if this one expression stood alone. But if 
Adam and all of his descendants are immortal by creation, and 
therefore by nature, then surely some hint to this effect 
should be found in this initial narrative, or at least somewhere 
within the entire range of Biblical writings, which are spread 
over some fifteen hundred years, and include prophets and 
apostles, and even embrace the witness of Jesus Christ Himself. 
But immortality, Scripture insists, is an attribute restricted to 
God alone. He “is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of 
kings, and Lord of lords; who only hath immortality” (1 Tim. 
6:15, 16).
2. 
No Valid Reason for Singling Out Immortality.— 
But creation in the divine “likeness,” or “image’’ (Gen. 1:26) 
—repeated in the record for emphasis—is no more an evidence 
of man’s Innate Immortality than of his eternal pre-existence,
omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence, or any other strictly 
divine attribute. And none of these other attributes have been 
ascribed to man, even in his pristine sinlessness in Eden. That 
God made man for immortality is clear. Beyond that sound 
and safe position we are not justified in going.
There is no valid reason, then, why immortality alone 
should be singled out as the one unique characteristic intended 
by the phrase “image of God.” Genesis 1:26 and 5:1 also speak 
of man’s being created in the “likeness” of God. This like- 
ness to God included a moral character not shared by the brute 
creation over which man was given dominion. But whatever the 
precise nature of that original “likeness,” it was marred by 
man’s disobedience, during which tragic experience his origi­
nal purity and position were marred or lost.
Man in his sinful condition cannot claim the full benefit 
of this original endowment, whatever it may have included. 
But, we repeat, the record nowhere states that this included 
immortality. We must therefore conclude that creation in the 
divine “image,” or “likeness,” no more proves man’s immortal­
ity than it proves his eternal pre-existence, omniscience, omnip­
otence, or possession of any other exclusively divine attri-
MAN CREATED IN THE IMAGE OF GOD 
33
buteLGod made man for immortality. That is beyond reason-
able challenge. Let us test this out by the same canons of logic
invoked. Let us visualize it by putting it in syllogistic form.
3. 
Fundamental Fallacy Revealed 
by Parallel Sy 
logisms.—As to the fundamental fallacy involved in this foray 
into logic, in the contention noted, the argument may be fairly 
set forth, in syllogistic form, thus:
Major Premise: God is immortal (1 Tim. 1:17)
Minor Premise: Man was created in the image of God
Conclusion: Therefore man is immortal.
But such a plausible yet specious deduction, based on 
this actually misleading syllogism, is completely quashed by a 
paralleling syllogism that exposes the inherent fallacy of such 
unsound reasoning. Note it:
1. God is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent:
2. Man was made in the image of God:
3. Therefore man is omnipotent, omniscient, and omni­
present.
Obviously, the argument from logic breaks down under 
the impact of this logical parallelism, as well as the contraven­
ing testimony of Scripture. We consequently maintain that 
there is no sound logical basis, much less Biblical foundation, 
for asserting that in creating man “in his own image” God be­
stowed on him the one distinctive attribute of immortality 
alone, but not the other prerogatives of Deity—unless God 
were to so state in His Word. This He has not done. One cannot 
logically insist, then, on singling out immortality, when by 
common consent it is recognized that man does not possess 
the other inseparable characteristics restricted to Deity.
Personality, dominion over the animal creation, and
moral agency? Yes; for these are declared, but not natural
mortality. (The technical arguments will be presented 
rately.) Man was driven out of the Garden, and cherubim and 
flaming sword were set up to prevent access to the indispensa-
(Gen. 1:27)
ble tree of life—“lest he put forth his hand, and take also of
2
34
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever” 
(Gen. 3:22V 
Thus the “image of God” argument collapses by default.
Does Not Connote Immortality
Another expression concerning man’s creation, that is like­
wise often invoked to sustain Immortal-Soulism, is the intri­
guing term “living soul.” Here is the familiar text cited: “And 
the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and 
breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became 
a living soul(Gen. 2:7).
The fact that Scripture declares that man became a “living 
soul” is persistently cited by some as establishing man’s pos­
session of inherent immortality. But while man became a liv­
ing sou\, he did not thereby jiutomatically become an im- 
\. mortal soul, or being. The same Hebrew term, “living soul,” 
is applied to the lower animals. In fact, nephesh (soul) is 
four times applied to the lower animals before it is used of 
man—in Genesis 1:20, 21, 24, 30. And out of^ the first thir- 
teen usages in Genesis, nephesh is nine times used of the 
lower animals.
Thus the expression “living soul,” as applied to Adam, 
does not thereby prove that he was endowed with immortality 
when he was created. If it does, then the animals were like­
wise invested with immortality, for they were also called “liv­
ing souls” (Gen. 1:20)—which all will admit unquestionably 
;oes too far. The obvious difference between a “living soul’’ 
and a lifeless soul is, of course, that the one has life, whereas 
the other does not. The term “living soul,” then, actually im­
plies mortality, for the word “soul” is also applied to men who 
are dead.
1. 
Living Soul Not a Separate Entity.—Further, God 
did not take a separately “living soul” and install it in a lifeless 
body—a tenant, as it were, a separate entity distinct from it. 
It was by the divine inbreathing of the “breath of life” into the
MAN CREATED IN THE IMAGE OF GOD 
35
lifeless body that man became a living soul—a single entity, an 
inseparable unit, a unique individuali^yEhe heart began to beat, 
the blood to circulate, the brain to think, and all the processes 
of life sprang into action. In death the process is simply reversed 
—the life-giving breath is withdrawn, the heart ceases to beat, the 
»
circulation of the blood stops, the(mind)ceases to function, and 
all the vital processes end. The organism begins to disintegrate, 
and the body returns to the dust—the same lifeless condition 
whence it came. The individual is dead.
2. 
Innate Deathlessness Not Part of Original Endow­
ment.—Inasmuch as God declared that after his transgression 
man was destined to return unto dust (Gen. 3:19), it is crystal 
clear that not only was he not immortal then but that up to 
that point immortality had not been assured him. More­
over, that he was not as yet immortal is likewise shown by his 
expulsion from the Garden—“lest he put forth his hand, and 
take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever” (Gen. 3:
22). The term “living soul” is therefore clearly not to be 
equated with immortal soul—an expression never once occur- 
ring in Scripture. This fact is unassailable.
It must be obvious, then, that Genesis 2:7 does not coun­
tenance the assumption of innate deathlessness as an original en­
dowment of man’s nature, nor does the creation story as a 
whole. Adam was simply created a candidate for immor- 
tality, which was to be conferred upon him upon the fulfill­
ment of conditions. Hundreds of outstanding Bible students of 
all faiths, spread over the centuries, attest that there is not a 
single passage in the Bible in which man, in his earthly life, is 
spoken of as immortal, either as a whole, or in any part of his 
being1 (These are discussed in volume 2.)
But in addition to this negative aspect of omission, the 
inspired record of creation contains positive evidence of man’s
3
t is significant to note that nephesh is used, in contrast, of man as actually dead— 
/
l thirteen passages: “The dead,” five times (Lev. 19:28; 21:1; 22:4; Num. 5:2; 6:11);
“dead body,” three times (Num. 9:6, 7, 10); and "body,” five times (Lev. 21:11; Num. 6:6;
19:11, IT; H aggai 2: l3)—a total of thirteen of such significant usages.
36
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
candidacy only for immortality in the original threat of death 
in case of disobedience, and finally in the doom of death subse­
quently jDronounced in Eden. Man was not created immortal, 
but only a candidate for immortality.
IV. “Breath of Life” Equated With “Spirit” and 
“Spirit of God”
The expression “breath of life,”2 in Genesis 2:7—else­
where called the “breath of the Lord” and “breath of the Al­
mighty”—is frequently equated with “spirit,” and “spirit of 
God.” Thus in Job: “If he set his heart upon man, if he 
gather unto himself his spirit [ruach] and his breath [nesha- 
mah]; all flesh shall perish [expire] together, and man shall 
turn again unto dust” (Job 34:14, 15).
1. “Breath”—“Breath 
of God”—“Spirit”—“Spirit 
of 
God.”—The “breath of life” is elsewhere called God’s gift: 
“Thus saith God the Lord, he that created the heavens . . . ; 
he that spread forth the earth . . . ; he that giveth breath 
[neshamah] unto the people upon it, and spirit [ruach] to them 
that walk therein” (Isa. 42:5). It is this “breath” that gives 
life to man: “The Spirit [ruach] of God hath made me, and the 
breath [neshamah] of the Almighty hath given me life” (Job 
,3Jl4).
Life is consequently dependent upon this “breath.” “All 
the while my breath [neshamah] is in me, and the spirit [ruach]
of God is in my nostrils” (Job 27:3). But possession of the 
“breath of life” does not in itself confer immortality, for we 
read that at the Flood “all flesh died . . . , and every man: all in 
whose nostrils was the breath of life [Heb. nishmath ruach 
chayyim, “breath of the spirit of life”]” (Gen. 7:21, 22).
2. “Breath of Life,” “Spirit of Life”—Same Principle 
of Life.—That the “breath of life” of Genesis 2:7 that God
2 In the Hebrew there are two words for breath—neshamah, and more commonly ruach. 
In general, they are used interchangeably for “breath” and “spirit.”
MAN CREATED IN THE IMAGE OF GOD 
37
thus breathed into man’s nostrils is identical with the “spirit” 
that God gave, is seen from the reversal of the creation process 
recorded in Ecclesiastes 12:7—“Then shall the dust return to 
the eart’ 
it was: and the spir
it [ruach] return unto God who
Breath and spirit obviously are one and the same principle 
of life. This fact is enforced by the striking principle of paral­
lelism in Hebrew literature. Here verses comprising two 
clauses are constantly used, in which the second clause is the 
repetition of the thought of the first clause, only in different lan­
guage. Thus: “All the while my br
ea
t
h [neshamah] is in me, 
and the spir
it [ruach] of God is in my nostrils” (Job 27:3).
And again, in describing death, Job says, “If he [God] 
gather unto himself his spir
it [ruach] and his br
ea
t
h [nesha­
mah]; all flesh shall perish together, and man shall turn 
again unto dust” (Job 34:14, 15).
Similarly in Ezekiel’s vision of the dry bones, the life that 
had vanished would be restored when God would “cause 
br
ea
th [spirit, ruach] to enter into you, and ye shall live” 
(Eze. 37:5)l And He reiterates: “And I will . . . bring up flesh 
upon you, and cover you with skin, and put br
ea
t
h [spirit, 
ruach] in you, and ye shall live” (v. 6). Then, repeating His 
promise that He would bring them out of their graves, He 
promises, “and shall put my 
spir
it [ruach] in you, and ye 
shall live” (v. 14).
3. 
“Spir
it,” 
or 
“Br
ea
t
h,” 
N
ever 
Id
en
t
ified 
W
it
h 
Sou
l.—In conformity with this, the psalmist David at the pros­
pect of death committed his spirit into the safekeeping of 
God—“Into thine hand I commit my spir
it [ruach]: thou hast 
redeemed me” (Ps. 31:5). And Jesus Himself used these very 
same words: “Father, into thy hands I commend my spir
it 
[Gr. pneuma]: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost” 
(Luke 23:46^. And it should be noted that while Scripture
Vj/Thus God is called "the God of the spirits [plural of Heb. ruach] of all flesh” 
(Num. 16:22; 27:16). Cf. Luke 23:46: _*Tather7 into tny' hands I commend" my spirit [Gr. 
pneuma]: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost [expired, or breathed His last].”
gave it.
38
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
identifies, or equates, “breath of life** with “spirit,” spirit is 
not once identified with soul. That is significant, and should 
not be forgotten.
4. 
Possessors of “Breath of Life” Subject to Death.— 
It is to be particularly observed that having the “breath of life” 
is never said to make its possessor deathless, or immortal. This 
is clearly seen from the following texts:
“And, behold, I [God], even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the 
earth, to destroy all flesh [every kind of being], wherein is the breath 
[rûach] of life [chayyim, plural for all kinds and manifestations], from un­
der heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die [cease to breathe, 
expire]’’ (Gen. 6:17).
“They [Noah and his family], and every beast after his kind, and 
all the cattle after their kind, and every creeping thing that creepeth 
upon the earth after his kind, and every fowl after his kind, every bird 
of every sort. And they went in unto Noah into the ark, two and two 
of all flesh, wherein is the breath [ruach] of life” (Gen. 7:14, 15).
This “breath of life,” given by God to man at his forma­
tion, returns to God at death (Eccl. 12:7). Of the Flood, the 
record is:
“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 
esha- 
of life [R.V., “breath of the spirit of life”], of all that was in the dry 
died [ceased to breathe]’’ (Gen. 7:21, 22)^J
It therefore follows that man does not possess immortal- 
ity because he possesses the breath, or spirit, of life—for it 
may be possessed by him for time only and not for eternity. It 
may be separated from man forever.
V. Clarifying Distinctions Between Soul and Spirit
The relationships, distinctions, and contrasts between 
“spirit” and “soul” can be seen from Genesis 2:7. The in-
* To these should be added, “And every living substance that I have made will I
destroy [“blot out,” margin] from off the face of the earth” (Gen. 7:4).
MAN CREATED IN THE IMAGE OF GOD 
59
breathing of the “breath [or “spirit”] of life” into the first hu­
man body-organism, made or constituted it a “living soul.” Prior 
thereto the soul, as regards Adam, had no existence. The 
“man” Adam was fully made and complete in bodily form be­
fore he began to live, for “God formed man of the dust of the 
ground” (v. 7). Nothing was wanting to make him a “livijig” 
man or being, or entity, or “living soul” but the “breath of 
life.” When God breathed this into him, he then became a 
“living soul.”
1. 
“So
u
l” 
D
epen
d
en
t U
pon 
Pr
esence 
of 
“Spir
it.”—As 
long as the “breath of life,” or spirit, remains in man, the “soul” 
continues to be or live. But when the “spirit” departs, he is 
no longer a living soul. Hence, the existence of the soul, as pro­
duced by the presence of the spirit, must always depend upon J 
the continuance^ of that presence. In other words, with the re­
ception of the spir
it [ruach], the soul [nephesh] comes into 
being and remains in being. And when the spirit is withdrawn, 
man thereupon ceases to be a living, sentient being. Thus the 
psalmist says, “His [man’s] br
ea
th [ruach, spirit] goeth forth, 
he returneth to his earth [Heb. ’adamah, ground or soil]; in 
that very day his thoughts perish” (Ps. 146:4).
2. Spir
it and Soul H
ave Ser
ies of Contr
a
sts.—“Spirit” 
and “soul” are therefore distinct and distinguishable. They 
constitute, essentially, cause and effect—connected but separate 
and distinct, coordinated but contrasting. Thus the “spirit” 
produced “life” in man, making him a “living soul,” capable 
of thinking, feeling, and acting—and with moral responsibil­
ity. The soul is the living person or being himself, not a sepa- 
rate, independent “something.” And it must never be forgotten 
that spirit and soul are never confused in Scripture, nor are 
they used interchangeably.
At death the “soul” (the man himself) goes to she’dl (the 
grave, gravedom, or the state of death), while the spirit goes 
back to God, from whom it originally came. That is totally 
different. Further, the soul sins (Eze. 18:4, 20). But that is not
■'said of the spirit. In death the two are dissevered, and it re­
quires a resurrection from death to another life to re-establish 
the dissevered connection.
3. “Spirit” Returns to God Who “Gave It.”—Of the 
final disposition of the ruach (spirit, or breath), the Old Tes­
tament writers record:
“Thou takest away their breath [ruach], they die, and return to their 
dust. Thou sendest forth thy spirit [ruach], they are created: and thou 
renewest the face of the earth” (Ps. 104:29, 30).
“His breath [ruach] goeth forth, he returneth to his earth [Heb. 
’adamah, ground or soil]” (Ps. 146:4).
“There is no man that hath power over the spirit [ruach] to retain 
the spirit [ruach]) neither hath he power in the day of death” (Eccl. 8:8).
After describing man in advanced age—with its character- 
istic deterioration, followed by death itself (Ecclesiastes 12)— 
such figures are employed as, “the silver cord [spinal cord] be 
loosed, or the golden bowl [head or skull] be broken, or the 
pitcher be broken at the fountain [failure of the heart]” (vs. 
6, 7). The sage of Ecclesiastes next says: “Then shall jhe dust 
[by metonymy, put for body, made of dust] return to the earth 
as it was: and the spir
it [ruach, not nephesh\ shall return unto 
God who gave it” (Eccl. 12:7).
4. To “Save a Soul” Is to Save a Man.—The question 
also arises as to the meaning of “save a soul.” It is simply to 
save what is the equivalent of a soul—the man himself. Man 
was made to have eternal life, but lost it by sin. He was to have 
continued on perpetually had Adam not sinned. Man dies 
the first death because Adam sinned. But he may be saved 
from, and avoid, the second death by redemption. Saving a 
soul, then, is saving a person from death; or, in other words, 
it is saving him unto life. That is the wonder of the gospel in 
operation.
5. Biblical Portrayal of Death.—Of Abraham’s death 
it is written: “Then Abraham gave up the ghost [yielded up his 
spirit], and died in a good old age . . . ; and was gathered to
\ 40 
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
MAN CREATED IN THE IMAGE OF GOD 
41
his people [idiomatic euphemism for death and burial]. And 
his sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the cave of Mach- 
pelah” (Gen. 25:8, 9).
Of Jacob’s death and burial this is the record: “He [Jacob]
. . . yielded up the ghost, and was gathered unto his people.” 
“For his sons carried him into the land of Canaan, and buried 
him in the cave of the field of Machpelah” (Gen. 49:33; 
50:13).
And of David’s death, and Solomon’s, it is written, “So 
David slept with his fathers [laid down to sleep], and was 
buried in the city of David” (1 Kings 2:10); “And Solomon 
slept with his fathers, and was buried in the city of David” 
(1 Kings 11:43).
CHAPTER 
THREE
, Probation, Temptation 
and Fall
I. One Prohibition Placed Upon Man in Eden
God brought forth a perfect world and placed perfect 
creatures upon it. The record is: “God saw every thing that he 
had made, and, behold, it was very good” (Gen. 1:31). After 
the vegetable and animal life were created, man, ^the crown of 
creation,” was brought into existence. He was a being worthy 
of his Creator, for he was made “in the image of God” (v. 27) . 
And God created a companion for Adam—a helpmeet corre­
sponding to him, bone of his bone, flesh of his flesh. They were 
innocent and perfect, and were free moral agents, capable of 
understanding righteousness, wisdom, justice, and moral obli­
gation^ But before they could be made eternally secure, their 
loyalty must be tested. Here is the Bible story:
“The Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he 
put the man whom he had formed. And out of the ground made the 
Lord God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for 
food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of 
knowledge of good and evil” (Gen. 2:8, 9).
“Anti the Lord God took die man, and put him into the garden 
of Eden to dress it and to keep it. And the Lord God commanded the 
man, saying, Of every tree of the garden diou mayest freely eat: but of 
the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for 
in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die” (vs. 15-17).
Everything on earth was placed under man’s control ex­
cept one tree. The eating or even the touching of the fruit of 
that tree (Gen. 3:3) was the one prohibition placed upon
42
RUSSELL HARLAN, ARTIST 
© I 959 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
Adam and Eve, as Free Moral Agents, Were Placed Under Test in Eden, Over 
Obedience to God’s One Prohibition.
Adam and Eve. The sinless pair were thus placed in a perfect 
environment, subjected to a simple basic test, and duly warned 
of the consequence of disobedience. A subject of the divine 
government, man was placed under the law of obedience as 
an indispensable condition of continuing welfare and exist- 
ence. If he transgressed here he incurred guilt, and disaster 
would follow.
Adam might have been created powerless to transgress— 
a mere automaton. But without freedom of choice, obedience 
would have been forced, not based voluntarily on sovereign
43
44
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
choice. There would then have been no essential development
of character. Hence, perfect perpetual obedience was the con-
dition of eternal happiness. This was the condition of perpetual 
access to the indispensable vigor imparted by the tree of life.
First Parents Placed on Probation.—Our first parents, 
as dwellers in Eden, were thus placed on probation. Their holy 
estate, and life itself, could be retained only on condition. The 
issue was clearly drawn. There was the tree of life in the Gar­
den and the unequivocal statement of God concerning the tree 
of knowledge of good and evil, “In the day that thou eatest 
thereof thou shalt surely die.” In effect God said, You may 
choose to obey or to disobey. Continued life in My domain is 
conditioned upon obedience. If you disobey, death will be the 
result. Thus the choices were clearly set forth, and the results— 
life or death.
It is commonly recognized that God alone is infinite and 
absolute in liberty of will, purpose, and action. But the moral 
creatures of His earthly creation—that is, mankind—were also 
endowed by their Creator with freedom of will. They were free 
moral agents. And no loftier conception of creative power and 
purpose can be conceived. Man, the crown of creation, was 
brought into being with a view to exercising that will with 
freedom, though the liberty of the creature is necessarily but 
relative as compared with that of the Creator.
Therein lies the explanation of the origin of good and 
evil. The contingency or possibility of a fall is, of course, in­
herent in such a creative provision. And the essence of the Fall 
is, in reality, the abuse of that vested liberty. So sin is the 
consequence of this collision between the will of man and the 
will of God—the assertion of self over against God.
1. 
Freedom of Will Is Essence of Being.—Adam was 
neither an automaton nor an undeveloped newborn babe, but
II. Freedom of Will Is Moral Accountability
a mature man—a completely responsible being. He must make 
his own choices. Though created sinless, he had to develop a 
righteous and holy character. And character is developed 
through right and sovereign choices. There could be no virtue if 
there were no possibility of becoming vicious. And virtue 
must be attained for continued life and fellowship with God. 
The only course that man was not free to take was that of never 
choosing. In fact, refusal of a free moral agent to make choice 
is impossible. Sooner or later choice must be made between 
truth and error, obedience and transgression.
The fall of the creature, then, is a determinate choice or 
exercise of his own will in a direction contrary to God’s will— 
the infinite and absolute will of God. It is the rebellion of a 
free moral agent. If this attitude persists, and no remedy is 
found, the result must eventually be the destruction of the re­
bellious sinner, for “the wages of sin is death” (Rom. 6:23). 
This point is vital, and justifies reiteration: The natural and 
inevitable consequence of such a life-and-death collision be­
tween the two wills is that the creature’s will must ultimately 
cease to be. He must “perish” (John 3:16). Otherwise the
PROHIBITION, PROBATION, TEMPTATION, AND FALL 
45
Creator’s will would no longer be absolute, but limited and 
negated by the creature’s persisting defiance.
But man as a creature was brought into being for the 
right and free exercise of his will. Liberty is therefore the very 
basis of his existence. Indeed, it constitutes the essence of his 
being. Therefore the removal of such liberty means the de­
struction of his very being and the termination of his existence 
as a moral entity. And it is, of course, the creature that will 
ultimately be obliterated in a fatal collision of the two wills. 
Any other outcome would be unthinkable—for the continu- 
ance of a moral creature without liberty, or with his freedom 
run amuck, would be the continuance of something without 
justifiable purpose. The creature would be no longer worthy 
either of God or of continuance.
/
2. 
Endless Defiance Would Thwart God.—The end­
less existence of such defiance would be a contradiction of the
46
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
root concept of the omnipotence and wisdom of God. There­
fore the logical consequence of the Fall will be the ultimate 
total extinction of the defiant creature formed to live in liberty. 
But he had now chosen to misuse that liberty. His essence of 
being will be taken away, and will revert to nothingness, as 
God becomes “all in all” (1 Cor. 15:28).
It is absurd and unthinkable to maintain, as some do, that 
God, the almighty Creator, would start something He could 
not stop.
But that golden day when God is “all in all” has not yet 
come to pass. Defiant creatures still exist. And while the Fall 
occurred back in Eden, evil by choice still persists. Human and 
angelic beings, good and evil, still exist and flout and defy God 
—along with Satan himself, the personification of sin. While 
man still exercises his freedom, he does not have all of his 
original liberties and privileges. But he is still held inescap­
ably accountable for his decisions. For these he must give an­
swer, and accept responsibility at the judgment bar of God. 
That is the logic of the case, and the Biblical principle at 
stake.
3. 
Ultimate Destruction 
for Incorrigible Defiance. 
—The free creature that sets himself up in conflict with God’s 
will, cannot conceivably continue to exist forever as a free 
creature. There is obviously a limit, because God’s liberty and 
power are infinite, as well as His goodness and justice. God 
has restricted, or repressed, His own complete liberty for a 
time, and imposed upon Himself certain restraints so as to 
leave room for the sinful creature’s liberty until the close of 
humanity’s period of probation.
But if such creature-defiance were to be continued eter­
nally, such rebellion would thwart God’s absolute liberty, love, 
and justice, which must ultimately fill the universe and all 
existence for all eternity to come.
Ultimate and utter destruction of the incorrigibly defiant 
is therefore the logical and unavoidable consequence of the 
Fall. Such is the verdict of logic.
Amid All 
the Glories of 
Eden, Eve Had Everything 
Needful for Complete Hap­
piness and Continuing Life, 
but Became Fascinated by 
the Forbidden Fruit.
III. Temptation at Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil
At the very beginning of life’s pathway in Eden, tempta­
tion confronted the first pair. Here is the Bible account:
“Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which 
the Lord God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God 
said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? And the woman said 
unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: 
but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath 
said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. And 
the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: for God doth 
know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, 
and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. And when the woman 
saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the 
eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit 
thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he 
did eat” (Gen. 3:1-6).
Eve was evidently passing through “the midst of the gar­
den” when a remarkable talking serpent in the fruit-laden 
branches of the forbidden tree attracted her attention. Her 
answer to the serpent’s intriguing question shows that she 
clearly understood God’s prohibition and the penalty for dis-
48
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
obedience. But the serpent flatly denied God’s threat, “Ye shall 
not surely die,” and continued seductively, “God doth know 
that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, 
and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.”
The forbidden fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good 
and evil was doubtless suitable for food, for there was no poison 
in Paradise. It appealed to Eve’s sense of beauty. And it com­
mended itself to the intellect as a tree that, if true to its name, 
should surely impart wisdom—just as the tree of life imparted 
life. And this wisdom, according to the allurement of the “ser­
pent,” would lift man’s insight to a parity with that of God.
Eve was thus assured that they would attain a more exalted 
sphere of existence, and enter into a broader area of knowl­
edge—if only they would partake. The serpent was evidently 
ensconced in the tree, and retribution had not been visited 
upon it. And the serpent promised an unconditional immor­
tality, whereas God’s promise was conditional on obedience. 
Would they indeed progress in knowledge, and be gainers by 
violating the command of God? Would they actually become 
like God Himself?—and the attributes of God would, of course, 
include immortality, omniscience, et cetera, with all that such 
characteristics involve. That was the basic issue. That was the 
life-and-death question. Man’s destiny was involved in the out­
come.
Eve, alas, was led to believe the serpent’s words, and 
thereby to disbelieve and deny the word of God. First, touch­
ing the fruit, she did not die. Then she ate of it without im­
mediate death. Then she led Adam to accept and eat. That is 
the tragic record.
IV. Satan Himself the Undercover Tempter in Eden
It is difficult to conceive of Eve’s holding converse with a 
groveling snake, as we know it today, or giving heed to it. But 
we can understand her fascination with a radiant creature, ap­
pearing like an “angel of light” (2 Cor. 11:14)—and appar­
PROHIBITION, PROBATION, TEMPTATION, AND FALL 
49
ently possessing supernatural knowledge, along with its dis­
concerting questions. Tradition has come to portray a slither­
ing snake and a shining apple in connection with the Fall— 
the former based on a misconception; the latter a pure fabrica­
tion. Thus this tragic episode is made the butt of the jeers and 
jokes of the infidel and the target of the critic’s attacks. But let 
us turn from all such trivia, as we reverently seek the truth.
The scene of this artful and crafty temptation in Eden 
was laid amid the glories of the significant trees of the Garden. 
And the undercover tempter was none other than Satan him­
self, working through the medium of an enchanting “serpent” 
(Heb. nachash)—the name implying fascination or enchant­
ment 1—evidently on the order of a saraph.2 The enchanting 
serpent of Eden was clearly not the writhing snake of today, 
now slithering along on its belly. It was then a creature of 
glorious beauty, more “subtil” (Heb. ‘aram, wise) than any 
other creature in Eden, possessing powers and capacities no 
longer enjoyed.
So this most attractive and intelligent of all creatures, then 
doubtless having wings, like the saraph, was the dazzling me­
dium that attracted the attention of Eve and to which she paid 
such deference. But back of it was none other than the old 
“serpent” (2 Cor. 11:3), here operating under a guise. After 
its cruel achievement, Satan’s tool was cursed by God and 
then made to glide and spiral along on its belly (Gen. 3:14), 
and has ever since been a loathsome, writhing reptile. That 
was one of the secondary results of the Fall.3
1 Nachash may be translated enchant, fascinate, bewitch, or as having occult powers of 
knowledge, or divination. It was something glorious and scintillating. See Gen. 44:5, 15: Lev. 
19:26; Deut. 18:10; 2 Kings 17:17; 21:6; 2 Chron. 33:6.
-The fiery serpents, or burning ones of Numbers 21:6, 9, were reminders of the glorious 
celestial beings of Isaiah 6:2, nachash being virtually synonymous with iaraph, indicating bril­
liance and fascination ([Bullinger], The Companion Bible, on Num. 21:6, 9, notes; cf. Isa. 6:2, 
note. Sec also App. 19, pp. 24, 25).
3 The annals of antiquity reveal that in ancient times the serpent was always regarded 
with awe. As it had no eyelids—a transparent membrane taking the place of those movable 
veils—it was seemingly a creature with eyes always open. Accordingly it was considered the most 
vigilant and intelligent of all animals. In fact, the name dragon, a kind of serpent, means the 
one that sees, and was believed to see at night. Another recognized characteristic was that under 
an inoffensive appearance it often concealed a deadly venom.
The Greek heralds, for instance, were symbolized by two serpents facing each other, 
signifying wisdom on both sides. And back in Egypt the gods and kings were always represented 
as having the uraeus, or coiled serpent, upon the head. In Greece, Pallas Athena, goddess of 
wisdom, wore a necklace of entwined serpents, sometimes with one at her feet.
50
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
V. Lucifer’s Rebellion in Heaven Transferred to Earth
1. 
Pride and Jealousy Fomented Rebellion in Heaven. 
—Here let us go back in time. Bible students widely recognize 
that Isaiah 14:12-18 and Ezekiel 28:12-18 are Inspiration’s por­
trayals of the origin, nature, and destiny of Satan.4 These pas­
sages tell us how Lucifer, the exalted light bearer, degenerated 
through sin into one who came to be called the devil (literally, 
slanderer) and Satan (the adversary). Created to be one of 
the covering cherubs, the highest and wisest of the angelic be­
ings, Lucifer became “lifted up” because of his beauty and wis­
dom (Eze. 28:17).
Jealousy of God gripped his heart, and he determined to 
exalt his throne above his fellows, and to be like the Most 
High (Isa. 14:13, 14). The Bible is explicit in teaching the per­
sonality of Satan and his part in effecting the fall of man. He 
himself is presented as a created being, likewise with power of 
choice, who took advantage of his liberty in order to bring 
about evil and to lead others into his own estrangement and re­
bellion.
Moved by jealousy and ambition, Lucifer fomented rebel­
lion in heaven, a third of the angels joining his defection (Rev. 
12:4; Jude 6). But he was defeated and cast out of heaven 
(Rev. 12:7-10; Luke 10:18), with the “angels that sinned’’ 
(2 Peter 2:4), who were cast into “pits of darkness” (A.S.V.). 
Satan was driven from his “first estate” and made the aerial 
regions and the earth the scene of his subsequent relentless 
warfare against God and man (Eph. 6:11, 12).
He became the “prince of the power of the air” (Eph. 
2:2), and has assumed the princeship or godship of this world 
(2 Cor. 4:4; John 12:31; 14:30; 16:11), with malign power to 
tempt mankind. His cohorts embrace the evil “principalities” 
and “powers” and spiritual hosts of wickedness in high places 
(Eph. 6:12). Lies, deception, force, cruelty, disease, suffering,
4 Church writers as early as Tertullian and Jerome so held. And this has also been a 
common understanding ever since the Middle Ages.
T. K. MARTIN, ARTIST
AFTER GUSTAVE DORÉ
Lucifer, Radiant Head of the Hosts of 
Heaven, Through Sin Became the Embodi­
ment of All Evil, the Father of Lies, the 
Tempter and Subverter, the Great Deceiver.
Satan and His Evil Minions Were Cast Out 
of Heaven, and Thenceforth Concentrated 
on Bringing Ruin to the Inhabitants of 
Earth Throughout the Centuries.
and death are his malign weapons. Here is the factual record 
in the Apocalypse:
“And there was war in heaven: Michael [Christ] and his angels fought 
against the dragon [Satan]; and the dragon fought and his angels, and 
prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven. And 
the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and 
Satan, which deceived! the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, 
and his [fallen] angels were cast out widi him” (Rev. 12:7-9).
So in the ultimate the great controversy is between Christ 
and Satan, and will continue on without respite until Christ 
gains an eternal, annihilating victory over Satan and his fol­
lowers. That is the destined outcome.
2. 
Eden Becomes 
the New Battleground.—After the 
creation of man and his placement in Eden, Satan in his epochal
51
52
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
temptation of man used a captivating, winged serpent of 
dazzling beauty, speaking through it to deceive and beguile 
Eve through the subtlety of his arguments (Gen. 3:1). In this 
way Satan secured the downfall of Adam, and thus of the 
race. But the covenant-promise subsequently made to Adam 
assures the ultimate destruction of Satan through the Seed of 
the woman (Gen. 3:15).
Satan then began his long and relentless warfare against 
God and man, with resort to every foul means and evil device. 
Cast out of his first estate, the devil operates as head of a vast 
host of rebel fallen angels, otherwise called wicked spirits, 
or demons (Matt. 7:22). This device was later destined to be 
developed into a master system of deception, to be covered in 
volume two. But Satan’s power will be broken. That was as­
sured by Christ’s triumphant death on the cross (John 12:31; 
16:11). At our Lord’s second advent Satan will be bound for a 
thousand years (Rev. 20:3, 7). Then, at their close, the devil 
will make his supreme and final effort to overthrow the king­
dom of God (vs. 7-9).
But Satan’s rebellion will end in failure. He will be ut­
terly defeated and destroyed, together with his fallen angels 
and all the human race who have followed him. They will be 
cast at last into the “lake of fire and brimstone” (v. 10). (The 
popular notion, it should be injected, that Satan, with horns 
and hoofs and pitchfork, now reigns in “hell” is utterly un-Bib- 
lical.) Because of the vital bearing of Satan, his evil angels, and 
his basic deceptions on the fate of man, let us scrutinize the 
inspired recital still more closely.
3. 
Lucifer: Highest Angel Becomes Lowest Devil.— 
According to Holy Writ the original fall took place in 
Heaven (Rev. 12:7-9), whence Lucifer, “son of the morning” 
or “day star” (Isa. 14:12, margin), author and instigator of sin, 
fell from Heaven. The true secret story is revealed by inspira­
tion through the prophet Isaiah, who discloses what Lucifer had 
said in his “heart”:
"I will ascend into heaven [the councils of Heaven], I will exalt my
PROHIBITION, PROBATION, TEMPTATION, AND FALL 
53
throne above the stars of God [the angels, Job 38:7]: I will sit also upon 
the mount of the congregation ... : I will ascend above the heights ... ;
I will be like the most High” (Isa. 14:13, 14).
He thus aspired to be like God in power and glory, but 
not in character. And of his malign work after his fall the In­
spired Record further states that he is the one who has “made 
the world as a wilderness, and destroyed the cities thereof,” 
with his evil machinations. And further, significantly, he 
“opened not the house of his prisoners [or, “did not let his 
prisoners loose homewards,” margin]” (v. 17), who lie (sleep) 
in the prison house of death, evidently the grave.
Ezekiel states that this fallen celestial being was created 
(Eze. 28:13, 15), and hence was not eternally pre-existent. 
He had been one of the “anointed,” the glorious covering 
cherub (v. 16), standing in the very presence of God. Cheru­
bim (mentioned many times as attending the throne of Deity) 
were assigned to guard the gates of Eden. And cherubim were 
placed upon the mercy seat of the ark in the symbolic provi­
sions of redemption in Old Testament times. Lucifer was 
clearly a superterrestrial being, the mightiest of the angels. 
The portrayal further reveals that before his fall, Lucifer was 
perfect in all his ways (v. 15), as well as in beauty (v. 12). 
This, of course, was before “iniquity [“perversity”]” took pos­
session of his heart.5
Satan became lifted up because of his superlative beauty 
and wisdom, and the splendor of his brightness (v. 17). In 
appearance he scintillated like a crown of jewels (v. 13). He was 
likewise a mighty musician (v. 13). So in these tremendous 
passages we have the inspired depiction of the author of sin 
and its beginnings in the universe. Sin actually began when 
Lucifer said, “J will”—in determining to usurp the place and 
prerogatives of God, and thus placing his will over against the 
will and government of God (Isa. 14:12, 13). Sin was thence 
later projected into the newly established Edenic circle on earth.
B In this chapter God chose the earthly “prince of Tyrus”—who sought to assume the 
prerogatives of God (Eze. 28:1, 2), and whose heart was lifted up because of his “wisdom” and 
his “riches,” but who would be overthrown (vs. 3, 10)—to symbolize none other than Satan 
himself, under the contrasting term “king of Tyrus” (vs. 12, 13).
54
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Satan’s identity and presence there are attested by In­
spiration’s telltale disclosure, “Thou hast been in Eden the gar­
den of God” (Eze. 28:13). There he was disclosed as the same 
“shining one,” with power to enchant, fascinate, and bewitch. 
Thus it was actually Satan who, through the medium of the 
serpent, beguiled Eve and overwhelmed Adam.
4. 
Satan’s Dual Lie 
Had but Single Point.—Satan’s 
first utterance in Eden, made through the medium of the ser­
pent, was, “Yea, hath God said?” In other words, Can it be 
that God hath said? It was ostensibly the asking of a question. 
But it was actually designed to elicit a concurring answer. The 
tempter was here impugning the veracity of God. He was chal­
lenging the divine declaration of the fact of the mortability of 
man. “Ye shall not surely die” (Gen. 3:4) was Satan’s ini­
tial lie to man. And Christ expressly declared that Satan (the 
“old serpent,” and “devil”) is the “father” of lies—first ut­
tered in Eden. It was an adroit, ingenious approach. Said Jesus, 
“He [the devil] . . . abode not in the truth, because there is 
no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his 
own: for he is a liar, and the father of it” (John 8:44).
Whatever Satan says i?i contradiction to God’s word of 
truth is manifestly a lie. So in Genesis 3:4, when he said to our 
first parents, “Ye shall not surely die,” the father of lies was 
manifestly and historically telling his first lie on earth, for God 
had just said to Adam and Eve, “Thou shall surely die” (Gen. 
2:17)—if you transgress. Satan’s declaration was consequently 
a direct, bald, unmitigated contradiction. By the insertion of 
the single negatory word “not” into God’s declaration of truth, 
Satan perverted an immutable verity into a diabolical falsehood 
that has reverberated throughout all subsequent time.
But that was not all. Satan immediately added a second lie, 
likewise on the same “immortality” aspect of man’s nature. It 
was: “Ye shall be as gods [that is, “as God,” ’ElohimJ' (chap. 3:5). 
But according to inspiration, absolute and inalienable immor­
tality is characteristic of, and belongs only to, God (1 Tim.
PROHIBITION, PROBATION, TEMPTATION, AND FALL 
55
6:16; cf. 1:17). Man’s immortality can be but relative and 
conditional, for it will be conferred, acquired, received.
In the very logic of the case, Innate Immortality cannot 
be an inherent quality in any created or derived being. And 
man, as a creature, is no exception. His life is not innate or 
inalienable, but only and always acquired. Hence it may be 
brought to an end. It cannot be overstressed that only God 
has absolute, primordial, indefeasible immortality. Conse-1 
quently, any creature’s arrogant claim to equality with God 
and His exclusive immortality is as groundless as it is pre- 1 
sumptuous.
There is, of course, something extremely flattering to the 
pride of man in the idea of possessing a Godlike nature that is 
absolutely indestructible. But immortality is one of the most 
“majestic jewels’’ in the unique and solitary “diadem of Deity,” 
as it has been impressively phrased. It is exclusively God’s, for 
God is the “blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and 
Lord of lords; who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light 
ivhich no man can approach unto” (1 Tim. 6:15, 16). There­
fore man’s attempt to place the crown of immortality upon his 
own head is effrontery, and made only at gravest peril. Sa­
tan’s presumption never had greater audacity, nor human gul­
libility a more tragic example. Indeed, it took the death of 
the Son of God to demonstrate the heinousness of that original 
dual lie in Eden.
VI. Essence of Fall Was Believing Satan’s Lie
It cannot be overstressed that Satan’s basic attack was on 
the veracity of the word of God as to the nature of man. That 
is why this entire episode of the “fall” is basic to our study of 
the issue, and that is why we dwell upon it. And the very 
fact that Satan’s contention has been perpetuated primarily 
through all the major pagan religions and philosophies, and 
not through the long line of Hebrew prophets, is likewise of 
utmost significance. It was through pagan channels that Im-
56
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
mortal-Soulism found its fateful way into certain major sec­
tions of Judaism and Christianity.
So the acceptance of Satan’s misrepresentation of the 
words of God, and his bold denial of the Creator’s declaration 
as to the mortability of man, became the epochal turning point 
of the race at the very dawn of human history.
And never was Satan’s astuteness more crafty than when 
he secured the well-nigh universal acceptance, in the pagan 
circles of antiquity, of his original lie in substitution for God’s 
truth, for—let it be repeated—the essence of the Fall con­
sisted in believing Satan’s lie instead of God’s truth. And the 
contention, “Ye shall not surely die,” first whispered into the 
ears of Eve within the confines of Paradise, has continued to 
echo on through all the diversified corridors of time to this 
very day.
In due time, in pagan antiquity, Satan secured the well- 
nigh worldwide acceptance of his declaration of the universal 
Innate Immortality of the soul. Only among God’s ancient 
people, the Hebrews, to whom were committed the protective 
“oracles of God” (Rom. 3:2), was it not accepted until shortly 
before the time of Christ, in the inter-Testament period, a 
period marked by grave departures. And then it was adopted 
only by a section of Jewry, chiefly in Alexandria, as we shall see, 
and with disastrous consequences.
CHAPTER 
FOUR
Th e Gospel of Genesis 3:15
Let us return to Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. 
We left them eating of the forbidden fruit, their eyes blinded 
by the deception of Satan. Doubtless by the time the last of the 
fruit had been consumed, they began to realize that they had 
disobeyed their Creator. Cut off from the tree of life and 
doomed to death, Adam and Eve faced a future bleak with de­
spair. The Bible describes their disillusionment and awakening 
to their condition: “And the eyes of them both were opened, 
and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves 
together, and made themselves aprons” (Gen. 3:7).
1. 
T
h
e T
errors of D
iso
bed
ien
ce.—They were not only 
naked, they were afraid. God had threatened them with death 
if they partook of the reserved tree. And almost as if in echo 
to their thoughts “they heard the voice of the Lord God walk­
ing in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife 
hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God amongst 
the trees of the garden” (Gen. 3:8).
But they soon discovered that running from God was use­
less, for God seemed determined to find them. The story con­
tinues:
“And the Lord God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art 
thou? And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, 
because I was naked; and I hid myself. And he said, Who told thee that
57
RUSSELL HARLAN, ARTIST 
© 1953 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
Terror Strikes the Heart of 
Eve 
as 
She 
Realizes 
the 
Enormity of Her Act in En­
ticing Adam to Eat the Fruit 
of the Forbidden Tree of the 
Garden.
thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee 
that thou shouldest not eat? And the man said, The woman whom thou 
gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat. And the 
Lord God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And 
the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat” (Gen. 3:9-13).
As the guilty pair stood frightened and ashamed before 
their Creator, He turned to the serpent, and through it 
cursed the tempter who caused the fall of His first earth chil­
dren. As Adam and Eve listened they heard Him say:
“I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and be­
tween thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and 
thou shalt bruise his heel” (Gen. 3:15).
2. 
The First Glimmer 
of Hope.—‘‘Her seed.” Adam 
and Eve had been commanded by God to multiply and re­
plenish the earth. But so short a time had elapsed since their 
creation that they had as yet no children. If the “seed” of Eve
58
was to crush the head of the serpent, then God did not intend 
to carry out His threat of death for a time, at least. Here was the 
first glimmer of hope. Some one of Eve’s descendants apparently 
was to win a victory over the serpent. The darkness began to 
lift.
This promise, dimly understood at first, was gradually ex­
panded until the full plan of God for restoring guilty man to 
holiness was revealed to Adam's descendants.
Though Expelled From Eden 
Because of Sin, Redemption 
Through a Redeemer Was 
Promised at the Very Gates 
of Eden. Infinite Love Found 
a Way.
II. Glorious Gospel Provisions Begin at Gates of Eden
The proclamation of the gospel of salvation, with its reve­
lation of substitutionary atonement and pardon, and promise 
of restored life, and assurance of immortality, brought the 
light of hope again to man. God does not annul His laws nor 
abrogate His commands. Neither does He work contrary to
60
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
them. But He does contravene the havoc wrought by sin 
through introducing a new provision of love-born grace. He 
thus transforms and restores, and through His grace He brings 
a blessing out of disaster. That was the Edenic covenant of life 
and salvation made that fateful day. Hope sprang anew.
1. Becomes Father of Race Under New Probation.— 
This new dispensation of grace and mercy provided the second 
chance for man. It extended Adam’s earthly life, made provi­
sion for regaining his lost innocency, and gave assurance of 
ultimate immortality for man. It enabled Adam to become the 
father of the human race. But the fact that the life of the sinner 
was temporarily extended does not set aside the possibility of 
punishment for subsequent sins. They must be met. The “wages 
of sin” still continue to be “death” (Rom. 6:23). Grace does 
not nullify the law and will of God.
2. Tree of Calvary Becomes Third Tree of Eden.— 
Man’s redemption revolves around the third (as it may be 
called) of these three epochal trees of Eden—the tree of life, 
established for sustaining man’s life throughout eternity; the 
testing tree of the knowledge of good and evil, used by Satan 
to accomplish man’s ruin; and now the tree of Calvary (1 Peter 
2:24; Acts 5:30; 10:39)—as the cross was significantly called 
—planted as it were at the very gates of Eden for man’s redemp­
tion and the restoration of his forfeited life, to assure access 
again in the earth made new to the withdrawn tree of life 
(Rev. 2:7; 22:2).
So it was that man’s original sin became the starting point 
for all the subsequent disclosures of God’s unfathomable love 
and grace. And as by sin the man Adam lost his potential, or 
provisional, immortality, so by the Man Christ Jesus full pro­
vision has been made for its restoration. Thus the dismal doom 
of the death sentence upon Adam was changed to a glorious 
assurance of life—conditioned on the acceptance of the gospel 
provisions set forth. But the plan of redemption and restored 
immortality meant the traversing of the path of Gethsemane
THE GOSPEL OF GENESIS 3:15 PROCLAIMED
61
and Golgotha, with the shadows of the tomb to follow, for the 
Divine Substitute and Saviour of men. That was the price to 
be paid for the rescue of man from the doom of death.
3. 
Placed on Probation, Given Second Chance.—So it 
was that instead of letting the law of transgression, with its dire 
death penalty, take its wonted course, the Lord God Himself 
(Jehovah the Creator—Gen. 2:4) invoked the provision of pro­
bation, devised in the love, mercy, and wisdom of God before 
ever the earth came into being. Through this plan the second 
person of the Godhead would become man, take man’s place, 
receive his penalty, and die in his stead (John 1:29). Thus the 
principle of substitution and vicarious atonement through the 
death^of another was instituted, that man might be Jorgiven 
and restored—for “without shedding of blood is no remission” 
(Heb. 9:22).
In the mind and covenant and provision of God, Christ 
the “Lamb of God” was “slain from the foundation of the 
world” (Rev. 13:8), thus providing lost and estranged man 
with his second chance, not after death but during his earthly 
lifetime. Christ’s death met every requirement of law and jus­
tice, blended with grace and mercy,1 and so offered pardon, 
restoration, and life to lost man.
III. Promised Seed Is Master Key to Atonement Mysteries
The promised Seed of Genesis 3:15 is the master key that 
unlocks the divine revelation of redemption of the race. Every­
thing centers in and around this assurance of the Seed (Gen.'" 
3:15; 12:7; 22:18; Ps. 89:3, 4; 2 Sam. 7:12). And the promised 
Seed was Christ, to come in the flesh2: “Now to Abraham and 
his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as
1 The sacrifice of Christ was penal (Gal. 3:13; 2 Cor. 5:21); substitutional (Lev. 1:4; 
Gal. 3:13; 2 Cor. 5:21): voluntary (John 10:18); redemptive 
(1 Cor. 6:20: Gal. 3:13; 
Eph. 1:7); propitiatory (Rom. 3:25); reconciliatory (2 Cor. 5:18. 19; Col. 1:21, 22); and 
efficacious (John 12:32, 33; Rom. 5:9, 10; 2 Cor. 5:21; Eph. 2:13; Heb. 9:11, 12, 26; 10:10-17;
1 John 1:7; Rev. 1:5).
2 John 7:40-42; Acts 3:25, 26; Rom. 1:3; Gal. 3:16, 19; 2 Tim. 2:8.
62
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ” 
(Gal. 3:16).
1. ‘‘Highway of the Seed” Begins.—This initial prom­
ise of the Seed, the Redeemer, involves the deepest mysteries 
of the atonement—Christ “made” to be “sin for us” (2 Cor. 
5:21), vicariously bearing our judgment, typified by the up­
lifted brazen serpent, made in the symbolic likeness of the fiery 
serpents that had brought death to Israel (Num. 21:5-9; John 
3:14, 15), just like the serpent in Eden. Even so was Christ to 
be lifted up. And here begins what has aptly been called the 
‘‘Highway of the Seed,” 3 stretching magnificently across the 
centuries—a chain of promises and prophecies concerning 
Christ, fulfilled through Abel, Seth, Noah, Shem, Abraham, 
Isaac, Jacob, Judah, David—and reaching to Immanuel-Christ/
2. Conflict of the 
Ages 
Begins.—The Seed of the 
woman, in the prediction, would bruise, or crush, the serpent’s 
head—head in Hebrew symbolism signifying the essence of the 
being. This was a promise of the ultimate destruction of Satan, 
a prediction that the very root of all evil would finally be de- 
stroyed by Christ. There, back in Eden, began the grim con­
flict of the ages between Christ and Satan—Satan being the 
‘‘prince of the power of the air” (Eph. 2:2), at the head of a 
host of fallen angels (Matt. 25:41)—evil spirits seeking posses­
sion of living men, and simulating the dead through imperson- 
ating people who have died. This last feature will be noted 
later.
3. Personal Application of the Fall to Us.—But that 
which is of paramount importance to us today is the actual, 
incontestable, and universal fact of sin. And the paralleling 
fact that until and unless one is ‘‘born again,” or regenerated 
spiritually, he is today in a state of enmity and rebellion against
3 The Old Testament provides a prophetic biography of Christ in the flesh, listed here for 
those desiring-trr folIuw_Ttrls through: 
Gen. 3:15; l2:3; TO7ICTTF; Isa. 
7:14; 9:6; 
11:1-5; 
2 Samuel 7; Micah 5:2; Daniel 9; Hosea 11:1: Isa. 40:9-11; Mai. 3:1; Isaiah 42 and 53; 
Zech. 11:13; 12:10; 13:7; Ps. 41:9; Ex. 12:46; Psalms 22 and 16; 68:18; 110:1; 118:22, 23.
4 Gen. 6:8-10; 9:26, 27; 12:1-4; 17:19-21; 28:10-14; 49:10; 2 Sam. 7:15-17; Matt. 1:1, 
20-23; 1 John 3:8; John 12:31.
THE GOSPEL OF GENESIS 8:15 PROCLAIMED
63
God. As a consequence, everlasting life is forfeit to us as verily 
as to Adam. Likewise excluded from Paradise, we are born 
into a world smitten with a curse, born of fallen progenitors, 
born under the sentence of death.
But from this bleak prospect the gates of eternal glory 
open to repenting sinners today because of the promised 
“seed.” It was this gracious grant of probationary time and op­
portunity that opened the way to eternal life restored, to be 
received through Christ (John 3:16; 2 Tim. 1:10).
IV. “Coats of Skins” Typified Righteousness of Christ
Adam’s transgression in violating the stipulated and re­
vealed will of God, and thus stepping over the boundary line 
from obedience to disobedience, was sin. And the wages of sin 
is always death (Rom. 6:23). Man had disobeyed the express 
command of God, and had lost his innocence and purity. He 
was now in rebellion against God, which condition resulted 
in a consciousness of alienation and separation. If man was not 
to perish, sin must be punished and the sinner restored to 
purity, obedience, and fellowship with God.
But his sin could only be covered by the righteous obedi­
ence of another, who alone could provide the requisite right­
eousness that would enable man, polluted by sin and estranged 
from God, to stand without alienation in His presence again.
1. 
Divine Propitiation Provided.—The Divine Record 
simply states that the Lord God (Jehovah, their Creator— 
Gen. 2:4) made “coats of skins and clothed them” (Gen. 3: 
21), thus for the first time typifying Christ Jesus, who is “made 
unto us wisdom, and righteousness” (1 Cor. 1:30). These di­
vinely provided garments replaced the man-made covering of 
fig leaves (Gen. 3:7), and made it possible for earth’s first sin­
ners to stand in God’s presence again.5 These skins were prob­
5 See Isaiah 61:10—“For he hath clothed me with the garments of salvation, he hath 
covered me with the robe of righteousness.” And in Revelation 19:8 the garment for the saints, 
symbolizing righteousness, is called the “fine linen, which is the righteousness of saints.”
64
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
ably from the animals offered up in sacrifice, as part of the 
symbolic worship of the sacrificial system then established, and 
as a type of divine propitiation soon to be revealed in greater 
fullness.
Thus man’s Creator became his Redeemer. And as Bunyan 
well phrased it, the sinner was “shrouded” under the provided 
righteousness of Christ.0 It is also essential to note that salvation 
apart from righteousness, obedience, and sacrifice is unknown 
either in the Old Testament or in the New. God thus provided 
the requisite righteousness by the sacrifice in Christ.
2. 
Deepest Mysteries of Atonement Unfolded.—The 
deepest mysteries of the atonement thus begin to appear— 
Christ becoming man’s sin-bearer and his sin-offering, taking 
man’s place and punishment, and providing for man’s restora­
tion. And the righteousness provided is none other than Christ 
Himself, who fully met in our stead and behalf every demand 
of the law, and is Himself “made unto us wisdom, and right­
eousness” (1 Cor. 1:30). Or as the apostle Paul graphically 
puts it: “He hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no 
sin; that we might be made the righteouness of God in him” 
(2 Cor. 5:21).
V. Christ’s Central Place in Gospel of Eden
1. 
Becomes Son of Man to Restore Lost Man.—The 
headship of the human race was vested, through creation, in 
the first, and now fallen, Adam. And full redemption from the 
ruin of the fall of man is brought about by the sinless, spotless 
Christ (1 Peter 1:19), the “second,” orj'last Adam” (1 Cor. 
15:45, 47)—Himself truly human yet truly divine, the one 
and only God-man.
Christ Himself in His own person was the divine medium 
and method of salvation. Thus it was that the Word, or Son of 
God, was made flesh (John 1:1-3, 14) in order to redeem man.
«See Rom. 3:26; 4:6; 10:4; 2 Cor. 5:21; Phil. 3:9.
The Pivotal Point of All Sacred History, the Atoning Death of Christ Followed 
by His Triumphant Resurrection, Was the Pledge of the Resurrection and Im­
mortalization of All the Redeemed of All Ages.
He was made flesh in order that He might suffer and die in 
man’s stead (Heb. 10:5; Ps. 40:6; Isa. 42:1; Phil. 2:7; Rom. 
8:3). In Biblical phrasing He took upon Himself human nature 
“that through death he might destroy him that had the power 
of death, that is, the devil; and deliver them who through fear 
of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage” (Heb. 2: 
14, 15).
Through this act of amnesty Christ then and there identi­
fied Himself with man, not only for the time that He lived 
here among men but for all eternity. And time may be defined 
as that portion of eternity marked off for the creation, proba­
tion, and redemption of the human race and the final disposi­
tion of sin. Or, it may be called the great parenthesis between 
the eternity of the past and the eternity of the future, with 
Christ the central figure of both time and all eternity.
66
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Eighty-seven times in the New Testament, Christ desig­
nated Himself as the “Son of man”—the first time in Matthew 
8:20. This was His racial name, His human appellation as the 
representative man and Redeemer of the race (Luke 19:10), 
just as in the Old Testament He is frequently called the Son 
of David, in the line of the Seed. In other words, “Son of man” 
is primarily His human title, just as “Son of God” is His divine 
name. But through His incarnation He so completely identi- 
fied Himself with the human race, as its Redeemer, that when 
He returns to earth the second time in glory He comes as the 
Son of man (Matt. 24:27-31; Luke 12:40). (In the Old Tes­
tament He so appears in Daniel 7:13.)
So it was that in due time Christ died for the sinner—in 
his stead. He became a curse for him, became sin for him, 
gave Himself for him, was made an offering and a sacrifice 
to God for him, redeemed him, justified him, saved him from 
wrath, purchased him by His own blood, reconciled him 
by His own death,rsaved him by His own life—and thereby 
>•provided for his forfeited life a restored life forevermore. 
It was a case of true and complete substitution, that the recip­
ients of His salvation might receive His righteousness and par­
take of His endless life (Heb. 7:16). That is the wonder and 
the glory of the gospel of Genesis 3:15, enfolded in embryo in 
that first simple promise and prophecy.
2. 
Assumes His True and Central Place.—Here, then, 
the gospel of Genesis begins—the inspired account of the be­
ginnings 
of 
human 
redemption, 
progressively 
unfolding 
throughout the Book of God. The Bible is therefore simply the 
wondrous record of God’s provision to restore the divine “im­
age” that fallen man had lost, and to recover for him the im­
mortality that had been forfeited. This purpose became the 
supreme object of the incarnation of the Son of God, leading 
to His atoning death, triumphant resurrection, and assured re­
turn. It is a revelation of supreme love beyond comparison and 
human comprehension.
Our mortal condition as members of a sinful race necessi-
THE GOSPEL OF GENESIS 3:15 PROCLAIMED
67
tates a new birth in order that we may be fitted for the life 
that shall never end. And as God “only hath immortality” 
(1 Tim. 6:16), the Deity as well as the humanity of the Saviour, 
as the One through whom alone this new life is obtained, is 
therefore basic. Hence the salvation that He offers is not a 
casual matter, or even a heavenly boon, but a prime neces­
sity to be sought for earnestly and accepted gratefully.
Redemption is an act of grage in which Christ assumes His 
true and central place in the plan and provision of salvation. 
Thus not only His first coming but His second advent—with 
its attendant resurrection ofjhe dead, final judgment^and be­
stowal of everlasting life—all come to assume their vital place 
in the belief of the church both of Old Testament and of New 
Testament times. And all this stems from Genesis 3:15.
3. 
Processes and Provisions of Redemption and Resto­
ration.—The uniform testimony of both the Old and the New 
Testament is that the supreme object of redemption is to 
change man’s fallen nature, not only from sin to holiness but 
from mortality to ultimate immortality—from a nature now 
perishable in all its parts to one that is to be incorruptible and 
destined to live forever.
As seen, this provision for the bestowal of everlasting life 
involved the incarnation of the Word, or Son of God, who was 
before all things and created all things (John 1:1-4, 10; Eph. 
3:9; Col. 1:16, 17; Heb. 1:2), but who became flesh (Heb. 2:14; 
1 Tim. 3:16), taking upon Himself our nature, “yet without 
sin” (Heb. 4:15). And as Christ, the Messiah, the Anointed 
One, He died on the cross as our atoning Sacrifice. He thence­
forth became the mighty mediator for man before the Father, 
thus uniting grace and mercy with the justice: and righteous­
ness of God, and so vindicating His divine law and government.
His divine nature is wondrously united with man’s nature 
in the provision of regeneration, through the incoming and 
indwelling of the Holy Spirit, who is the “Spirit of Life” of 
none other than the Lord and Giver of life (Rom. 8:2, 10). 
Thus it is that holiness and immortality are made available
68
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
to the believer by the life, death, resurrection, and mediation 
of Jesus Christ (2 Tim. 1:10). Consequently, redemption from 
death to endless life depends on this union of humanity and 
divinity, first in Christ through His incarnation, and then in us 
through regeneration. The nature which has broken the law\ 
becomes united with the life and nature of the Giver, Up­
holder, and Keeper of the law. Thus sin’s victims are snatched 
from the great destroyer’s hand forevermore.
4. 
Enabling Provisions of Redemption.—It was possible; 
for Adam in his perfect state of sinlessness before the Fall to 
develop a righteous character by loyal obedience to God’s com­
mands. But this he failed to do. Now, not only because of 
Adam’s sin, but because of our own sins as well, our natures as 
well as his are fallen. We are not innocent as was Adam when 
created, and therefore cannot achieve righteousness by means 
of our own obedience, because we ourselves are powerless to 
obey. Our fallen natures must be transformed, and divine 
power obtained.
Christ came to provide both the requisite righteousness 
and the enabling power and grace. He lived amid temptation 
but without sin. He took our sins vicariously that He might 
first impute His righteousness to us to cover our past sins, 
and then impart His righteousness by making His enabling 
grace and power available to care for our present spiritual 
needs and deficiencies. That was the divine plan of redemp­
tion, as spelled out under the gospel, first initiated in Eden 
after the Fall.
CHAPTER 
FIVE
Th e Penalty of Death for 
Disobedience
When God placed man in the Garden He told him plainly, 
“Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: but of 
the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat 
of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely 
die” (Gen. 2:16, 17).
The message of God could hardly have been clearer. He 
declared that He would punish disobedience with death. This 
Adam and Eve understood full well, for Eve referred to the 
death threat when she parleyed with the serpent. And as in­
timated, it was doubtless fear of punishment that prompted 
the guilty pair to flee in terror when they heard God calling 
them in the Garden. Let us return to the frightened pair stand­
ing before their insulted Maker that fateful day in Eden.
I. A Second Chance Provided for the Sinner
1. 
A Reprieve Granted Adam and Eve.—God has just 
cursed the serpent, and in doing so He has intimated to Adam 
and Eve that a reprieve has been granted—in fact, that a second / 
chance is being offered them. This is no disavowal of God’s 
original intention to punish disobedience with death. As we 
have already seen, this death penalty deserved by them had ■, 
already been accepted by His Son, the second person of the 
Godhead. In this sense Christ was “slain from the foundation 
of the world” (Rev. 13:8). Provision for paying the debt of 
sin was already made before God faced His erring creatures 
with their guilt.
69
Expelled From the Garden, 
Adam and Eve Were Cut Off 
From Access to the Tree of 
Life, and Faced the Terrify­
ing Prospect of Death, as 
Forewarned by the Almighty.
And now God turns to man on probation, with his second 
chance before him, and sets forth the changed conditions of his 
life:
“Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and 
thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire 
shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee. And unto Adam 
he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and 
hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt 
not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat 
of it all the days of thy life; thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth 
to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; in the sweat of thy face 
shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast 
thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return. . . .
“And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, 
to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take 
also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: therefore the Lord 
God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from 
whence he was taken. So he drove out the man; and he placed at the 
east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned 
every way, to keep the way of the tree of life” (Gen. 3:16-24).
70
THE PENALTY OF DEATH FOR DISOBEDIENCE 
71
2. 
Significance 
of Probation 
for 
Race.—“Dust thou 
art, and unto dust shalt thou return.” Thus God passed sen­
tence on the sinners before Him. After a life of toil, sorrow, 
and care, dissolution back into dust would be the fate of every 
man on earth. Children would be born, generation would fol­
low generation, but death would close the history of each 
life. The immediate cause for this changed condition of affairs 
was separation from the tree of life. God did not intend to 
have a race of immortal sinners on His newly created earth. 
So He withdrew the tree of life from man’s access. And man be­
came mortal—subject to death. The potential immortality with 
which man was endowed at creation was withdrawn, and man 
looked forward to the end of life.
The entire human race, and each person born therein, 
was thus assured of a period of probation for testing, just as 
Adam had in the beginning. Salvation from sin is offered to all, 
and each may accept or reject it. This racial probation gave 
time for Satan to fully develop his plans and demonstrate his 
principles before the universe. And it also provided time for 
God to demonstrate, through the gift of His Son, how salvation 
may be attained and immortality received through the provi­
sions of the gospel.
II. Adam Died Judicially on Day of Transgression
Perplexity is often expressed over the clause, “For in the 
day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die” (Gen. 2:17). 
The simple fact is that, judicially and implicitly, Adam did die 
on the day that he sinned. He thereupon became a mortal, 
dying creature. His doom was fixed, his fate sealed. He passed 
under the irrevocable sentence of death. His life was forfeit, 
and he began to die. Although he might live on for an hour, a 
week, a year (or 930 years, as Adam did—Gen. 5:5), it was but a 
respite under condemnation, a delay, or stay, of execution. If, 
however, he were to live forever, there must be a rescue, a re­
demption, an act of amnesty and grace. Otherwise, the death
72
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
debt incurred must be paid in full. He must in due time die. 
That is the fundamental point.
1. Rhetorical Figure of Prolepsis Employed.—This 
warning of immediate death is held by many able Bible stu­
dents to be an instance of what in rhetoric is called prolepsis 
—an anticipation of that which is future as if it were already 
present. It js a common figure of speech. Thus, when one is 
falling over a precipice, has taken poison, or has committed a 
capital crime, he is often referred to as a “dead man”—even if 
he should live on for days, weeks, months, or even years.
When the angel of death had smitten their first-born, the 
affrighted Egyptians cried out, “We be all dead men” (Ex. 
12:33). When Aaron’s rod budded in condemnation of the 
rebels, the Israelites exclaimed, “fiehold, we die, we perish, 
we all perish” (Num. 17:12). Even God Himself employed 
similar words in addressing the presumptuous Abimelech: ‘‘Be­
hold, thou art but a dead man, for the woman which thou hast 
taken” (Gen. 20:3).
2. Other Instances Are Not Misunderstood.—A strik­
ingly similar expression occurred when Pharaoh said to Moses, 
‘‘Get thee from me, take heed to thyself, see my face no more; 
for in that day thou seest my face thou shalt die” (Ex. 10:28). 
Yet no one would think the king faithless to his word if, un­
der sentence, Moses waited for some time for execution. Again, 
when Solomon gave charge to Shimei concerning the tenure of 
his forfeited life, he declared: ‘‘It shall be, that on the day 
thou goest out, and passest over the brook Kidron, thou 
shalt know for certain that thou shalt surely die” (1 Kings 
2:37). Yet none would contend that he must flee, be arrested,
tried, and executed all on the same twenty-four hour day. Thus 
he exclaims, ‘‘Thy blood shall be upon thine own head.” The 
intent is clear.
So, out of it all, one thing is sure: The execution of the 
Edenic sentence upon Adam, ‘‘Thou shalt surely die,” would 
indicate anything rather than the thought that man was to live
THE PENALTY OF DEATH FOR DISOBEDIENCE 
73
on in endless immortality.1 Had there been no redemption, 
Adam would have utterly perished.
3. Sands 
in 
Time’s 
Hourglass 
Begin 
Falling.—The 
death that God threatened actually began in Eden on the 
very day of transgression, as Adam came under sentence of 
death. When, after Adam’s transgression, God declared to him, 
“Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return” (Gen. 3:19), 
He was but passing the sentence of which He had previously 
warned, “In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely 
die” (Gen. 2:17).
From that day preparation was under way for the ultimate 
execution of the sentence. On that very day Adam was ejected 
from the Garden of Eden, where grew that life-giving tree of 
life, the eating of the fruit of which would have perpetuated 
obedient life forever. He was now cut off from the channel 
through which deathlessness was designed to flow to him. The 
sands in time’s hourglass of existence had now begun to fall.
4. Finality of Death Imposed Not Specified.—But as 
to the duration, or finality, of the death decreed for disobedi­
ence—whether it would be final and irrevocable, with no 
awakening: or, whether life would be restored through a 
resurrection, for final award or punishment—not one word was 
said in advance. That omission was surely designed, making it 
possible for God to bring forward at the appropriate time and 
circumstance the provision of grace through Christ that He had 
purposed before sin entered the world. But the sentence of 
death, whether the first natural death, or the final second death^ 
was passed upon all men.
III. Encompassing Involvements of Death Penalty
Man, because of his sin, was now on his way to destruction. 
Without divine intervention he would have been doomed to
1 In twenty other places the same term, “surely die,” occurs, and all of them refer to 
literal death. See Gen. 20:7; 1 Sam. 22:16; 1 Kings 2:37, 42; Jer. 26:8; Eze. 3:18; 33:8, 14; etc.
74
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
return to the nothingness, or nonbeing, whence the Creator 
had brought him into existence at creation. But divine mercy 
had already intervened. The promised Seed, or Saviour, was to 
come and exhaust the death penalty, and regain the lost life— 
eternal life—for man. The blow that in justice should fall on 
man was to fall on Christ. Death at the close of life’s tenure, 
the return to dust, was to be simply a “sleep,” from which all 
would be awakened by a resurrection from this initial, or 
“first,” death.
God set His attested seal upon the gospel of the resurrec­
tion by raising Jesus from the dead—His resurrection becoming 
the pledge of our own in due course. Otherwise there would be 
no assurance, no tangible guarantee, of life beyond the grave. 
But the promise and provision of Christ, the Redeemer, pro­
vide that assurance. Thus the light of the radiant gospel of life 
was injected into the impenetrable darkness of death at the 
very gates of Eden.
1. “Death” Embraces Total Punishment for Sin.— 
Death was the total penalty that was forewarned upon Adam by 
God as punishment for that primal sin. All that God purposed 
to inflict upon Adam and his posterity because of transgres­
sion was comprehended within that single word “death.” “In 
the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die,” was the 
solemn but all-inclusive decree 
(Gen. 2:17). That clearly 
meant complete loss of life, deprivation of being, forfeiture of 
existence.
2. Justice Requires Penalty Be Understood.—Elemen­
tal justice requires that the penalty for a transgression be ex­
plicitly stated, so it may be unmistakably understood by all 
who may be involved. And in this instance that penalty is de­
clared, according to the term “die,” as just noted, to be loss 
of life, cessation of being and existence—not, as some later 
came to contend, eternal living existence in endless agony. 
It would be a strange way of understanding a law, which re­
quires the plainest and most direct words, that by death should
THE PENALTY OF DEATH FOR DISOBEDIENCE 
75 
be meant eternal life in misery and perpetual torment, as later
advocated first in paganism, then in Jewry, and finally in a ma­
jor segment of Christianity.
Christ must have suffered the very penalty to which sim 
man was sentenced at the beginning, for Christ bore our 
Consequently, an eternal life in misery can form no true 
of the meaning of death (Rom. 5:7, 8; 6:10; Heb. 2:9), C]
did not endure^ Eternal Torment. He was raised the third 
The ultimate penalty for sins is the cancellation of life when 
the true objective has been lost (Eze. 18:4, 13, 18). And inas­
much as God gave life initially to the human race, He could by 
the same power withdraw that life if man sinned. And that is 
just what the death sentence means.
3. “Second Death” Completes the Death Penalty.— 
The initial death, at the end of the natural life (and which 
in the Bible is called a sleep)* is a consequence of racial or uni-_ 
versal sin. The first, or natural, death is not the penalty to be 
paid for our personal sins. Descendants are not punished fo: 
the sins of their ancestors, unless they persist in their ancestors 
sins. The initial death that overtook Adam and Eve was not th< 
end. The punitive death for unrepented sin is the second 
death, and does not come until after the second resurrection for 
the execution of judgment.
That will be a death of both soul and body, which in­
volves final and irretrievable loss of the total life, (Matt. 10:28; 
Mai. 4:1; Rev. 20:14). So man’s first death is not the end; it 
i^only the first, or natural, death, which passed upon all men 
(Rom. 5:12). The second death, which will bring about the 
completion of the death penalty, will be executed only upon 
the obdurately evil.
Let us consider it another way: The wicked die the first 
time in their sins, but the second time (after their resurrec­
tion, Rev. 20:5, 6), they die for their sins (Eze. 18:26). It is. 
appointed unto all men “once to die” (Heb. 9:27). All die the 
first time because they became mortal as a result of Adam’s 
transgression. In the matter of this first death men have no
76
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
choice. But it is a matter of complete and inescapable choice as 
to whether we die the first death in our sins, or are saved and 
safe in Christ. For if we die in Christ, then the second death 
will have no power over us (Rev. 20:6). And the second death, 
which is eternal, can be averted by accepting Christ’s provision 
of salvation.
4. “Second Death” Is Loss of Life, Not Continuance.
—We would stress this point, that the second death—for un­
repented of and unpardoned sin—is not to be confounded 
with the first death, which all men, whether saved or lost, 
undergo alike as the children of Adam. This is often mis­
understood.
The second death applies only to future punishment 
—for the second death is the punishment for personal, 
unconfessed sin, just as everlasting life is the reward of individ- 
ual righteousness, received through and in Christ.
Thus loss of life was the doom pronounced against sin. 
But this loss of life is not simply implied in Scripture. It is de­
finitively stated to be the punishment determined—“The soul 
that sinneth, it shall die” (Eze. 18:4, 20; ^3:18)^ 
\/
The Old Testament explicitly and repeatedly describes this 
loss of life, or existence, as the reversion of the organized being 
into its original elements—reduction to what it was before it 
was called into being. Here are a few of the less-known texts:
“The destruction of the transgressors and of the sinners 
shall be together, and they . . . shall be consumed” (Isa. 1:28).
“Prepare them for the day of slaughter” (Jer. 12:3).
“The slain of the Lord shall be many” (Isa. 66:16).
“They shall go forth, and look upon the carcases of the men 
that have transgressed” (Isa. 6(k24).
“He shall destroy them” (Ps._28:5).
“The transgressors shall be destroyed together: the end of 
the wicked shall be cut off” (Ps. 37:38).
They shall be rooted “out of the land” (Ps. 52:5).
“Let them be blotted out of the book of the living” ^Ps. 
69:28); et cetera.
Every clear-cut Old Testament declaration on the punish­
ment of the wicked states it to be loss of life, not continuance— 
dissolution of life into its original elements, as though one had 
never been called into existence as an entity. And while the 
redeemed are to have life immortal which knows no end, the 
lost will succumb to the second deatlr_ which knows no 
awakening.
5. 
Doom Applies to Man as a Whole.—God’s sentence 
declared, “Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return” 
(Gen. 3:19). This pronouncement was more explicitly ex­
plained after man’s transgression, as related to his person. But 
there is nothing in the context that minimizes or changes the 
meaning or force of the words or limits their all-inclusive appli­
cation.
There is no hint of a distinction between body and soul in 
the application of Adam’s destined doom. The whole man
sinned. And the sentence appearing in the Inspired Record ap­
plies to man as a whole. Accordingly, as with the sentence so 
with its execution—the man, without redemption, would at 
death utterly and forever cease to live. Such would have been 
the final, tragic outcome had it not been for the divine plan 
and provision of salvation. This involves man’s being brought 
back to life, through resurrection, for pronouncement of sen­
tence based upon a just judgment, and then for final reward 
or punishment.
IV. Supreme Argument Against Eternal Torment
1. 
Death Penalty Stems From Law and Authority.— 
Punishment implies the existence of law. And law involves au­
thority. But no law can have binding force unless it is but- 
tressed by penalty for infraction. Moreover, punishment is in-\ 
flicted upon the violator by the same authority from which the 
law proceeds. There can therefore be no legitimate penalty 
threatened, nor punishment inflicted, where there is no law or 
authority (Rom. 5:13). But God, the Creator of man, had given
THE PENALTY OF DEATH FOR DISOBEDIENCE 
77
78
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
an express command and warning to our forebears in Eden 
(Gen. 2:16, 17). And Adam and Eve had violated the explicit 
command and broken the declared law, or word, of God, and 
so had incurred the statutory penalty forewarned.
As we have seen, death—in the sense of forfeiture of life and 
extinction of being through withdrawal of life—was the stated 
penalty for infraction of the divine command. This is the uni­
form teaching of the Bible from cover to cover in all its multi­
ple forms of statement—whether of doctrine, warning, stat­
ute, exhortation, promise, or prediction, and as amplified in 
parable, figure, and illustration. The uniform penalty in all 
forms is, “The soul that sinneth, it shall die” (Eze. 18:4, 20); 
or in the New Testament, “The wages of sin is death” (Rom. 
6:23). Or, to change to one of the figures, the inevitable har­
vest from the sowing of the seed of sin is destruction (Matt. 
13:30). The essence of it all is that “sin, when it is finished, 
bringeth forth death“ (James 1:15).
2. 
Question Settled at Highest Level.—We repeat, 
“death” means cessation of life, not eternal life in torment. 
Strange contention of some that to perish is to live on forever! 
That, of course, is a complete contradiction. Here is the su­
preme argument against the alien concept of the Eternal Tor­
ment of the sinner: If the death that threatened Adam were 
eternal torture, then it would have necessitated that our Sav­
iour, as man’s complete Substitute, must be tormented eternally 
in order to receive man’s allotted punishment and pay his 
designated debt. But no one is prepared to contend that such is 
true as regards our Saviour.
If, on the contrary, the penalty of death is loss of life, as 
executed upon Christ on the cross, then Jesus must die by 
literally giving up His life in our stead, thus meeting the full 
demands of the law for our sins. And this is precisely what He
did. That is consideration of the question at the highest level. 
That is the supreme and decisive evidence. Christ died, just 
as Adam was to die.
THE PENALTY OF DEATH FOR DISOBEDIENCE 
79
V. Sleep the Beautiful Euphemism for Death
1. First a Sleep, 
With 
Resurrection 
Awakening.— 
Since the Bible states, “It is appointed unto [all] men once 
to die,” and after death the “judgment” (Heb. 9:27), the 
“first,” or natural, death, is simply a temporary cessation of 
life, which the Bible pictures as a “sleep.” The^gospel makes 
provision for another life through the resurrection awakening 
—a vsecond and eternal life for all who accept the gospel of 
Christ (2 Tim. 1:10) and are fitted for it.
The same gospel also reveals the irrevocable “second 
death,” from which there is a resurrection unto damnation for 
those who reject the gospel (John 5:28, 29), and no hope for 
those who lack fitness for immortality. All those who reject the 
sole means of salvation will be lost forever. There will be no im­
mortal sinners. But let us examine the figure of “sleep.”
2. Implications of the Metaphor of Sleep.—The Old 
Testament consistently speaks of death under this metaphor 
of “sleep”—like falling asleep at night. So this intermediate 
state, between death and the resurrection, is for good and evil 
alike, and is thus likened to the hours of unconscious rest. The 
resurrection is compared to the experience of awakening to a 
new day. Death is repeatedly declared to be a deep, uncon­
scious, unbroken sleep until the resurrection morn.
Thus in Holy Writ, “Man lieth down, and riseth not: 
till the heavens be no more, they shall not awake, nor be raised 
out of their sleep” (Job 14:12). The psalmist said, “Lighten 
mine eyes, lest I sleep the sleep of death” (Ps. 13:3). And the 
prophet Daniel adds, “Many of them that sleep in the dust of 
the earth shall awake”—at the resurrection (Dan. 12:2). This 
is the unvarying testimony of the Old Testament. And the 
New Testament does not deviate from this in the slightest 
degree. Rather, it elaborates upon it.
Sleep, then, is a condition of suspended activity and un­
conscious rest. Thus the dead are repeatedly declared to be 
“at rest” (Job 3:17, 18; 17:16; Dan. 12:13; Rev. 14:13). And
80
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
this intermediate state is defined as one of inactivity and silence 
(Ps. 6:5; cf. Rev. 14:13). The Hebrew concept of this un­
conscious sleep, in she’ol, or gravedom, is seen in such state­
ments by the psalmist as:
“His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth [dust]; in that 
very day his thoughts perish” (Ps. 146:4).
“In death [she’ol, the grave] there is no remembrance of thee" 
(Ps. 6:5).
“The dead praise not the Lord, neither any that go down into 
silence” (Ps. 115:17).
3. Time Obliterated to t
h
e Sleeper.—Sleep obliterates 
the space, or span, between death and the resurrection. It has 
no perceptible passage of time. This Biblical concept of death 
as a sleep makes the Second Advent equally near to every gener­
ation and to every individual believer—to the first as verily as 
to the last. To both, our Lord is equally nigh, even at the door.
Death, as a sleep, is not therefore a long, conscious, stretch­
ing blank of centuries or millenniums. A century is as short as 
a moment, a millennium as brief as the twinkling of an eye. 
The next conscious instant after falling asleep will be the day 
of redemption. Death is followed by rising, going to sleep by 
awakening.
Such a gracious provision, it is to be noted, robs death of 
its gloom and its sense and dread of long separation. Thus the 
twilight hour of death is succeeded, through the resurrection, 
by the dawn of eternal day for the righteous. But, alas, it is 
followed by an everlasting night of utter destruction for the 
wicked, after their resurrection for the execution of the judg­
ment (Rev. 20:5, 6, 14, 15; 21:8).
4. “Sleep” 
Is Undeviating Synonym for 
“Death.”— 
“Sleep” is consequently the common Biblical synonym for 
“death.” Beginning with its initial application to Moses (“Be­
hold, thou shalt sleep with thy fathers,”2 Deut. 31:16), and 
then to David (“Thou shalt sleep with thy fathers,” 2 Sam.
3 That this meant Moses was to die is plainly stated in Deuteronomy 32:48-51. He died 
and was buried (Deut. 34:5-7; Joshua 1:1, 2).
THE PENALTY OF DEATH FOR DISOBEDIENCE 
81
7:12), and Job (“Now shall I sleep in the dust; and thou shalt 
seek me in the morning, but I shall not be,” Job 7:21), we find 
that this beautiful euphemism runs like an unbroken thread 
all through the Old and New Testaments, ending with Peter’s 
“since the fathers fell asleep” (2 Peter 3:4).s
This chosen synonym for death occurs no less than sixty-six 
times in seventeen books of the Sacred Canon, including its 
considered use by Jesus Himself (Matt. 9:24; Mark 5:39; 
Luke 8:52; John 11:11). These frequent occurrences are so 
important and significant, and impressive, that all Old Testa­
ment usages are tabulated here for reference, that the eye 
may quickly run down this meaningful tabulation. Thus the 
scope and weight of evidence quickly become apparent. The 
term, it will be observed, is used of good and evil alike—of 
Ahab as well as of David. Here are the texts:
Deut. 31:16—“Thou [Moses] shalt sleep with thy fathers.”
2 Sam. 7:12—"Thou [David] shalt sleep with thy fathers.”
1 Kings 1:21—“The king shall sleep with his fathers.”
1 Kings 2:10—“So David slept with his fathers.”
1 Kings 11:21—“David slept with his fathers.”
1 Kings 11:43—“Solomon slept with his fathers.”
1 Kings 14:20—“He [Jeroboam] slept with his fathers.”
1 Kings 14:31—“Rehoboam slept with his fathers.”
1 Kings 15:8—“Abijam slept with his fathers.”
1 Kings 15:24—“Asa slept with his fathers.”
1 
Kings 16:6—“Baasha slept widi his fathers.”
1 
Kings 16:28—“Omri slept with his fathers.”
1 
Kings 22:40—“Ahab slept with his fathers.”
1 Kings 22:50—“Jehoshaphat slept with his fathers.”
2 
Kings 8:24—“Joram slept with his fathers.”
2 
Kings 10:35—“Jehu slept with his fathers.”
2 Kings 13:9—“Jehoahaz slept with his fathers.”
2 Kings 13:13—“Joash slept with his fathers.”
2 Kings 14:16—“Jehoash slept with his fathers.”
2 
Kings 14:22—“The king slept with his fathers.”
2 
Kings 14:29—"Jeroboam slept with his fathers.”
2 
Kings 15:7—“Azariah slept with his fathers.”
2 
Kings 15:22—“Menahem slept with his fathers.”
3 The seventeen New Testament references are: Matt. 9:24; 27:52; Mark 5:39; Luke 8:52; 
John 11:11 (twice); Acts 7:60; 13:36; 1 Cor. 7:39 (koimaö, “fall asleep”; see Rotherham); 
11:30; 15:6. 18, 20; 1 Thess. 4:13, 14, 15; 2 Peter 3:4—in all four Gospels, the Acts, and two 
of Paul’s Epistles, as well as in Peter.
82
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
2 Kings 15:38—"Jotham slept with his fathers.”
2 Kings 16:20—“Ahaz slept with his fathers.”
2 Kings 20:21—“Hezekiah slept with his fathers.”
2 Kings 21:18—“Manasseh slept with his fathers.”
2 Kings 24:6—“Jehoiakim slept with his fathers.”
2 Chron. 9:31—“Solomon slept with his 
fathers.”
2 Chron. 12:16—"Rehoboam slept with his fathers.”
2 Chron. 14:1—“Abijah slept with his fathers.”
2 Chron. 16:13—“Asa slept with his fathers.”
2 Chron. 21:1—“Jehoshaphat slept with his fathers.”
2 Chron. 26:2—“The king slept with his fathers.”
2 Chron. 26:23—“Uzziah slept with his fathers.”
2 Chron. 27:9—“Jotham slept with his fathers.”
2 Chron. 28:27—“Ahaz slept with his fathers."
2 Chron. 32:33—“Hezekiah slept with his fathers.”
2 Chron. 33:20—"Manasseh slept with his fathers.”
Job 3:13—“I should have slept."
Job 7:21—“Now shall I sleep in the dust.”
Job 14:12—“Nor be raised out of their sleep."
Ps. 13:3—“Lest I sleep the sleep of death.”
Ps. 76:5—“They have slept their sleep.”
Ps. 76:6—“Cast into a dead sleep.”
Ps. 90:5—“They are as a sleep.”
Jer. 51:39—“Sleep a perpetual sleep.”
Jer. 51:57—“Sleep a perpetual sleep.”
Dan. 12:2—“Them that sleep in the dust of the earth.”
Sleep, then, is beyond question the established Biblical 
term for man’s state in death.
CHAPTER 
SIX
in the Period of the 
Sacrificial Altar
The basic difference between the plan of redemption in 
Old Testament and in New Testament times is largely one of 
perspective and direction. The Old Testament believers looked 
forward to a suffering Messiah to come, One who would take 
away sin by the substitutionary sacrifice of Himself. The later 
New Testament believers looked back to the tremendous trans­
action of the cross as the accomplished fact, and upward to an 
ascended ministering Priest and just Judge, who is to come 
again at the end of the age as conquering King.
The Person is the same in both cases, but the method of 
manifesting faith in His sovereign efficacy differs. In the Old 
Testament, saving faith was exhibited by symbolic sacrifices 
and services pointing forward to the Lamb of God to come, 
who would take away the sin of the world. But from the cross 
onward, with the great transaction of Calvary an accomplished 
fact, salvation was now by simple faith in a crucified, risen, 
ascended, ministering, and returning Lord. Note its earlier op­
eration, first with the children of the primal pair, then among 
the patriarchs, and finally among the prophets of Israel, in Old 
Testament times.
I. Cain and Abel Tested by Sacrificial Offering System
Next in historical sequence after the expulsion from Eden 
the test was applied to Cain and Abel, Adam and Eve’s first 
descendants, as recorded in Genesis 4. This particular test
83
By His Offering Abel Rec­
ognized 
the 
Principle 
of 
Atoning Blood Substitution, 
and Aroused the Hatred of 
Self-sufficient Cain With His 
Disobedient, 
Bloodless 
Of­
fering.
was likewise designed to prove whether they too would believe 
in and obey the word of God. In accordance with previous in­
struction Abel brought “of the firstlings of his flock”—a type 
of the coming Christ, “the Lamb of God, which taketh away 
the sin of the world” (John 1:29). Cain, on the contrary, 
brought only an offering “of the fruit of the ground,” which 
was not in compliance with the divine directive.
The brothers obviously understood the purpose of the 
system of offerings that God had ordained, designed to express 
personal faith (Heb. 11:4) in the atoning death of a coming 
Saviour. This involved the symbolic sin offerings. These bloody 
sacrifices dramatized the underlying principle that “without 
shedding of blood is no remission” (Heb. 9:22).1
Such was the ordained way of acceptable approach to God, 
instituted immediately after the Fall.
1 This is the essence and foundation of the doctrine of substitution and blood atonement— 
“life for a life.” The “wages of sin is death” 
(Rom. 6:23), and “without shedding of 
blood [and thus giving up the life] is no remission” (Heb. 9:22).
84
REDEMPTION IN THE PERIOD OF THE SACRIFICIAL ALTAR 85
1. 
Fatal Lack in Cain’s Bloodless Offering.—Abel fol­
lowed God’s instructions. Therefore God had “respect unto 
Abel and to his offering” (Gen. 4:4). But Cain brought only 
a bloodless offering of the fruit of the ground—the prod­
uct of his own labor. The fundamental principle of sub- 
stitutionary sacrifice was thus omitted—the declared recog- 
nition of the need of a Redeemer. That is why “by faith Abel 
offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain” (Heb. 
11:4). Taking God at His word, he had grasped the basic 
principle of salvation—sin, penalty, death, substitution, and 
restoration—with righteousness and life received through the 
vicarious, sacrificial atonement of another. Abel’s sacrifice 
clearly represented Christ, laden with the sinner’s sins, in the 
sinner’s place and stead. Cain’s bloodless offering may have 
been an acknowledgment of the sovereignty of God and an 
act of worship, but there was no recognition of the forfeiture 
of his own life because of his sin nor of his need of salvation 
from its penalty of death.2
Abel, on the other hand, pouring out the lifeblood of the 
innocent victim, acknowledged the forfeiture of his own life 
and sought the mercy of God through the sacrificial substitute. 
We have dwelt upon this because these two brothers represent 
the two religious classes that have existed and will continue 
to exist to the end of time. Here again is revealed the gospel 
in Genesis, the Abel class recognizing the Redeemer^ as the 
sole hope of man. And by New Testament times both the 
Redeemer’s name and His identity are boldly proclaimed by 
the apostles as man’s only hope. “Neither is there salvation in 
any other: for there is none other name under heaven given 
among men, whereby we must be saved” (Acts 4:12).
It may also be observed that Cain’s murder of Abel was the 
first example of the enmity that God declared would exist be­
tween the serpent and the seed of the woman—in other words,
3 The statement of Cain in Genesis 4:13 is really an inquiry, “Is mine iniquity too great 
to be forgiven I” So it is with tKc Septuagint7 Vulgate, 'Syfiacr-AratFlc^Targuiii of Onkelosy 
Samaritan Pentateuch, and Greek and Latin Fathers. (See The Companion Bible, note on 
Gen. 4:13.)
WILLIAM BOUGUEREAU, ARTIST
The First Death, That of Abel, as the Fruit of Sin Brought Anguish to the 
Hearts of Our First Parents. But Death Called for Restoration Provided
Through Christ.
between Satan and his subjects and Christ and His followers.
2. 
Larger Involvements of Sin, Death, and Salvation. 
—So it was that the promise of a Redeemer was immediately 
followed by the institution of a perpetual reminder and a 
penitential acknowledgment of man’s sin—a sacrificial confes­
sion of faith in the promised Redeemer. This provision was to 
impress constantly upon fallen man the solemn truth that it 
was sin that had caused death. Life, that only God could give, 
was to be taken—for if man had remained obedient to God, 
there would have been no death of man or beast.
In time man came clearly to understand that his sin would 
cause the death of the coming spotless, sinless Lamb of God, 
man’s divine Substitute (2 Cor. 5:21: Heb. 9:14; 1 Peter 1:19). 
Nothing could actually expiate man’s sin save the death of 
God’s own Son, who would give Himself a ransom to save the 
guilty.
86
REDEMPTION IN THE PERIOD OF THE SACRIFICIAL ALTAR 87
Moreover, the coming of the Redeemer would also vindi­
cate the character and veracity of God and His word and will 
before the universe, and establish the justice and integrity of 
the government and law of God. Thus Christ said, when He
came, “Now is the judgment of this world: now shall 
the
prince of this world be cast out. And I, if I be lifted up from 
the earth, will draw all men unto me’’ (John 12:31, 32).
That act of dying for the salvation of man would not only
make the restored Paradise accessible to men but would justify J & 
God in dealing with the rebellion of Satan as well as of defi­
ant man. It would reveal the subversive nature of sin and es- 
tablish the perpetuity of the word and law of God—and thus ‘■Z 
show to all that theJTvages of sin is death” (Rom. 6:23).
This sacrificial rite, established by God Himself, came to 
have a place in perverted form, it should be added, in most of 
the ancient religions of mankind. Though mankind had de­
parted far from God, and had lost the true knowledge of Him, 
yet this one basic principle of forfeiture of life because of\ 
sin, and of redemption through a substitute as the only ground 
of hope, still remained in varying degrees and in distorted 
forms in most religions, which merely sought to placate their 
false gods thereby.
II. Unfolding Portrayal to Abraham Included Resurrection
As we have seen, the entire worship system of the patriar­
chal age centered, in fact, in the rite of sacrifice as typifying 
the Great Sacrifice that was to come. As such it was an enacted 
ceremonial prophecy, or type, of the gospel realities to follow.
In this divine institution the offerer acknowledged the forfei­
ture of his own life in the death of the substitutionary victim he 
offered to God, and placed his hope in the promised Sacrifice 
to come, when man’s Redeemer would give up His own sin­
less life to redeem sinners from death.
And in it all the shed blood was the essence and founda­
tion of the doctrine of substitution and atonement—for, as ob-
88
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
served, “without shedding of blood [in which is the life (Gen. 
9:4)] is no remission” (Heb. 9:22).
All through patriarchal times the sin offering represented 
Christ’s bearing the believer’s sins, taking the sinner’s place, 
and dying in his stead—the sin offerings being both substitu­
tionary and expiatory 
(Matt. 26:28; 
1 Peter 2:24; 3:18; 
2 Cor. 5:21). Thus Abraham’s “sacrifice” of Isaac was a 
dramatic portrayal of the great prophesied sacrifice of Christ 
for the redemption of mankind (Heb. 11:8-10, 17), for Abra­
ham “rejoiced to see my [Christ’s] day: and he saw it, and 
was glad” (John 8:56). Let us scrutinize this historic episode 
in some detail.
1. 
Abraham’s Test of Faith in Gospel Provision.—Abra­
ham’s test of faith with the paralleling submission of Isaac in 
faith was a conspicuous example of this basic principle in the 
patriarchal age. Isaac, actually a child of miracle, was portrayed 
as Abraham’s “only son” (Gen. 22:16)—a significant term. But 
looking beyond the strange command on Mount Moriah, Abra­
ham grasped the implications of the divine word, in “account­
ing that God was able to raise him [Isaac] up, even from the 
dead” (Heb. 11:19).
When Isaac asked, “Where is the lamb for a burnt offer­
ing?” Abraham’s response was, “God will provide himself a 
lamb for a burnt offering” (Gen. 22:7, 8). And when Abra­
ham’s hand was lifted to slay, it was stayed by the voice calling, 
“Abraham, Abraham.” And the words followed, “Lay not thine 
hand upon the lad . . . : for now I know that thou fearest God, 
seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son from 
me” (vs. 11, 12). One can almost hear the pathos in those 
words, for when God’s only Son died on Calvary there was no 
hand to stay !
Then it was that Abraham saw “a ram caught in a 
thicket” (v. 13). And taking this substitute, he offered it “in 
the stead of his son.” So it was that Abraham gave a new name 
to the place—“Jehovah-jireh” (“the Lord will see, or, pro­
vide, v^ 14, margin). And here on Mount Moriah, God re-
The Obedience of Abraham and Isaac Was Rewarded by the Provided Substitute 
Ram Seen in the Nearby Thicket. Christ Died in Our Stead.
newed His covenant. Thus was the gospel preached unto 
Abraham (Gal. 3:8). That is why Christ said to the Jews, “Your 
father Abraham rejoiced to see [“that he should see,” margin] 
my day; and he saw it, and was glad” (John 8:56, R.V.). But 
there is another important angle.
2. 
Provision 
of 
Resurrection 
Recognized 
by 
Patri­
archs.—By faith Abraham “offered up Isaac,” “accounting 
that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead; from 
whence also he received him in a figure” (Heb. 11:17, 19). 
While the binding and laying of Isaac upon the altar prefig­
ured the sufferings and death of Christ, Isaac’s being taken
89
90
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
thence alive clearly signified Christ's resurrection from the 
dead. With highest propriety, then, Abraham may be said to 
have witnessed, in figure, the raising of Isaac from the dead. So 
the principle and provision of the resurrection were known like­
wise both to Abraham and to Isaac. Indeed, the hopes of all the 
patriarchs of old in a life to come were founded upon this ex- 
pectation of a resurrection from the dead.
Thus David spoke of his flesh resting in hope because God 
would not leave his soul in she’dl (“the grave”), nor suffer His 
“Holy One to see corruption” (Ps. 16:10)—and this was in the 
eleventh century b.c. Later, in the time of the prophets, Isaiah 
expressly declared: “Thy dead men shall live, together with 
my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell 
in dust: for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall 
cast out the dead” (Isa. 26:19).
By the time of Christ’s first advent, man’s coming resurrec­
tion to eternal life was so thoroughly established as a belief 
among most of the Jews that Martha, in reply to Christ’s as­
surance of the resurrection of Lazarus, responded: “I know 
that he shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day” 
(John 11:24). So belief in the resurrection had been known 
from antiquity. And in Daniel 12 there is explicit declaration 
of the awakening of some of the righteous from among those 
who “sleep in the dust of the earth” (Dan^l2^2).
Clearly, then, Isaac the son was a type of Christ, “obedi­
ent unto death” (Phil. 2:5-8); and Abraham a type of the 
Father, who “spared not his own Son, but delivered him up 
for us all” (Rom. 8:32). And the ram was a symbol of substitu­
tion—Christ as our offering, in our stead (Heb. 10:5-10), 
and then the resurrection was prefigured (Heb. 11:17-19).
3. 
Only the Dawn; Not Yet the Noontide.—The elev­
enth chapter of Hebrews is an important witness to the im­
memorial antiquity of this belief—the patriarchs “all died in 
faith,” looking “for a city which hath foundations, whose 
builder and maker is God” (Heb. 11:13, 10L The entire chap­
ter is a declaration of the faith of the fathers in a future life for
1947 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
Jacob’s Mystic Ladder, Connecting Earth 
With Heaven, Was a Symbol of Christ, Both 
God and Man—Our Sole Hope of Heaven 
and Source of Immortality.
1947 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
Abraham, Father of the Faithful, Believed 
God and Looked for a Coming Redeemer and 
the Restoration of the Lost Eden and For­
feited Life.
the saints, and in a resurrection from the dead. And in time, 
after the resurrection of Jesus, the resurrection came to have 
the central place in the gospel plan of redemption.
But the patriarchs’ expectation of receiving an everlasting 
inheritance must be distinguished from their understanding of 
the precise method. A ray of divine light, as in the dawn, 
shone upon them. But the opening and unfolding of the 
noontide floodlight of truth, and the full or detailed explana­
tion of its provisions through the spectrum of the New Testa­
ment, were not as yet seen. Christ, in the purpose of God, was 
both the life and the light of the world from the day of 
Adam’s sin. But the glories of His coming were only gradually 
perceived by the saints of old. As Peter says:
91
92
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
‘‘Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched dili­
gently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you: searching 
what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them 
did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and 
the glory that should follow. Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto 
themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now 
reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with 
the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire 
to look into” (1 Peter 1:10-12).
III. Two Ways to Glory—Translation and Resurrection
The fifth chapter of Genesis, in which the taking away of 
the antediluvian prophet Enoch (seventh from Adam—Jude 
14) is recorded, reads like a funeral hymn. Each strophe ends 
with the dirge “and he died.” But in the seventh recurrence the 
sequence is interrupted, and the usual refrain is replaced with 
the significant statement, “And Enoch walked with God: and 
he was not; for God took him” (Gen. 5:24).
Enoch, who was thus “translated that he should not see 
death” (Heb. 11:5), became a type of the blessed destiny of 
the living righteous who, in the last days of earth, are likewise 
to be translated at the second coming of Christ (1 Thess. 4: 
15-17). Enoch’s translation was thus a living proof in antedi­
luvian times of the wondrous provision that immortal life with 
God was still to be the destined portion of the righteous. And 
Elijah’s later translation to heaven similarly, and even more 
significantly, represented those to be translated at the Second 
Advent.
On the contrary, the bodily resurrection of Moses was a 
type of those who will be resurrected from the dead, but who 
rest in God in the “sleep of death” until the call of the Life- 
giver (Ps. 13:3). Enoch, Moses, and Elijah were treated as ex­
ceptions—in that they were taken to Heaven early in Old 
Testament times. There is no Biblical hint of deliverance from 
death except through resurrection or translation, and this will 
commonly occur at the Second Advent.
The later appearance of the resurrected Moses and the
translated Elijah on the Mount of Transfiguration (Matt. 17: 
2), talking to Jesus, made them the forerunners of the two cat­
egories. They constituted foregleams of the glory that is to come 
for the righteous. So there are just two ways to glory, as pre­
sented in the Old Testament—(1) bodily translation and (2) 
rest in God in the death sleep until the resurrection at the 
call of Christ the Life-giver.
The Resurrected Moses and 
the Translated Elijah on the 
Mount 
of 
Transfiguration 
Prefigured the Two Ways to 
Glory — Resurrection 
and 
Translation.
1. 
Enoch and Elijah Translated Without Dying.— 
Enoch and Elijah, as just noted, were translated without pass­
ing through death. In the time of Enoch the tide of human guilt 
had reached such heights that destruction through overwhelm­
ing divine judgment was decreed. But righteous Enoch, who 
had walked with God on earth, was taken up through the gates 
of the Holy City—the first among men to enter there. As the 
Epistle to the Hebrews specifically puts it, he was “translated
94
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
that he should not see death; . . . for before his translation he 
had this testimony, that he pleased God” (Heb. 11:5).
He was not permitted to fall under the power of death, 
and thus his life represents the state of holiness of the living 
saints who will likewise be “redeemed from the earth” (Rev. 
14:3) at the time of Christ’s second advent, when gross iniquity 
will prevail, just as was the case before the Flood. And in this 
same way the saints of the last days, clad in the righteousness 
of Christ, will be translated just before the destruction of the 
world by the final deluge of fire (2 Peter 3:3-13).
2. 
Moses’ 
Resurrection: 
First 
to 
Break 
Bonds 
of 
Death.—But death “reigned from Adam to Moses” (Rom. 5: 
14) upon all who came under its power. Israel’s great leader 
Moses, greatest of all the Old Testament prophets (Deut. 34: 
10), after viewing the Land of Promise from Mount Nebo and 
envisioning the future triumph of the faithful, died and was 
buried (vs. 1-6). But Michael'3J:he Archangel (one of the many 
names applied to Christ in the Old Testament) called forth 
the sleeping prophet. Satan was angered and dismayed, for he 
had claimed him as one of his prize prisoners of the grave.
Chrisjt, however, did not deign to enter into controversy 
with Satan, not even to remind him that it was he who, through 
enticing Adam and Eve to sin, had brought universal death 
upon the human race. Christ simply said, “The Lord rebuke 
thee” (Jude 9), and Satan fled as Moses arose from the dead. 
This was the first instance of breaking the death power of the 
grave, and asserting the life-giving supremacy of Christ. Thus 
assurance was given of final resurrection to all who should 
“die godly” in Old Testament times. Translation and resur­
rection are therefore the two ways to glory.
Later, when Christ the Messiah had appeared among men 
to die in their stead, and soon to break forever the power of
3 Sjpe Matthew Henry’s Commentary, on Dan. 10:10; Clarke’s Commentary, on Jude 
9: J. Dr-olasgow, Commentary on the Apocalypse, on Rev. 12:7; Lange’s Commentary, on Rev. 
12:1-12, Exegetical anH”Cnfical SyriopricVIcvv. p. 238; Calvin’s Commentaries, on 
'Daniel,” 
vol. 2, pp. 253, 368, also p. 13.
REDEMPTION IN THE PERIOD OF THE SACRIFICIAL ALTAR 95
Satan over the tomb and give assurance of His resurrection 
power, the two ancient worthies apppeared with Jesus on the 
Mount of Transfiguration. Moses, prototype of the sleeping 
saints to be raised, was present along with Elijah, who had 
been translated without passing through death (Matt. 17:3), 
as an earnest of the living saints destined to be taken to Heaven 
without tasting death when Christ returns in power and glory 
(Matt. 24:30, 31). This episode demonstrated visibly both 
God’s power to raise the dead and man’s capability of life be­
yond the grave. This the apostle Paul amplifies in his descrip­
tion of that tremendous hour:
"We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in 
the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and 
the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we [the living] shall be changed” 
(1 Cor. 15:51, 52).
"And the dead in Christ shall rise first: then we which are alive and 
remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the 
Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord” (1 Thess. 4:16, 17).
IV. Annual Round of Tabernacle Services Typified 
Gospel Realities
The whole Old Testament principle of sacrifice was fur­
ther amplified under the ministrations in the sanctuary of old, 
first in the tabernacle service in the wilderness and then in 
the Temple that later took its place in the Jewish economy. By 
the rounds of typical offerings and priestly services the people 
were taught day by day the central truths relative to the com­
ing death and ministration for the sins of the people of Christ 
the Messiah.
And once each year, at the close of the round of typical 
services, their minds were carried forward to the closing events 
in the great controversy between Christ and Satan and to the 
final purification of the universe from all sin and sinners. Since 
Satan was the originator of sin, and man’s archtempter—and 
thus the direct instigator of all the sins that caused the death 
of the Son of God—justice demands that Satan shall suffer the
S. E. BOHLMANN, ARTIST
VERNON NYE, ARTIST
© 1963 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
© 1958 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
Both in the Patriarchal Age and in the 
The Slaying of the Lamb of Old Symbolized
Later Period of the Tabernacle, the Sacrificial 
the Coming Lamb of God Who in Actuality
Offering Pointed Forward to Christ Who 
Takes Away the Sins of the Repentant
Would Die in Man’s Stead. 
and Forgiven Sinner.
final, fateful punishment for the instigation and perpetuation 
of sin. That, too, was prefigured in symbol on the Day of Atone­
ment. Christ died vicariously for my part. Satan must also die 
for his part in all sin.
1. 
Yearly Enactment of Plan of Redemption.—The 
sanctuary service was, in fact, a yearly enacted portrayal and 
graphic prophecy in type of the whole plan of redemption. All 
the offerings, of the several kinds, were portrayals foreshadow­
ing in type various aspects of the one all-sufficient and all- 
embracing and complete and perfect atoning sacrifice for sin by
96
Christ the Lamb of God on Calvary. And all the functions of 
all the priests, both common and high priest, in the multiple 
yearly round were but symbolic of the one all-comprehensive 
and all-efficacious priesthood and judicial ministry of Christ.
But in the antitypical fulfillment Christ was both offering 
and offerer, both victim and priest. The multiple services of 
the sanctuary were simply a foreshadowing of the sublime gos­
pel realities, centering in the atoning death, triumphant resur­
rection and ascension, and priestly mediation in Heaven be­
fore the Father, of Christ our Saviour and Priest, our Judge 
and coming King. And the meaning of all these sanctuary types 
of old is to be understood and interpreted in the light of the 
great antitypical realities in Christ. He is both the grand 
center and the vast circumference of salvation for man.
2. Justice and Mercy Met in Type at the Ark.—The 
blood of the sin offerings represented the principle of the Sub­
stitute accepted in the sinner’s stead. The repentant sinner 
brought his offering to the door of the tabernacle. Placing his 
hand on the victim’s head and confessing his sins, he in figure 
transferred them to the innocent sacrifice. Then the animal 
was slain by the sinner’s own hand, and the blood was placed 
by the priest on the horns of the altar of burnt offering.
The law of God, enshrined in the ark, was the great 
rule of righteousness and judgment. And the vindication of 
that law involved the death of the transgressor. But above the 
law was the mercy seat, over which the presence of God was 
manifested in glory, and from which, by virtue of the atoning 
sacrifice, pardon was granted to the repentant sinner. Thus the 
work of Christ for our redemption was symbolized by the sanc- 
tuary service, where “mercy and truth are met together; right-^ 
eousness and peace have kissed each other” (Ps. 85:10).
3. Sin and Righteousness, Death and Life, Portrayed. 
—The Levitical rites were only symbols, their efficacy depend­
ing solely upon the effectual sacrifice of Christ, which they 
prefigured. But this basic truth Israel, alas, came to forget.
REDEMPTION IN THE PERIOD OF THE SACRIFICIAL ALTAR 97
4
98
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
The shed blood of the animal victims was only the emblem of 
redemption to be effected actually through the blood of Christ 
shed on Calvary. This truth Israel as a nation failed to grasp 
when Messiah came. The slaying of the innocent animal, 
through the shedding of its blood by the sinner, was a symbolic 
enactment of the offering of a substitute, the blood of which 
had been shed instead of his own, and the life of which had 
been extinguished instead of his own life. It was God’s plan.
Thus the principle was continually emphasized that sin 
is an offense against God. And the essential righteousness of 
God requires that sin be punished, and that death, which is 
the “wages of sin,’’ is the divinely designated punishment. 
The sinner is unable of his own power to escape the punish­
ment due to his offenses. But God in His grace and mercy par­
dons the guilty offender by way of the substitution and offer- 
ig of an expiatory victim.
But, be it noted, the sinner was not to subject the animal 
to unending torture, but was to put it to death by taking away 
its life. This was the true representation of death, the requisite 
punishment for sin—the death threatened to Adam, the one 
involved in the original transgression, and stressed in every 
book in the Old Testament.
4. 
Penal Punishment Death Not Life Imprisonment. 
—In the p^nal economy of the Mosaic law there was no such 
punishment as imprisonment for life, much less imprisonment 
for life under continuous torture. The penalty for the gravest 
offenses was always and only death. And it is to be remembered 
that this law of retribution, under the theocracy, was insti­
tuted by God Himself. We can draw no other conclusion than 
that for ancient Israel, capital punishment by death, under the 
divine as well as human administration, was the supreme pen- 
alty set forth in the law.
Indeed, in the entire system of sacrifices, patriarchal and 
Mosaic, both of which were ordained by God, the substitute 
victim was never subject to prolonged torture, or impris­
oned for life, but was put to death. By this the offerer acknowl-
REDEMPTION IN THE PERIOD OF THE SACRIFICIAL ALTAR 99
edged that he had forfeited not merely his liberty or his well­
being but his life—his very being. The sacrifice was not merely 
an offering, but the offering of a life in the place of the offerer.
Under the theocracy of Israel the legislative, executive, 
and judicial powers and processes were all united, and death 
was the penalty for the major violations. But there is not a word 
about endlessly prolonged suffering of body and soul. We re­
peat: The penalty of the law was never even life imprisonment, 
but only and always death—capital punishment, loss of life, 
cutting off, utter destruction, perishing, being blotted out. 
That is the testimony of Israel’s theocracy.
5. Sinner Incurred Doom of Death.—The taking away 
of the life, dramatically portrayed all through the patriarchal 
and Mosaic dispensations, attested that man, refusing to live 
the intended life of holy obedience to the living God, had 
justly incurred the doom of death, and that it was divine good­
ness alone that withheld the stroke of final death from man. 
Man could hope for a restoration to unending life only through 
the sacrifice of One who, by His atoning death and resurrect 
tion, should thereby abolish death and bring immortality to 
light (2 Tim. 1:10).
Above all, Christ’s death showed that a final rejection of 
the remedy offered still left men liable to the penalty—but 
now with the added guilt of trampling underfoot the divine 
provision in the plan of redemption.
Thus understood, those typical sacrifices take on tremen­
dous significance. As one ponders the numberless effusions of 
blood, it is easy to understand the ancient testimony to the 
just deserts of sin—“the soul that sinneth, it shall die” (Eze. 
18:4, 20). It was a continuing dramatic representation to Is­
rael of sin and punishment, remedy and redemption. It por­
trayed the results following from the fall of man. But with it 
comes the wondrous corollary, “If the wicked will turn from 
all his sins . . . , he shall surely live, he shall not die” (v. 21).
6. Entire Sacrificial System Fulfilled 
in 
Christ.—
AThe Christ-centered character and emphasis of the Mosaic 
sanctuary service cannot be overstressed. Before leaving this 
aspect, note six points revealing the gospel in prototype and 
in essence:
(1) The Passover lamb was a type of Christ (Ex. 12:3- 
14; 1 Cor. 5:7).
(2) The daily, or continual, burnt offering was a type of 
Christ (Ex. 29:39-42; Heb. 9:25, 26).
(3) The sin offering was a type of Christ (Lev. 4:32, 33; 
Isa. 53:6, 7; John 1:29).
(4) The tabernacle itself and its services all constituted 
a type of the incarnate Christ and His redemptive work (Ex. 
25:8; 29:43-45; John 1:14; 2:19-21).
(5) All other ceremonial observances were but shadows 
of the reality, which is Christ and His saving work (Col. 2:16, 
17; Heb. 10:1).
(6) Finally, the typical system of sacrifices was abolished 
by the incarnation and death of Christ (Matt. 27:50, 51; Eph. 
2:14-16; Col. 2:14; Heb. 10:4-9). The types had served their 
prefatory purpose.
7. 
Christ Actually and Truly Died 
in Atonement. 
—These sacrifices all pointed specifically to Christ, “the Lamb 
\ of God, which taketh away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). 
"Hf the punishment due to our sins is not actual death, then 
Christ could not have made an atonement for us by His death. 
Of the fact that He actually died there can be no valid ques­
tion. And that He died an ignominious and painful death is 
undeniable. But His agony on the cross was brief compared 
with the prolonged agony that many others suffered—even the 
\ thief on the other cross (John 19:32, 33). It was therefore 
^ Christ’s death, not simply His suffering, that was efficacious 
unto atonement.
Death is definitely, then, the forfeiture of life. In the light 
fof revelation, in this amazing, substitutionary, atoning transac­
tion, the one and only God-man, becoming such through the 
incarnation, paid the exact and full penalty designated by law
\ 
100 
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
REDEMPTION IN THE PERIOD OF THE SACRIFICIAL ALTAR 101
that was due to us. He died, actually and truly died, just as 
any other man dies, and as we must all die—but we without 
any hope of resurrection, save through Him.
Then, by the almighty power of the Divine Spirit—“be­
ing put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit” 
(1 Peter 3:18)—Christ Jesus rose victorious over the power of 
the grave, and so became “able also to save them to the utter­
most that come unto God by him” (Heb. 7:25). That is our 
sole hope.
8. 
Death Penalty Under the Divine Law.—Since the 
“wages of sin is death” (Rom. 6:23), the nature and essence of 
the death penalty under the divine law is of vital importance 
in this Old Testament survey. “The law entered, that the 
offence might abound” (Rom. 5:20), and that “sin by the 
commandment might become exceeding sinful” (Rom. 7:13). 
This was brought out as a fundamental principle in the Pauline 
theology. The law of God was not merely a human institution, 
applying only to Israel. The Jewish organization was a theoc­
racy, a divine economy—the Ruler and moral Governor of the 
universe becoming the Ruler over Israel.
In attestation of His righteousness He gave them a law— 
“holy, and just, and good” 
(Rom. 7:12)—a spiritual law 
(Rom. 7:14), requiring not only outward obedience but in­
ward purity of motive, and an obedience springing from loy­
alty to God. It was designed to exhibit the exceeding sinful­
ness of man and its disastrous penalty upon the sinner. It was 
indeed the Praeparatio Evangelica, or preparation for the gos­
pel.
V. Christ, Prophesied First Fruits, Rose on Precise Day
According to Old Testament type and New Testament 
fulfillment, Christ was the prophesied first fruits of Old Testa­
ment resurrection assurance and provision. Paul declares:
“But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of 
them that slept. For since by man [Adam] came death, by man [Christ]
102
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in 
Christ shall all be made alive. But every man in his own order: Christ the 
firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ’s at his coming” (1 Cor. 15:20-23).
Speaking before Agrippa, Paul declared what Moses and 
the prophets predicted—“that Christ should suffer, and that 
he should be the first that should rise from the dead, and 
should shew light unto the people” (Acts 26:23). Now, this 
precisely stipulated ceremony of the “firstfruits” was given as 
a type to Israel, with this clear instruction:
“When ye be come into the land which I give unto you, and shall reap 
the harvest thereof, then ye shall bring a sheaf of the firstfruits of your 
harvest unto the priest: and he shall wave the sheaf before the Lord, to be 
accepted for you” (Lev. 23:10, 11).
1. First Fruits a Fixed Part of Annual Service.—This 
ceremony of the first fruits became a fixed part of the annual 
typical service, prefiguring the antitypical actualities of re­
demption through Christ, that were to come. Each year the 
sheaf of the first fruits of the harvest was gathered and waved 
before the Lord, and was accepted for Israel. They might then 
freely partake of the grain of the harvest. Now note the unique 
application of the first fruits to the resurrection.
2. “Every Man in His Own Order.”—There are actually 
three-resurrections involved, with “every man in his own 
order” (1 Cor. 15:23). Observe the distinctions:
(1) The basic first resurrection was that of the Man Christ 
Jesus, the first fruits (1 Cor. 15:23; Acts 26:23), at His resur­
rection. This was the essence and certification of those to fol­
low.
(2) Next, "they that are Christ’s [the righteous] at his 
[Christ’s second] coming” (1 Cor. 15:23). This is commonly 
designated the resurrection of the righteous—out from, or 
from among, all the dead. It is called “the first resurrection,” 
and comprises the “blessed and holy” (Rev. 20:5, 6). It is 
the “better resurrection” (Heb. 11:35); the resurrection unto 
life (John 5:29; 1 Cor. 15:51-53; Phil. 3:20; 1 Thess. 4:16, 
17); or resurrection of the just (Luke 14:14; Acts 24:15).
Those who partake of it are called “children of God, being the 
children of the [first] resurrection” (Luke 20:35, 36). This 
takes place at the Second Advent.
(3) 
And finally the “rest of the dead” (Rev. 20:5) come 
forth—the remainder, or wicked. This is called the resurrec­
tion of the unjust (Acts 24:15); the “resurrection of damna­
tion” (John 5:29), and “to shame and everlasting contempt” 
(Dan. 12:2). This occurs at the close of the millennium, 
whereas that of the righteous comes at the beginning of the 
thousand years (Rev. 20:5, 6). The two are thus in vivid con­
trast. But they comprise the whole of humanity.
3. 
First-Fruits Resurrection Fulfilled on Very Day 
of Type.—Now, it is tremendously impressive to note the 
exactness of the time of prophesied fulfillment. In the type, \ 
the Passover lamb was always slain on the fourteenth day of 
the first month (Abib; Num. 9:2, 3, 5). It was eaten on the 
fifteenth, which was the first day of unleavened bread. And 
on the sixteenth day, the “morrow” after this annual “sabbath” 
(Lev. 23:11), the first fruits (which had previously been cut) 
were presented before the Lord. So it was that in the anti- 
typical reality, Christ, “our passover” (1 Cor. 5:7), died on 
Friday afternoon, the fourteenth of Abib, in the year of the 
crucifixion.* He rested in the grave over the Sabbath, the 
fifteenth. And on the “morrow after the sabbath,” that is, on 
the sixteenth, Christ, the first fruits, arose triumphantly from 
the tomb and presented Himself before the Father for accept­
ance—exactly according to prophetic stipulation. (In this par^\ 
ticular year the annual typical sabbath coincided with the 
weekly seventh-day Sabbath. As such it was a “high day.”)
Thus it was that the resurrection of Christ, the anti- 
typical Wave Sheaf, or First Fruits, took place on the precise 
day stipulated in the prophetic type. He was the grand fulfill­
ment. For more than a thousand years after its establishment, 
that typical ceremony took place annually in Israel. From the
REDEMPTION IN THE PERIOD OF THE SACRIFICIAL ALTAR 103
4 For detailed study, with diagram, see L. E. Froom, Prophetic Faith, vol. 4, pp. 
1245-1247.
newly ripened harvest the first heads of ripened grain were 
gathered, and waved as a thank offering before the Lord. And 
not until the wave sheaf was presented could the sickle be put 
to the grain for the use of the people.
In the great antitypical reality Christ, as the divine First 
Fruits of the resurrection, was the great pathfinder, as it were, 
of the spiritual harvest of the redeemed to be gathered at His 
second advent by means of the first resurrection. Thus Christ’s 
own resurrection, after the cross, became the inviolable pledge 
of assured resurrection of the righteous dead at His return. 
That is its broader significance. “For if we believe that Jesus 
died and rose again, even so them also wjiich sleep in Jesus 
will God bring with him’’ (1 Thess. 4:14),B
Such is the remarkable assurance of our resurrection based 
upon the Mosaic type.
104 
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
vx® The phrase “bring with him” does not, as some contend, imply that when Jesus comes 
again He will bring back with Him the souls of the saints who have been in Heaven since their 
death. On the contrary, those who are now silently “asleep” in death and not engaged in 
unceasing activity in Heaven, must first be raised from the dead, just as Jesus rose, before they 
can be with their Redeemer.
Furthermore, the Greek word ago, for “bring,” means to lead, lead along, or take along 
—as a general leads. Thus in Acts ¡¿1: I he chief captain "commanded him [Paul] to be carried 
[ago] into the castle” (v. 34). In the Emphatic Diaglott, 1 Thessalonians 4:14 reads “lead forth.” 
Hebrews 13:20 reads, “Now the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord 
Jesus,” et cetera. So when Christ comes He will raise, or bring again, the dead from their 
death sleep, and they will thus be led forth to meet their Lord, who comes with all His holy 
angels.
CHAPTER 
SEVEN
Eternal Destruction Is Decreed 
Doom of Wicked
I. Utter Destruction Ultimate Fate of Intractably Wicked
We now come to the final phase of the tragic episode of 
sin—the ultimate and utter destruction of the unrepentant 
sinner if he willfully clings to his sin. According to the Inspired 
Word all such will be destroyed “root” and “branch.” This 
means Satan and his evil angels, together with all the incor­
rigibly wicked who have joined in the great rebellion against 
God and His government and law, and have spurned His prof­
fered redemption and righteousness. Here is a typical pas­
sage from the last chapter of the last book of the Old Testa­
ment:
“For, behold, die day cometh, diat 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” (Mai. 4:1).
The writers of the Old Testament seem to have exhausted 
the resources of the language at their command—the Hebrew 
tongue—to affirm the complete destruction of the intractable 
sinner. The major Hebrew verb roots (such as destroy, perish, 
consume, cut off, burn up) are literal, and are used to sig­
nify the total extinction, or excision, of such animate beings.
Other expressions are figurative—couched in metaphor, 
simile, symbol, analogy, metonomy, synecdoche, compari­
son, and allegory. But they are all designed to further enforce 
this foundational emphasis. These must be noted in some de-
105
MENTE, AFTER FRANCIS DANBY, A.R.A.
The Ultimate and Utter Destruction of the Wicked Will Forever End the 
Terrors, Sorrows, and Memories of Sin. Then the Fires Will Go Out.
tail, as we can only determine their real significance by survey­
ing their over-all Biblical usage.
1. Scores of Old Testament Verbs Signify “Destroy.” 
—The Old Testament uses some fifty verbs (along with their 
Greek equivalents in the Septuagint and the New Testament), 
signifying different aspects of destruction when setting forth 
the ultimate doom of the wicked. Many of them declare abso­
lute cessation of existence. Others point strongly in that direc­
tion, and the clear must always explain the obscure. Together 
they constitute overwhelming testimony. Indeed, no stronger 
terms are to be found in any language than those employed in 
both the Old and the New Testament to connote ultimate total 
extinction of being for the wicked. Note the scope of the terms.
2. Imposing Array of Literal English Equivalents.—In 
order for us to get the over-all picture, here is an imposing list 
of English equivalents used in translating the Old Testament 
terms: Destroy, end, consume, devour, take away, tread down, 
burn, burn up, cut off, hew down, cut down, break in pieces,
106
ETERNAL DESTRUCTION IS DECREED DOOM OF WICKED 107
quench, go out, extinguish, slay, break down, overthrow, cast 
down, destroy utterly, sink down in a pit, beat down, melt 
away, die, mortify, put to death, strike, melt, pluck out, fall, 
dash in pieces, scatter as dust, pass away, trample underfoot, 
root out, bring to nought. No loopholes are left.
Only God can dissipate the “breath,” efface the personal­
ity, and destroy the sinful ego, or entity, comprising man. And 
He has fully and irrevocably declared the fate of the incorrigi­
bly wicked. Such is the witness of the literal depictions.
3. Galaxy of Figurative Expressions Support the Lit­
eral.—And here are some of the varied figurative or prover­
bial expressions that harmonize with, and consistently buttress, 
the nonfigurative literal declarations concerning the ultimate 
end of existence for persistent evildoers: They will be as a ves­
sel broken to pieces, as ashes trodden underfoot, as smoke that 
vanisheth, as chaff carried away by the wind, as tow that is 
burned, as bundles of dry tares, as thorns and stubble, as vine 
branches pruned off, as wax that is melted, as the fat of sacrifices 
—all combustible and all destructible by fire. And all of these 
expressions, it will be observed, likewise preclude the notion of 
sufferings infinitely prolonged.
Again, the wicked will pass like the morning cloud, like the 
early dew, like a dream when one awakens. Other figures in 
the Scripture symbolism are: the lost sheep, threatened with 
speedy death by hunger and thirst or the wolf’s jaws; the 
withered tree, without root or branch; the garment that is 
moth-eaten; the ax and the fire, and the leprosy that consumes 
the tissues. Everywhere and always the concept prevails of the 
decomposition, of the breaking up of the organism and final 
cessation of the existence of being—never that of immortal 
life in endless suffering.
4. Iterated and Reiterated in Key Chapters.—A strik­
ing but typical example of Old Testament teaching is found 
in Psalm 37. Here are nine different expressions concentrated 
in the one psalm, italicized to bring out the intent:
108
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Vs. 1, 2—“For they [workers of iniquity] shall soon be cut down like 
the grass.”
9—“Evildoers shall be cut off.”
10—“For yet a little while, and the wicked shall not be.”
20—“The wicked shall perish, . . . into smoke shall they consume 
away.”
22—“They that be cursed of him shall be cut off.”
28—“The seed of the wicked shall be cut off.”
34—“The wicked are cut off.”
36—“He passed away, and, lo, he was not: ... he could not be 
found.”
38—“The transgressors shall be destroyed together: the end of the 
wicked shall be cut off.”
Or take the eighteenth chapter of Job, with seven declara­
tions:
Vs. 
5—“The light of the wicked shall be put out.”
6—“His candle shall be put out with him.”
12—"Destruction shall be ready at his side.”
13—“ It [destruction] shall devour the strength of his skin.”
16—“His roots shall be dried up beneath, and above shall his 
branch be cut off.”
17—"His remembrance shall perish from the earth.”
18—“He shall be . . . chased out of the world.”
20:9—"The eye . . . shall see him no more.”
A wide range of individual declarations of similar intent 
and equal intensity is scattered all the way from Genesis to 
Malachi.
II. Multiple Terms Signify Complete Destruction of Being
We here list alphabetically for reference some seventy 
variant expressions denoting the one thought of “destruction,” 
“perishing,” “consumption by fire,” “turning to ashes,” and 
“cessation of being,” as portraying the fate of the wicked. Note 
the impressive, cumulative array:
Ashes under soles of feet—Mai. 4:3.
Be as though they had not been—Obadiah 16; Job 20:9; Ps. 37:10.
Be no more—Ps. 104:35; Prov. 10:25.
Become as nothing—Isa. 41:11, 12.
Blossom go up as dust—Isa. 5:20-24.
Blot out name forever—Ps. 9:5.
ETERNAL DESTRUCTION IS DECREED DOOM OF WICKED 109
Blot out of existence—Deut. 29:20; Ps. 69:28.
Break in pieces—Job 34:24; Ps. 2:9.
Bring down to pit of destruction—Ps. 55:23.
Burn like tow—Isa. 1:31.
Burn them up—Mai. 4:1.
Burned up as cut thorns—Isa. 33:12.
Candle of wicked put out—Job 21:17.
Cast down to destruction—Ps. 73:18.
Cast down, unable to rise—Ps. 36:12.
Cast off forever—1 Chron. 28:9.
Chaff which wind drives away—Ps. 1:4.
Chased out of world—Job 18:18.
Consume—Ps. 59:13; 104:35; Isa. 29:20.
Consume away into smoke—Ps. 37:20.
Consumed—Job 22:20.
Consumed out of the earth—Ps. 104:35.
Cut down like grass—Ps. 37:2.
Cut off—Ps. 37:9, 22, 28, 34; 94:23; Prov. 2:22; Nahum 1:15. 
Cut off remembrance from earth—Ps. 34:16.
Dash in pieces—Ps. 2:9.
Destroy—Ps. 145:20; Prov. 13:13.
Destroyed forever—Ps. 52:5; 92:7.
Destroy utterly—Ex. 22:20; Ps. 21:10.
Devour—Ps. 50:3.
Devour as stubble—Nahum 1:10.
Die—Eze. 18:4, 20.
Dissolved—Ps. 75:3.
Driven away like chaff—Ps. 1:4.
Eaten up like garment—Isa. 51:8.
Fire shall devour them—Ps. 21:9.
Lamp of wicked put out—Prov. 13:9; 24:20.
Leave neither root nor branch—Mai. 4:1.
Light of wicked be put out—Job 18:5.
Melt away as waters—Ps. 58:7.
Melt like wax—Ps. 68:2.
Name put out forever—Ps. 9:5.
Not be—Ps. 37:10; Prov. 12:7.
Overthrown—Prov. 12:7.
110
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Perish—Ps. 37:20; 49:20; Isa. 41:11, 12.
Perish forever—Job 20:7.
Pluck thee out—Ps. 52:5.
Put away like dross—Ps. 119:119.
Put out light—Job 18:5, 6.
Put out name forever—Ps. 9:5.
Put to death—Lev. 27:29.
Quenched as fire of thorns—Ps. 118:12.
Quenched as tow—Isa. 43:17.
Rain of fire and brimstone—Ps. 11:6.
Return to dust—Gen. 3:19; Ps. 104:29.
Root out—Ps. 52:5; Prov. 2:22.
Roots dried up—Job 18:16.
Scattered—Ps. 92:9.
See him no more—Job 20:9.
Shall not be—Ps. 37:10.
Slay—Ps. 34:21; 62:3; 139:19; Isa. 11:4.
Stubble . . . taken away by whirlwind—Isa. 40:24.
Swallow them up—Ps. 21:9.
Tear ... in pieces—Ps. 50:22.
Tread down—Ps. 60:12.
Turned into hell [she’ol, grave]—Ps. 9:17.
Utterly consumed—Ps. 37:20 (LXX 72:19).
Whirlwind passeth, wicked no more—Prov. 10:25.
Wither as green herb—Ps. 37:2.
Such an array is overwhelming. But one conclusion can be 
drawn.
It is to be particularly noted that all these variant terms 
are simply an unfolding or expansion of the original penalty 
threatened in Eden—death, or returning to the dust (Gen. 
2:17; 3:19). They simply indicate the mode of destruction 
and the results. Summarizing, these multiple terms fall under 
four general categories. Anglican Vicar R. S. Callander, of 
Gloucester, England, has accurately analyzed and summarized 
them as indicating:
(1) Death by fire, or burning, set forth as the designated
ETERNAL DESTRUCTION IS DECREED DOOM OF WICKED 111
m
ode of final punishment1 (Ps. 21:9; Mai. 4:1, 3; cf. Rev. 20:14, 
15; Matt. 13:40, 42; 25:41, 46).
(2) Perishing as the r
esult of such punishment (Ps. 37: 
28; cf. 2 Peter 2:12; John 3:14, 15).
(3) Death, or cessation of being, as the end of such pun­
ishment (Eze. 18:4, 20; Rom. 6:23; Rev. 21:8).
(4) Utter destruction as the permanent effec
t of such 
punishment (Ps. 55:23; 92:7; 145:20; cf. Matt. 7:13; 10:28).
And in support of these conclusions the New Testament 
confirms, adds to, and gives precision—such as specifying the 
“second death,” of Revelation 20:6 and 21:8, by destruction 
in the lake of fire.
III. Eternal Torment No Part of Death Penalty
It will be observed that in this vast array of Scripture pas­
sages there is uniform testimony as to utter destruction— 
without a single statement implying Eternal Torment for the 
finally impenitent wicked. And even if a Jew perplexing texts 
are found, they could not reasonably be allowed to reverse the 
preponderant-* emphasis of Scripture or nullify its over­
whelming testimony. The notion of Eternal Torment came 
out of paganism, as a corollary to the postulate of the universal 
Innate Immortality of the soul. But that presumption did not 
penetrate Jewry until about 150 B.C., or begin to infiltrate the 
Christian church until nearly a.d. 200.*
God's blessings in this life extend to a “thousand genera­
tions” of those who love Him and keep His commandments,
1 This may be checked by scanning the following passages from nearly a score of 
OT books, and a few sample New Testament passages, as showing beyond peradventure the 
uniform testimony of Scripture to fire as God’s designated mode of destruction for the wicked:
(OT) Gen. 19:24, 25: Ex. 32:10: Lev. 10:2; Num. 11:1; 16:35; Deut. 32:22, 24;
2 Kings 1:12: Ps. 21:9; 97:3; 140:10; Isa. 1:28, 31; 9:18, 19; 10:16-18; 30:33; 33:11, 12; 4^: 14; 
66:15, 16, 24; Jer. 4:4; 21:12; Lam. 2:3, 4; Eze. 15:6, 7; 21:31, 32; 22:21, 22, 31; 28:18; 
Amos 5:6; Nahum 1:5, 6; Mai. 4:1.
(NT) Matt. 3:10, 12; 13:49, 50; 25:41; Luke 17:29, 30; Heb. 6:4-8; 2 Peter 3:7; Jude 7; 
Rev. 20:9, 10, 15. (While some terms are figurative, this in no way modifies the preponderant 
testimony.) “Our God is a consuming fire” to the wicked (Heb. 12:29; cf. Ex. 24:17; Deut. 4:24; 
9:3; Isa. 33:14).
2 See Outline Chart A, page 522, and pertinent chapters in Parts III and IV.
112
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
while He punishes only to the “third and fourth generation” 
of those who hate Him (Ex. 20:5, 6; Deut. 7:9). If the pun­
ishments of the future life were to go on forever, paralleling 
the bliss of the righteous, it would logically follow that God 
would likewise punish to the thousandth generation. But even 
here there is intimation that the wicked are doomed to ulti­
mate and utter extinction.
1. Torture No Part of Jewish Sacrificial Rite.—As 
previously pointed out, in the Levitical sacrificial offerings the 
victim in the sin offering stood for the sinner. It typified 
Christ, atoning vicariously for the guilt of man’s sin—Christ 
bearing our sins and standing in our place and stead. Those 
who offered the sin offering were neither required nor allowed 
to inflict prolonged torture upon the sacrificial offering—be it 
lamb, goat, bullock, or turtle dove—but simply to impose 
death. Jn the burnt offerings the animal was already dead be­
fore it was burned upon the altar, where it was wholly con- 
sumed (Lev. 4-7). The rite, therefore, was not based on 
extended suffering but on the suppression of the life. In Jew­
ish practice, if the execution was prolonged the sacrifice had 
to be rejected.
2. Torture No Part of Mosaic Penal Code.—Likewise 
in the penal code of the Mosaic theocracy the heaviest punish­
ment prescribed was the imposition of the death of the offender 
(Lev. 20:2; 24:14-16; Num. 15:33-36; Deut. 17:5; 22:21). 
Long-continued torture was foreign to Old Testament legis­
lation. The odious practice of torture, so common in ancient 
pagan civilizations, had no equivalent in the code of Israel. 
(Crucifixion, it should be noted, was of Roman origin.) In case 
of stoning, under Israel, care was taken that the first stone cast 
should be large enough to crush the victim’s chest, resulting in
-x. death.
^ Death, not torture, as the wages of sin (Rom. 6:23). is 
consistently set forth in Scripture. The punishment fitted the 
crime.
ETERNAL DESTRUCTION IS DECREED DOOM OF WICKED 113
IV. Eternal Destiny Revolves Around Intent of “Life” 
and “Death”
1. Life and Death—Keys That Unlock Inspired In­
tent.—The issues of eternal destiny turn on the intent of Holy 
Scripture, as seen in the prologue (of Genesis) and in the 
epilogue (of the Revelation). The terms “life” and “death” 
are the dual keys that unlock the Biblical intent as to the 
destiny of man. Everything turns upon these two antithetical 
expressions.
As mentioned, life and death are ever set forth as oppo­
sites, like black and white. For one to say that death is simply 
another kind or state of life is like insisting that black is 
variation of white. But if death were a certain state of life, it 
would simply be a continued manifestation of that same life. 
The usage of Biblical language protests such violence. To die 
is to cease to live, or exist, not to suffer on forever, simply away 
from the presence of God, but to keep on living.
2. Platonic Perversion of Death as Perpetual Life.— 
When man is under consideration, life—in the historical and 
grammatical sense—refers to his existence as manifested through 
animation, action, and sensation. Death, on the contrary, is the 
end of that existence, the termination of all action and sensa­
tion. But under the Platonic influence, with its notion of the 
absolute and indefeasible immortality of the human soul, and 
the consequent flaunting of the total testimony of Scripture, 
the traditionalist took his stand on the premise that the in­
herent life of the soul cannot cease.
As a result the death of the soul inevitably came to signify 
its perpetual life in the midst of sin and suffering—without 
any possible end. Ever dying, the soul nevertheless could never
die. Death was consequently replaced by pain that is intermi­
nable, while life was made synonymous merely with holiness 
and blessedness in that existence. It was a travesty of truth both 
in word and in intent.
114
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
3. Innate 
Immortality 
Postulate 
Reverses 
True 
Exegesis.—But the postulate of the Innate Immortality of^all 
souls involves an inescapably unnatural and arbitrary interpre­
tation of Scripture—a reversal of true exegesis—so that instead 
of death being the penalty for the unrepentant sinner, with 
unending life solely for the righteous, eternal life is instead 
asserted to be the final destiny of both righteous and wicked 
—only with the one class in bliss and the other in torment. 
But such a procedure is undeniable eisegesis—a reading into 
the text of what is not there, and of what is, moreover, funda- 
mentally contrary to the uniform, overwhelming testimony of 
Scripture.
4. Christ’s Death, Not Sufferings, Constituted Aton­
ing Sacrifice.—There is often, of course, intense suffering 
with death—but always ending in destruction. However, it is 
not_the suffering but the destruction that is the ultimate. Suffer­
ing precedes it. Thus it was with the death of Christ, if we 
are to consider this point at the highest level. There is frequent 
allusion to His “sufferings” in our behalf. But, dreadful as 
these were, Christ’s sufferings alone did not constitute His 
atoning death. They were only the accompaniments thereof.
he fundamental point is that Christ did not endure 
Eternal Torment. He paid the designated penalty due to 
Adam and the race—which was death. The death of Christ 
on Calvary, though including fearful mental and bodily suffer­
ing, required the extinction of His life. This principle was 
illustrated back in the case of Old Testament Israel:
"If thou wilt not observe to do all the words of this law that are 
written in this book, that thou mayest fear this glorious and fearful name, 
The Lord Thy God; then the Lord will make thy plagues wonderful, and 
the plagues of thy seed, even great plagues, and of long continuance, and 
sore sicknesses. . . . Also every sickness, and every plague, which is not 
written in the book of this law, them will the Lord bring upon thee, until 
thou be destroyed. . . . And it shall come to pass, that as the Lord rejoiced 
over you to do you good, and to multiply you; so the Lord will rejoice over 
you to destroy you, and to bring you to nought” (Deut. 28:58-63).
eath is ceasing to live.
ETERNAL DESTRUCTION IS DECREED DOOM OF WICKED 115
Thus all suffering terminates in final destruction, and 
comes to nought. That is the over-all Bible evidence.
5. 
Destruction, Not Eternal Torment, the Punish­
ment.—Man was placed in the Garden of Eden with the 
explicit warning that “in the day that thou eatest thereof [of 
the tree of the knowledge of good and evil] thou shalt surely 
die” (Gen. 2:17). Should he disobey he would be subject to 
capital punishment—death, by forfeiting his life. There is 
nothing in the language employed that conveys any concept 
other than utter destruction as punishment for transgression. 
There is no intimation of a prolonged, much less endless, 
existence in torment.
Life and death must have appeared as opposites to Adam— 
the threat of “death” being the opposite of “living forever.”
We must therefore repeat that there was absolutely no Bib­
lical declaration of death as an endless life in interminable 
misery as the penalty for sin.
V. Stock Objections Invoked Collapse Under Scrutiny
In both Testaments there are certain stock-objection texts 
that are always invoked. Three such passages in the Old Testa­
ment—Isaiah 33:14; 
Isaiah 66:24; and Daniel 
12:2—are 
pressed into service by those contending for the Eternal Tor­
ment of the wicked.
1. 
Isaiah 33:14—Contention 
Collapses 
Under 
Scru-\ 
tiny.—The first of the three texts reads: “Who among us shall 
dwell with the devouring fire? who among us shall dwell with/ 
everlasting burnings?”
These words are often brought forth by Immortal-Soulists 
as describing the torments of the lost, and to impress one with 
the torrid glare of the pitiless prospect of eternal misery. But 
even a cursory glance at the context will show that the future J 
state is not under discussion in this text. It is simply a portrayal 
of the insufferable temporal miseries being inflicted upon
116
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Israel by her enemies and by God’s threatened retribution. It 
is an exclamatory expression to the effect that no one can en­
dure such burnings—a strong negative, to indicate that what 
is doomed to fire cannot continue to exist; that none can dwell 
with such devouring flames.
The passage has no relation to the fate of the lost, but 
rather to the desolation of Palestine by the Assyrians. Verses 
10-12 describe Sennacherib’s invading army, even threatening 
Jerusalem itself but nevertheless awaiting sudden and utter 
destruction, as already foretold in chapter 27:4—when the 
Lord would “go through them” and “burn them together.” 
And the fulfillment is portrayed in chapter 37:36, when the 
angel of the Lord “smote in the camp of the Assyrians a hun­
dred and fourscore and five thousand: and when they [the 
Israelites] arose early in the morning, behold, they [the As­
syrians] were all dead corpses.” That is a simple statement of 
historical fact.
According to the ancient custom of the Eastern nations 
these bodies were to be burned. The effect of this display of 
divine power was to alarm those who had not trusted in God, 
and to lead them to exclaim, “Who among us shall dwell with 
this devouring fire? who among us shall dwell with these ever­
lasting burnings?” 
________________________________
These words have not the remotest reference to future retri­
bution in Gehenna, only to present punishments on earth. They 
echo the outcries of terrified pinners in Jerusalem who feared 
that the perpetual conflagrations of war and the devastations 
of fire and sword by the invader—and God’s wrath—would 
end in their own destruction, for “who can dwell in these per­
petual burnings?” 8 In verses 10 to 12 of Isaiah 33 the Lord 
addresses them:
“Now will I rise, saith the Lord; now will I be exalted. ... 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 [fuel for lime-
3 If a further application is desired,_ it is well to remember that “our God is a consuming 
fire’’ (Heb. 12:29). He is the Sun of Righteousness, whose brightness glorifies the saints but 
is a fire of vengeance that burns up the worthless (Mai. 4:2, 3; Heb. 6:8; Rev. 20:9).
kilns]: as thorns cut up [common Palestinian fuel for such] shall they be 
burned in the fire.”
Then the text in question (verse 14) follows immediately. 
We would simply add that indifference to the sense of Scrip- 
ture in an attempt to ^establish a predetermined point is un­
worthy of hermeneutics and is fatal to sound conclusions. The 
“fire” of verse 14 is manifestly the same as that of verse 12— 
the flame of war kindled in Palestine Joy the Assyrians, and 
God’s predicted retribution. So the first contention collapses.
2. 
Isaiah 
66:24—Carcasses, 
Undying 
Worm, 
Un­
quenchable Fire.—We next scrutinize Isaiah 66:24: “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.”
The scene is set in verses 22, 23: “For as the new heav­
ens and new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me,” 
and “all flesh” shall come to worship before the Lord. Then 
follows the declaration of the verse quoted. The “worm” and 
the “fire” in this passage can only legitimately symbolize the 
utter destruction of dead and insensible “carcases” or corpses, 
as expressly stated. The text does not therefore support the 
theory of an eternal, conscious suffering of sentient, disem­
bodied souls of the living damned, which have been con­
signed to an ever-burning hell.
Any attempt to deduce the immortality of the lost from this 
text must first assume the indestructibility of “carcases.” But 
an unquenchable fire is not necessarily one that will not ulti­
mately go out. Rather, it is one that must consume and destroy 
until nothing remains (cf. Jer. 7:20).
The clause, “their worm shall not die,” unquestionably sig­
nifies that the worms shall not cease to be until their sordid mis­
sion has been accomplished. The contention of eternal, con­
scious, human suffering could be sustained only by taking out 
the word “die,” in the sense of ceasing to live, because only as
ETERNAL DESTRUCTION IS DECREED DOOM OF WICKED 117
118
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
so taken, with a negation, could the passage be construed_to 
speak of eternal suffering.
And it is of course obvious that such “worms” 4 are not 
endowed with immortality, or with powers of continuous re­
production throughout eternity in a blazing fire. We repeat 
that a “fire” that never shall be “quenched” does not neces­
sarily mean it must burn forever. Jude, in verse seven, de­
clares that Sodom and Gomorrha are set forth as examples of 
eternal fire. But Peter tells us that they were turned into 
ashes, “condemned . . . with an overthrow [Gr. katastrophe]” 
(2 Peter 2:6). Thus Jude’s “eternal fire” is equivalent to 
Peter’s “ashes.” It signifies ultimate extinction.
“Unquenchable fire” is therefore a fire that is destined 
ultimately to go out, but that cannot be put out until it has 
consumed all upon which it feeds. It thus denotes inevitable 
and utter destruction, and the eternal results of such awesome 
punishment. With this agrees Christ’s solemn New Testament 
declaration that He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable
The “abhorring” clearly refers to the nauseous spectacle of 
the putrefying “carcases.” The reference to the “worm” is not 
to the remorse of a tormented conscience as some contend, but 
to literal maggots (Heb. tola‘), bred in putrid substances 
(Ex. 16:20; Deut. 28:39; Isa. 14:11). And it is to be noted 
that the “worm” is distinct from that upon which it feeds. The 
allusion is unmistakably to the ghastly scenes of the ancient 
Va 1 ley of Hinnom, or Tophet, with its flames and its worms 
—where those permitted to walk over the fields of the slain 
could see the vast number of the dead and putrefying bodies 
of their former enemies. And the case in point, in Isaiah’s 
time, was the 185,000 slain of Sennacherib’s host.
So it is not the immortal soul but the multitude of the 
dead who perished that engages the unquenchable fire and
* Allusions to the “worm” that feeds upon the “carcases,” or dead bodies, appear fre­
quently in the Old Testament, and are actually used to exclude all hope of restoration, and 
to declare that the punishment is eternal and without hope. (See lob 17:i4: 19:26: 24:20; 
Isa. 14:11.)
the insatiable worm. That was the Old Testament type. And 
in the final, antitypical fulfillment, and the punitive destruc­
tion of the wicked, there is depicted the feast for these worms 
at the “supper of the great God/’ to which the fowls of heaven 
are invited (Rev. 19:17, 18V5
3. 
Deprived of Life, Not Consigned to Misery.—It is 
further argued that in Mark 9:43-48 Christ quotes the last 
two clauses of Isaiah 66:24 in proof of the eternal sufferings of 
the wicked in Gehenna, and thus gives divine support to the 
contention. But both the premise and the conclusion must be 
denied. Christ was not uttering words in proof of eternal suf­
fering. Not a syllable did He express to that effect. He was 
warning the disciples that it is better to enter into life halt or 
maimed rather than having two hands or feet to be cast into 
the unquenchable fire of Gehenna—for it is better that one of 
the members should perish than the whole body be cast into, 
Gehenna (Mark 9:43).
In Mark 9, Christ contrasts the living and the perishing. 
But the perishing of one member, by its being cut off, is to 
deprive it of life, not to consign it to endless misery. It there­
fore follows that the perishing of the whole body likewise 
results in similar but total destruction. Consequently, the 
persons whose worm shall not die are those who have been re- 
duced to peger (dead corpses). So the second citation, from 
Isaiah 66:24, obviously does not apply to Eternal Torment.
The ancient fire of Gehenna was not a fire into which living \ 
persons were cast, to be kept alive under torture, but one into 
which corpses were cast to be consumed. It was not fire de­
signed to prey upon living beings, but upon the “carcases” of 
animals, and the dead bodies of malefactors, hence the con­
sistency of associating fire and worm together. What portion 
of the dead body the fire failed to consume, the worm would 
seize upon and devour. Even if one were cast alive into such a
ETERNAL DESTRUCTION IS DECREED DOOM OF WICKED 119
5 Cf. Isa. 66:15, 16—“Behold, the Lord will come with fire, and with his chariots like 
a whirlwind, to render his anger with fury, and his rebuke with flames of fire. . . . And the 
slain of the Lord shall be many.”
120
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
fiery place (as the wicked will be cast into the coming Ge­
henna), his life would soon become extinct, and his lifeless 
remains would soon be utterly consumed by these agents of 
destruction. So this contention likewise collapses.
4. Daniel 12:2—Resurrections to Life and to Judg­
ment.—The third text, often cited, reads: “And many of them 
that sleep in the dust of the earth [the inspired depiction of 
death] shall awake [in the resurrection], some to everlasting 
life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt [thrusting 
away].’’
The awakening of “some” clearly applies to the resurrec­
tion of the righteous, destined to eternal life. As has been 
shown, those doomed to shame and “everlasting contempt” are 
excluded from eternal life. Their brief awakening is but for 
the execution of the judgment. The contempt is felt by the 
righteous survivors after the judgment and destruction of the 
contemptible have been meted out.
Thus the “everlasting” applies to the righteous, and the 
“contempt”—or more accurately “abhorrence”—is that of the 
righteous over the incorrigibly wicked, who perish. This text 
affords one of the clearer Old Testament foregleams of the two­
fold resurrection—one group to life, and the other to judg­
ment—expressly stated in the New Testament (Luke 14:14; 
John 5:28, 29; 1 Cor. 15:23; Rev. 20:4, 5).
Some assert that the everlasting contempt involves the con­
tinued conscious existence of those who are the recipients of 
the contempt referred to. But the epithet “everlasting” is not 
applied to the word “shame” (“abhorrence,” R.V., margin)— 
the same Hebrew dera’on used in Isaiah 66:24 in referring to 
the corpses of the slain that lie unburied. Dera’on means “an 
object of abhorrence.” Hence it is not the subjective conscious­
ness of the guilty, but the objective abhorrence in which their 
memory is held bv others, that is declared to be everlasting 
(cf. Jer. 20:11, R.V.; 23:40).
5. Conclusion: Contentions of Three Citations Col-
ETERNAL DESTRUCTION IS DECREED DOOM OF WICKED 121
lapse.—These are the stock Old Testament passages frequently 
cited in support of the Platonic postulate of the Eternal Tor­
ment of the wicked. But such an interpretation is in direct con- 
flict with the prophet’s own position and testimony elsewhere. 
Furthermore, these three texts are declared by many of the\ </ 
most competent Bible scholars to have no relevancy to a sup-i 
posed unending torment.
Obviously, they are “theologizing hand-downs” from Neo- 
platonic Christian philosophers of the third and fourth cen­
turies. They came from men steeped in the theory of the uni­
versal, Innate Immortality of the soul, and its corresponding 
corollary, the Eternal Torment of the wicked. They are un­
worthy of valid Christian exegesis. All three contentions col­
lapse under scrutiny.
CHAPTER 
EIGHT
Prophetic Witness Concerning the 
“Last Things”
I. The Two Advents Focal Points of All Prophecy
It has been well said that eschatology is the crown, or 
capstone, in the edifice of systematic religious thought. It sys­
tematizes, in logical sequence and relationship, the revealed 
facts regarding the prophetically heralded last days, so as to syn­
thesize the textual evidence and resolve seeming contradictions, 
as well as to systematize and coordinate the vast array of perti­
nent evidence.
1. Master Key to Man’s Destiny.—True eschatology, or 
the doctrine of the last things, thereby becomes the master key 
that unlocks the problem of the origin, nature, and destiny of 
man, dealing especially with the climactic finale of human his­
tory and destiny. For our purpose here, eschatology 1 may there­
fore be defined as that subdivision of systematic theology that 
treats of the last days, or time of the end, preceding and lead­
ing up to the actual end of the age, or world, the “great day 
of the Lord.” It culminates in the Second Advent and resurrec­
tion, the final judgment, the future life, and thus the final 
destiny of all mankind, good and evil—and the final disposi­
tion of Satan and sin.
2. Issues of Time and Eternity.—“Time” may well be 
termed that portion of eternity marked off for the redemption
1 In theological parlance, eschatology (the doctrine of the last things) is here used in 
contrast with anthropology (the doctrine of the origin and destiny of man), and soteriology 
(the plan of God in reference to the salvation of man).
122
PROPHETIC WITNESS CONCERNING THE “LAST THINGS” 123
of a lost race, ruined as we have seen by the tragedy of sin. 
History traces the transactions of time. And “time” has been 
compassed again and again in Bible prophecy, portraying the 
transcendent developments in the carrying out of God’s great 
redemptive provisions of the divine plan of the ages.
The apostle Peter depicts “prophecy” in these words: 
“For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: 
but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy 
Ghost” (2 Peter 1:21). And further: “We have also a more sure 
word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as 
unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, 
and the day star arise in your hearts” (v. 19).
3. Key to Divine Movements of the Ages.—The javo 
great areas ofjpjrophecy as concerns the Redeemer, Peter de­
clares, involved the testifying “beforehand the sufferings of 
Christ [predictions of the first advent], and the glory that 
should follow”—prophecies of the Second Advent and the con­
summation of the plan of redemption fl Peter 1:10. ID. 
Therefore the twoj>£eapJqcal points of prophecy are the first 
and second advents—with tKe“Tatter in glory and majesty at 
the last day. So the twin and inseparable centers of Bible 
prophecy are the transcendence of the cross and the triumphant 
return of the Redeemer.
Indeed, God’s plan of redemption cannot be completed 
apart from the second coming of Christ and the events con­
nected therewith. The Second Advent is tied in with the first 
as the necessary and complemental part of the same divine 
provision for the redemption of man. It is the last, or consum­
mating, phase of His original coming in the flesh. The incar­
nate, crucified, risen, glorified Redeemer will assuredly come 
again. Thus the unity and coordination of the plan of salva­
tion is disclosed as complete and harmonious.
4. Only True Philosophy of History.—Once the tran­
scendent truth of the two coordinate and consecutive advents 
is grasped, one possesses the key to the divine movements of
HARRY ANDERSON, ARTIST 
© 1958 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
As There Was Life in a Look for the Serpent-smitten Israelites, So There Is 
Life in the Look of Faith at Christ, Who Was Lifted Up at Calvary for Sin-
smitten Humanity.
the ages—past, present, and future. He has the only true 
philosophy of history, for around these two advents revolve the 
issues of time and eternity. But the climax of the plan of re­
demption, with its glorious consummation, is preceded by an 
unfolding sequence of mighty epochs and events, portrayed 
step by step in Old Testament prophecy. This relationship of 
part to part is disclosed through the great outline prophecies 
of Daniel. But these all terminate in the final phase of the re­
demptive plan of the ages, as all history moves irresistibly on 
to the final, transcendent events predicted by many inspired 
penmen of old.
So the central theme of prophecy all the way from Genesis 
to Malachi—and on through to the Revelation—is the unfold-
124
PROPHETIC WITNESS CONCERNING THE “LAST THINGS” 125
ing story of the redemption of lost man. That is its lofty pur­
pose. From the first whisper of hope in Eden to the last paean of 
triumph in the Apocalypse, the restoration of the image of God 
in the soul is the dominant note of inspired revelation. Proph­
ecy presents the full sweep of this glorious plan of redemption. 
And eschatology deals with the last portion thereof.
II. Outline Prophecies Mark Out Highway of the Centuries
The outline prophecies of the Old Testament are most 
completely presented by the prophet Daniel. These set forth a 
continuous sequence of epochs, as well as major events, span­
ning the centuries from the time of Daniel onward and reach­
ing to the climax of the ages. Interwoven into these outline 
coverages are the great prophetic time periods—the 70 weeks, 
the 1260, 1290, 1335, and 2300 year-days—which are concerned 
with the specific events, epochs, and activities. And these, in 
combination, constitute the inspired timetable of the cen­
turies.2
1. 
Co
n
t
in
u
it
y, 
Com
pr
ehensiv
en
ess, 
and 
R
epet
it
io
n.—
 
The characteristics of Daniel’s outline prophecies are conti­
nuity, comprehensiveness, and the principle of repetition—as 
the prophet four times covers the grand outline, repeating for 
emphasis and amplification, and establishing beyond all ques­
tion the landmarks mapping out the highway of the centuries. 
The establishment of the eternal kingdom of God is the termi­
nus in each unfoldment, when all earthly dominions are super­
seded by the eternal kingdom of God, with the redeemed 
saints as its citizens forevermore.
These long-range outline prophecies, extending to the 
end of the age, therefore involve in their closing sections 
the various aspects of eschatology—emphasizing the 
last 
things, and specifically the climactic close of the age, involv­
ing the Second Advent, resurrection, judgment, establishment
2 For documented evidence see L. E. Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers,
4 volumes.
The Metallic Image of a Man, Symbolizing The Kingdoms of Man Will Be Shattered by
the Sequence of Nations From the Prophet the Stone Symbol of the Kingdom of God,
Daniel’s Day, Leads on to the Last Days of Soon to End the Reign of Sin, Terror, and
Destiny at the World’s End. 
Death Forever.
RUSSELL HARLAN, ARTIST
© 1955 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
PAUL REMMEY, ARTIST
© 1944 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
of the everlasting kindgom, the future rewards of the right­
eous, and the final destruction of the wicked. Scrutiny of the 
terminal sections of Daniel’s multiple prophecies is therefore 
essential to our quest.
2. 
Destiny of World Powers of History Portrayed.—
The symbolism of the' great metallic image of Daniel 2, rec­
ognized as constituting the ABC of all outline prophecy, pre­
sents the far-reaching vista of the life span and destiny of the 
great world powers of history, and lifts the veil on the “deep 
and secret things” (v. 22)—particularly as to “what shall be 
in the latter days” (vs. 28, 29).
126
PROPHETIC WITNESS CONCERNING THE “LAST THINGS” 127
A huge symbolic colossus of a man, comprised of gold, 
silver, bronze, iron, and clay, is succeeded by a mystic stone that 
smites the image on the feet, grinding the entire image 
to powder, 
and becoming a mountain which 
fills 
the 
whole earth. These four consecutive metals symbolically por­
tray the course of world empires until the shattering stone, 
representing the kingdom of God, ends man’s rule and makes 
way for God’s eternal kingdom. It presents the vast sweep 
of the ages.
3. Course of Empire Gives Way to God’s Kingdom.— 
Then, paralleling this symbolism of Daniel 2, come the four 
symbolic beasts in Daniel 7, rising in succession out of the sea 
of nations—the Babylonian lion, Persian bear, Grecian leopard, 
and Roman nondescript beast (the same four world powers) 
—followed by a multiple-kingdom period, in which we now 
live. Then is to follow the establishment of the kingdom of 
God.
So the scintillating metal image and pulverizing stone (chap. 
2), the wild beasts rising from the sea (chap. 7), and the bat­
tling ram and the speeding he-goat clashing in chapter 8, all por­
tray the rise and fall of these great nations of the past, in God’s 
charted course of empire, and their final terminus.
Thus while there is a distinct eschatological emphasis run­
ning all through the Old Testament prophets, Daniel not only 
presents the all-encompassing outline of the major epochs of 
history but gives the most complete and comprehensive herald­
ing of the “time of the end,” leading to the time of the resur­
rection of the righteous, the establishment of the eternal king­
dom of God, and the final destruction of the wicked.
4. Now Living in “Time of End.”—The identity of Dan­
iel’s four world powers—Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and 
Rome in the grand outline, with Rome, the fourth empire, di­
vided into ten major divisions—is attested by hundreds of 
leading scholars of all faiths across the centuries. It is significant 
that there was widespread recognition in the early decades of
128
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
the nineteenth century of the fact that mankind has now en­
tered the prophesied “time of the end.” *
The evidence is so overwhelming and so well established 
—attested by men of so many lands and many faiths—that it 
cannot be brushed off as simply visionary speculation. There 
has been a fundamental understanding stemming from the 
prophetic books of the Old and New Testaments, based upon 
these unmistakable predictions of the prophets of old.
5. Sublimity of Revelation Surpasses Human Compre­
hension.—The sublimity of the scenes presented by the 
prophet Daniel surpasses human comprehension. These scenes 
disclose the plans and purposes of God for ending the tragic 
innovation of sin, for recognizing and rewarding the characters 
that will stand throughout eternity, that will put an end to 
the author of sin, quash forever his lie in Eden, and terminate 
his deception of the human race.
This divine plan of redemption, as here outlined, exempli­
fies the wisdom and love of God, and is imperative for the re­
covery of lost man. It constitutes God’s matchless solution for 
the sin problem. In it justice and mercy meet, and everlasting 
righteousness and peace are established.
Here again the two advents constitute the essence of the 
portrayal. For as surely as the incarnation led to the cross, the 
cross to the tomb, and the empty _tomb to the throne, so 
surely do the ministration before the throne and the judgment 
scenes lead to Christ’s coming again in glory and the establish­
ment of His eternal kingdom.
This divine portrayal and provision touches the deepest 
depths and reaches the highest heights in the whole range of 
human contemplation of man’s sin and God’s redemptive rem-
3 Beginning at the outset of the nineteenth century, scores of religious leaders of all 
faiths—on both sides of the Atlantic and independently of one another—began to declare their 
common conviction that mankind had entered the fateful “time of the end,” or “latter days,” 
or epoch of the last things, repeatedly foretold by Old Testament prophet and New Testament 
apostle. In the course of the century, that conviction became worldwide among conspicuous stu­
dents of prophecy in all faiths, until the belief is now widespread that the second coming of 
Christ, with all its concurrent events and involvements, is drawing near. Full documented 
discussion appears in L. E. Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, vols. 3 and 4.
HERBERT RUOEEN, ARTIST 
© 1955 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
The Final Event in Human History Is the World-shattering Second Advent 
With Its Resurrection and Bestowal of Immortality Upon the Righteous.
edy—man’s total ruin by sin being met by God’s complete sal­
vation in Christ. It constitutes, we repeat, the only true philos­
ophy of history. Indeed, there is nothing more profound in 
the whole range of human destiny than man’s fortune and fate 
in the hands of divine purpose and power, now on its way to 
consummation.
As stated, it compasses the whole of time—that portion of 
eternity marked off for the redemption of a lost race. It con­
stitutes the ultimate in divine revelation and redemptive 
achievement. God is holy and righteous, and cannot condone 
sin. Neither can He ignore sin. He must therefore judge sin, 
and propitiation must be made in order to save man. And that 
very act of expiation, by Christ, reconciles man to God. Thus ^ 
lost man is restored to his lost estate.
5
129
PROPHETIC WITNESS CONCERNING THE “LAST THINGS” 131
III. Significance of “Day of the Lord” and Cognate Terms
1. Transcendent “Day of the Lord.”—There are sev­
eral similar terms of increasing intensity that appear in the 
writings of the Old Testament prophets. These are: “The day” 
(Mai. 4:1); “latter day” (Job 19:25); “day of the Lord” (Isa. 
2:12; 13:6, 9; Eze. 30:3; Joel 2:11; Amos 5:18; Zech. 14:
1); “day of his coming” (Mai. 3:2); “great day of the Lord”
(Zeph. 1:14); “great and the terrible day of the Lord” (Joel 
2:31); “great and dreadful day of the Lord” (Mai. 4:5); 
“day of the Lord’s anger” (Zeph. 2:2, 3); “day of the Lord’s
wrath” (Zeph. 1:18). Job and Daniel both refer to the “latter
days” (Job 19:25; Dan. 2:28; 10:14), and Daniel alludes to the 
coming “time of the end” 
(Dan. 8:17; 11:35, 40; 12:9)/ 
and to the “time of trouble” (Dan. 12:1). Here are two ex­
amples:
“That day is a day of wrath, a day of trouble and distress, a day of 
wasteness and desolation, a day of darkness and gloominess, a day of 
clouds and thick darkness, a day of the trumpet and alarm against the 
fenced cities, and against the high towers. And I will bring distress upon 
men, that they shall walk like blind men, because they have sinned against 
the Lord: and their blood shall be poured out as dust, and their flesh as 
the dung. Neither their silver nor their gold shall be able to deliver them 
in the day of the Lord’s wrath; but the whole land shall be devoured by 
the fire of his jealousy: for he shall make even a speedy riddance of all 
them that dwell in the land” (Zeph. 1:15-18).
“And there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there 
was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall 
be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book” (Dan. 12:1).
2. Second Advent to Terminate “Latter Days.”—The 
Old Testament is replete with prophecies of the Second Advent 
and its attendant events. From Enoch to Malachi, the prophets 
graphically foretold Christ’s coming in power and glory to 
bring salvation and to execute judgment. The Advent was to all 
the “hope of all ages,” the “desire of all saints.’^Jfob expected his 
Redeemer to stand on the earth at the “latter day.” Then fol­
low the holy hopes of others:
‘The New Testament writers usually refer to this period as the “latter times” (1 Tim. 
4:1), “last days” (2 Tim. 3:1), or equivalent phrases.
CLYDE PROVONSHA, ARTIST 
© 1948 BY THE SOUTHERN PUBLISHING ASSN.
Transcendent, Awesome Glory Will Mark Christ’s Re­
turn to Earth to Consummate the Plan of Redemption.
Then Will Our Immortality Be Bestowed.
132
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
“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: whom I shall see for myself, and 
mine eyes shall behold, and not another” (Job 19:25-27).
"Our God shall come, and shall not keep silence: a fire shall devour 
before him, and it shall be very tempestuous round about him. He shall 
call to the heavens from above, and to the earth, that he may judge his 
people. Gather my saints together unto me; those that have made a cove­
nant with me by sacrifice” (Ps. 50:3-5).
"For he cometh to judge the earth: he shall judge the world with
righteousness, and the people with his truth” (Ps. 96:13).
“Behold, the Lord hath proclaimed unto the end of the world, Say 
ye to the daughter of Zion, Behold, thy salvation cometh; behold, his reward 
is with him, and his work before him” (Isa. 62:11).
“And I will shake all nations, and the desire of all nations 
shall come:
and I will fill this house with glory, saith the Lord of hosts” (Haggai 2:7).
“And the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even 
the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, 
saith the Lord of hosts. But who may abide the day of his coming? and 
who shall stand when he appeareth? for he is like a refiner’s fire, and like 
fullers' soap: and he shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver” (Mai. 3:1-3).
And as recorded in the New Testament:
“Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, 
Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, to execute 
judgment upon all” ungodly sinners and bring salvation to His saints 
(Jude 14, 15).
And as Enoch was “translated that he should not see 
death” (Heb. 11:5; Gen. 5:24), and therefore lives today—in 
Heaven above with his Creator and Redeemer—it follows 
that the first preacher, or prophet, of the Second Advent is still
living!
3. 
Resurrection Is Climactic Feature of Advent.—A 
score of varied expressions are used, all meaning the same 
thing, to indicate bodily resurrection from the grave, living 
again at the coming and call of the Life-giver. Here are the 
key words in their various expressions:
“Awake” (Job 14:12).
“Awake, with thy likeness” (Ps. 17:15).
"Behold thy face in righteousness” (Ps. 17:15).
“Arise” (Isa. 26:19).
“Raised out of their sleep” (Job 14:12).
FRANKLIN BOOTH, ARTIST 
©1944 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
The End of Time Impends—the Climax of the Ages, the End of Sin and Death, 
the Bestowal of Life, and Beginning of Eternity.
“In my flesh shall I see God” (Job 19:26).
“Remembered” (Job 24:20).
“My change come” (Job 14:14).
“Thy dead men shall live” (Isa. 26:19).
“Together with my dead body shall they arise” (Isa. 26:19). 
“Live again” (Job 14:14).
“Thou shalt call, and I will answer thee” (Job 14:15).
133
134
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
“Redeem . . . from the power of the grave” (Ps. 49:15).
“Swallow up death in victory” (Isa. 25:8).
“Put my spirit in you, and ye shall live” (Eze. 37:14).
“They lived, and stood up” (Eze. 37:10).
“Shall awake” (Dan. 12:2).
“Ransom them from the power of the grave” and “redeem them 
from death” (Hosea 13:14).
4. Eternal Restoration Is Reward of Righteous.— 
The lost Paradise will be restored and immortality conferred 
and endless joy and peace will be the reward of the righteous 
forevermore:
“For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall 
remain before me, saith the Lord, so shall your seed and your name 
remain" (Isa. 66:22).
“But the saints of the most High shall take the kingdom, and possess 
the kingdom for ever, even for ever and ever” (Dan. 7:18).
“And the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom 
under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the 
most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions 
shall serve and obey him” (v. 27).
“Those that wait upon the Lord, they shall inherit the earth. . . . But 
the meek shall inherit the earth; and shall delight themselves in the 
abundance of peace” (Ps. 37:9-11).
“In thy presence is fulness of joy; at thy right hand there are pleasures 
for evermore" (Ps. 16:11).
5. Wicked 
to 
Receive 
Punitive Destruction.—Many 
terms are employed to specify the ultimate and utter destruc­
tion of the wicked—involving complete cessation of being, be­
coming as though they had not been. The leading expressions 
are:
“Burn them up” (Mai. 4:1).
“Destroyed” (Ps. 37:38); “wicked will he destroy” (Ps. 145:20).
“Consume,” “consume away” (Ps. 37:20).
“Perish” (Ps. 37:20; 68:2).
“Cut off” (Ps. 37:22, 34; 94:23).
“Not be” (Ps. 37:10, 36).
“They shall be ashes” (Mai. 4:3).
“Like the chaff . . . the wind carried them away” (Dan. 2:35).
The completeness of the Old Testament picture is im­
pressive. A tremendous portrayal of the plan of God is 
presented.
PROPHETIC WITNESS CONCERNING THE “LAST THINGS” 135
IV. Solemn Procession of Prophetic Witnesses Testify
1. 
Panoramic Survey of Old Testament Witnesses.— 
As we have already observed, the prophesied “time of the end” 
(Dan. 8:17, 19), climaxing with the “day of the Lord,” is that 
final segment of time leading up to and terminating with the 
“end”—the end of the age, or present world order. It there­
fore leads to and through the time of God’s judgments, the 
close of human probation, the Second Advent and resurrection, 
the final rewards and punishments, the conferring of the cove­
nanted immortality upon the righteous, and the utter destruc­
tion and dissolution of sinners forevermore—and thus the end­
ing of the sin problem.
A score of Old Testament prophets proclaim the coming 
of the “day of the Lord” with all of its involvements—em­
bracing the eternal overthrow of wickedness and the everlast­
ing establishment of righteousness. There are about eight 
categories of frequently reiterated events that are stressed:
(1) 
The coming of the Lord in power and glory, (2) the 
resurrection of the righteous, (3) the convulsions of nature,
(4) the attendant fire and destruction, (5) the resultant deso­
lation, (6) the judgment and punishment for sin, (7) the 
kingdom of blessedness; and (8) the new heavens and the new 
earth. This sequence of tremendous events of course involves 
divine interposition in the affairs of mankind and the physical 
world.
It may well be noted that many of the characteristic New 
Testament expressions in this field are drawn directly from the 
Old Testament. There the coming and the kingdom of Mes­
siah are constantly stressed by Inspiration, far beyond the nar­
row provincial concepts increasingly envisioned and adopted by 
the Jews. Jehovah as the righteous Judge and the future king­
dom of God for the regenerate of all peoples were constantly 
portrayed in vivid phrasings.
Let us now take a sweeping survey of the witness of the 
Old Testament prophets, and note their testimony.
2. 
Constant Succession 
of Eschatological Glimpses. 
—The climax of human history has intrigued men through­
out the centuries. But, far more significantly, it has engrossed 
the thoughts and pens of God’s prophets. Eschatological 
glimpses of the last things appear in constant succession in 
their inspired writings. Here are some of the many Old Testa­
ment declarations:
(1) Job—tells of the great resurrection day, when the 
heavens depart, and the Life-giver calls forth the sleeping 
dead:
“Man lieth down, and riseth not: till the heavens be no more, they shall 
not awake, nor be raised out of their sleep. . . . All the days of my appointed 
time will I wait, till my change come. Thou shalt call, and I will answer 
thee” (Job 14:12-15).
(2) David—declares that judgment by fire from Heaven 
has been prepared for sinners: “Upon the wicked he shall rain 
snares, fire and brimstone, and an horrible tempest: this shall 
be the portion of their cup” (Ps. 11:6).
(3) Solomon—sets forth the expectation of a judgment 
at the end of the world:
“Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep 
his commandments.. . . For God shall bring every work into judgment, with 
every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil” (Eccl. 
12:13, 14).
(4) 
D
a
n
iel—gives a multiple testimony. Among other 
points he forewarns:
“And there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was 
a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be 
delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book. And many 
of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting 
life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt” .(Dan. 12:1, 2; cf. Matt. 
25:46).
(5) 
Ezekiel—passing over Isaiah for the moment, we find 
that Ezekiel stresses the responsibility of the soul to God, then 
declares, “The soul that sinneth, it shall die” (Eze. 18:4). 
And he emphasizes the resurrection of the body in his graphic 
portrayal of the vision of the dry bones reclothed with flesh
136 
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
PROPHETIC WITNESS CONCERNING THE “LAST THINGS“ 137
by God’s command, and filled again with the “breath,” or 
“spirit,” of life (Eze. 37^ especially vs. 5, 6, 14).
(6) 
Hosea—holds forth the hope of the future tri­
umph of righteousness in the Messianic kingdom, and affirms 
the hope of the resurrection: “I will ransom them from the 
power of the grave; I will redeem them from death: O death, 
I will be thy plagues; O grave, I will be thy destruction” 
(Hosea 13:14).
(7) Joel—looks forward to the latter day, when there 
will be “wonders in the heavens and in the earth” and celestial 
signs seen “before the great and the terrible day of the Lord 
come” (Joel 2:30, 31). Then he assures that a “remnant” will be 
delivered, and the nations judged, as the Lord shall “roar out 
of Zion, and utter his voice from Jerusalem” (chap. 3:16). 
And finally, a new Jerusalem will become God’s dwelling place 
forever (chap. 3). He pictures the dark antecedent “day of 
the Lord” in vivid terms:
“Blow ye the trumpet in Zion, and sound an alarm in my holy moun­
tain: let all the inhabitants of the land tremble: for the day of the Lord 
cometh, for it is nigh at hand; a day of darkness and of gloominess, a day 
of clouds and of thick darkness.” “The day of the Lord is great and very 
terrible; and who can abide it?” (Joel 2:1, 2, 11).
(8) Amos—attacks the popular current concept of the 
day of the Lord as vindicating not merely Israel but righteous­
ness. And he cries, “Woe unto you that desire the day of the 
Lord! to what end is it for you? the day of the Lord is darkness, 
and not light” (Amos 5:18). And he likewise warns of celes­
tial signs—how the Lord of hosts “in that day . . . will cause 
the sun to go down at noon, and . . . will darken the earth in 
the clear day” (chap. 8:9).
(9) 
Habakkuk—foretells the glad time when, with all 
tribulations past, “the earth shall be filled with the knowledge 
of the glory of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea” (Hab. 
2:14).
(10) Zephaniah—warns of the approaching “day of the 
Lord” (Zeph. 1:14): “A day of wrath, a day of trouble and
138
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
distress, a day of wasteness and desolation, a day of darkness and 
gloominess, a day of clouds and thick darkness” (v. 15).
But when the tempest is past then all the righteous will 
serve God “with one consent” (chap. 3:8, 9).
(11) Zecha
r
ia
h—presents both the gloom and the glory 
of the “latter days,” as well as the Messianic Era, in which the 
Gentiles are to be converted (Zech. 2:11).
(12) Malachi—tells of the “messenger of the covenant” 
who will “suddenly come to his temple,” but comes in judg­
ment: “Who may abide the day of his coming? and who shall 
stand when he appeareth? for he is like a refiner’s fire” (Mai. 
3:2).
His final chapter describes graphically “the great and the 
terrible day of the Lord”—the day that “shall burn as an 
oven,” consuming the wicked like “stubble,” reducing them 
to “ashes,” and leaving them “neither root nor branch” (chap. 
4:1). Then shall the eternal “Sun of righteousness arise with 
healing in his wings” (v. 2).
These all portray, in various inspired phrasings, the “last 
things,” the events of the “latter days,” “time of the end,” and 
“great day of the Lord.” That is Old Testament eschatology.
V. Isaiah—Star Witness on Inspiration’s Witness Stand
Isaiah—portrays the glories of the new heavens and the 
new earth to come. But first he pictures the preceding general 
judgments. The testimony of these prophetic witnesses has a 
strikingly similar pattern, climaxing with the Second Advent 
and the concurrent literal resurrection of the righteous. Here 
is Isaiah’s characteristic portrayal of the dread scenes of desola­
tion, when the Lord returns in judgment: “Behold, the Lord 
maketh the earth empty, and maketh it waste, and turneth it 
upside down, and scattereth abroad the inhabitants thereof” 
(Isa. 24:1).
Then follows a succession of vivid descriptions: The earth 
is to be utterly emptied and despoiled—devoured with a curse
PROPHETIC WITNESS CONCERNING THE “LAST THINGS” 139
—broken down and desolated—the inhabitants gathered to­
gether as prisoners in the pit—but visited again after many 
days (chap. 24). Then comes the time when “he [the Lord] 
will swallow up death in victory,” and all tears will be wiped 
away. That is when the saints, who have waited for their Lord, 
are saved (chap. 25).
He sets forth a fervid expectation of resurrection—when 
“thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall 
they arise,” and “the earth shall cast out the dead” (chap. 26: 
19). There is also allusion to the coming of the Lord to punish 
earth’s inhabitants for their iniquity. And at that time “the 
earth also shall disclose her blood, and shall no more cover her 
slain” (chap. 26:21).
Thus the “indignation of the Lord” upon all nations is 
disclosed, and they are “utterly destroyed” (chap. 34:2)—be­
cause it is “the day of the Lord’s vengeance” (v. 8). Then 
the “streams” and the “land” are turned into “burning 
pitch,” and the “dust thereof into brimstone,” as vast destruc­
tion reigns (v. 9). The tremendous physical upheavals of the 
last days are portrayed, but always with hope:
“Lift up your eyes to the heavens, and look upon the earth beneath: 
for the heavens shall vanish away like smoke, and the earth shall wax old 
like a garment, and they that dwell therein shall die in like manner: but 
my salvation shall be for ever, and my righteousness shall not be abolished” 
(Isa. 51:6; cf. 2 Peter 3:7-13; Rev. 21:1).
While there is warning that “darkness shall cover the 
earth, and gross darkness the people,” there is assurance that 
this will be followed by the coming of the glory of the Lord 
(Isa. 60:1, 2). And there is radiant promise of a “new heavens 
and a new earth,” to supersede the present sin-and-death- 
pocked earth: “For, behold, I create new heavens and a new 
earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into 
mind” (Isa. 65:17; cf. Rev. 21; 22).
But the Lord’s coming in awesome fiery judgment is again 
portrayed:
“For, behold, the Lord will come with fire, and with his chariots like 
a whirlwind, to render his anger with fury, and his rebuke with flames of
140
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
fire. For by fire and by his sword will the Lord plead with all flesh: and 
the slain of the Lord shall be many” (Isa. 66:15, 16).
Then Isaiah’s portrayals end with the glorious assurance 
to the redeemed: “For as the new heavens and the new 
earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the 
Lord, so shall your seed and your name remain’’ (v. 22).
But Isaiah, the gospel prophet, likewise gives a tremen­
dous portrayal of Christ’s first advent, when the Redeemer 
should come to Zion (Isa. 59:20). Isaiah tells graphically of 
the mission of Christ’s first advent, beginning with His birth 
(chaps. 7:14; 9:6), then His role as Suffering Servant, and on 
to His glorious triumph. (Micah even names his birthplace— 
Micah 5:2.) Tremendous is the detail of Isaiah’s inspired por­
trayal of the anguish of the Redeemer’s last hours, as “his visage 
was so marred more than any man, and his form more than 
the sons of men” (Isa. 52:14), as He gave His “back to the 
smiters,” and His “cheeks to them that plucked off the hair,” 
and hid not His face from “shame and spitting” (chap. 50:6).
Christ’s sufferings and death are all disclosed in chapter
53: “Despised and rejected”—“a man of sorrows”—bearing 
our griefs—carrying our sorrows—taking the iniquities of us 
all—“smitten of God, and afflicted”—“wounded for our trans­
gressions”—“bruised for our iniquities”—“brought as a lamb 
to the slaughter”—“taken from prison and from judgment”— 
“cut off out of the land of the living”—making His grave with 
the rich—and His soul made an offering for sin—“numbered 
with the transgressors”—justifying many—and making inter­
cession for the ransomed transgressors. It is the incomparable 
prophetic portrayal of the atonement on Calvary.
VI. Major Results Spring From “Day of the Lord”
1. 
Scenes 
o
f Judgment D
o
m
in
a
t
e 
Closing 
Por
t
r
a
ya
l. 
—Let us now summarize. First, scenes of judgment, to de­
termine the reward of the righteous and the punishment of 
the wicked, appear in the multiple portrayal:
PROPHETIC WITNESS CONCERNING THE “LAST THINGS” 141
“Our God shall come, and shall not keep silence: a fire shall devour 
before him, and it shall be very tempestuous round about him. He shall 
call to the heavens from above, and to the earth, that he may judge his 
people. Gather my saints together unto me; those that have made a covenant 
with me by sacrifice. And the heavens shall declare his righteousness: 
for God is judge himself” (Ps. 50:5-6).
“For he cometh to judge the earth: he shall judge the world with 
righteousness, and the people with his truth” (Ps. 96:13).
“For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret 
thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil” (Eccl. 12:14).
“I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did 
sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the 
pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning 
fire. A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him: thousand 
thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand 
stood before him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened” 
(Dan. 7:9, 10).
2. 
N
ew 
Ea
r
t
h 
Becomes 
Et
er
n
a
l 
H
om
e 
of 
R
ed
eem
ed. 
—The new heavens and new earth, created anew by God, be­
come the eternal home of the redeemed and now immortalized 
saints, paralleling the transcendent scenes and provisions of 
Revelation 21 and 22 and 2 Peter 3:13. This is in the eternal 
kingdom of glory that shall never end:
“And thou, O tower of the flock, the strong hold of the daughter of 
Zion, unto thee shall it come, even the first dominion; the kingdom shall
come to the daughter of Jerusalem” (Micah 4:8).
“But the meek shall inherit the earth; and shall delight themselves in 
the abundance of peace” (Ps. 37:11; cf. Matt. 5:5).
“Wait on the Lord, and keep his way, and he shall exalt thee to inherit 
the land: when the wicked are cut off, thou shalt see it” (Ps. 37:34).
“In thy presence is fulness of joy; at thy right hand there are pleasures 
for evermore” (Ps. 16:11).
“Behold, the righteous shall be recompensed in the earth” (Prov. 
11:31).
“For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former 
shall not be remembered, nor come into mind.” ‘‘The voice of weeping
shall be no more heard in her” (Isa. 65:17, 19; cf. Rev. 
21:4).
“For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall 
remain before me, saith the Lord, so shall your seed and your name remain” 
(Isa. 66:22).
“And the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom 
under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the 
most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom” (Dan. 7:27).
3. Obliteration of Sin Eventuates in Clean Universe. 
—The final disposal of sin and its author, together with all 
who have followed him, will eventuate in a clean universe, 
in which sin and its dire results will not rise up the second 
time:
“He will make an utter end: affliction shall not rise up the second time” 
(Nahum 1:9).
“For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former 
shall not be remembered, nor come into mind” (Isa. 65:17).
“They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the earth 
shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea” 
(Isa. 11:9; cf. Rev. 21:4).
“For then will I turn to the people a pure language, that they may all 
call upon the name of the Lord, to serve him with one consent” (Zeph. 3:9).
4. Resurrection 
and Millennium 
Clarified 
in 
New 
Testament.—The eschatology of the Old Testament is not, of 
course, as fully developed or expounded as in the New Testa­
ment, which complements and completes the Old. For example, 
the two resurrections (of righteous and wicked, or just and un­
just), which take place a thousand years apart, as clearly pre­
sented in the Apocalypse (Rev. 20:5, 6), are only implied in the 
Old Testament. These separated events are sometimes grouped 
together, and not sharply distinguished as to timing, as in the 
New. Similarly, the doctrine of the millennium was not as yet 
clearly developed in the Old Testament, being reserved for the 
fuller presentation of the Apocalypse.
Nevertheless, the millennium definitely follows the sec­
ond coming of Christ. According to Daniel, it is after the Son 
of man comes with the clouds of heaven that He is given—
“dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and lan­
guages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which 
shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.” 
“And the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under 
the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the most 
High, . . . and all dominions shall serve and obey him” (Dan. 7:14, 27).
The millennium is preliminary to this eternal kingdom. 
According to the psalmist the appearing of the Lord in flam­
ing fire upon His adversaries prepares the way for the establish­
142 
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
PROPHETIC WITNESS CONCERNING THE “LAST THINGS” 143
ment of His glorious kingdom, as He comes first to judge and 
then to rule the world with righteousness and the “peoples 
with equity” 
(Ps. 98:9; 96:13). The millennium is conse­
quently an interim period.5
5. Ba
r
r
en 
Condit
ion 
of Ea
r
t
h D
ur
ing M
il
l
en
n
iu
m.—
 
The Old Testament gives flash pictures of the chaotic condi­
tion of the earth during the millennial period.* But contrary 
to common expectation the saints spend the millennium in 
Heaven with Christ, with whom they ascend at His second ad­
vent (1 Thess. 4:16, 17; cf. 1 Cor. 15:51, 52), returning to this 
earth at its close.7 The condition of the earth during this period 
is one of desolation and ruin, being inhabited only by Satan 
and his evil minions (Rev. 20:1-3, 7). This is strikingly por­
trayed in the Old Testament. Then at its close the earth will 
for a time become the scene of the complete destruction of all 
evil beings in the Gehennan lake of fire (Rev. 20:9, 10). Old 
Testament intimations of the devastation are:
“I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was without form, and void; and the 
heavens, and they had no light. I beheld the mountains, and, lo, they 
trembled, and all the hills moved lightly. I beheld, and, lo, there was 
no man, and all the birds of the heavens were fled. I beheld, and, lo, the 
fruitful place was a wilderness, and all the cities thereof were broken down 
at the presence of the Lord, and by his fierce anger. For thus hath the 
Lord said, The whole land shall be desolate; yet will I not make a full 
end” (Jer. 4:23-27).
“The Lord hath a controversy with the nations, he will plead with 
all flesh; he will give them that are wicked to the sword, saith the Lord. 
. . . And the slain of the Lord shall be at that day from one end of the 
earth even unto the other end of the earth: they shall not be lamented, 
neither gathered, nor buried; they shall be dung upon the ground” (chap. 
25:31-33).
5 The clear distinction of the New Testament as to the temporary disposition of the 
living wicked, at Christ’s second advent, is not brought out clearly in the Old Testament. But 
at Christ’s second coming the living wicked are cut off, slain by the brightness of His coming— 
thus bringing about the first death of all remaining living sinners (as is the lot of all men), 
except the living righteous who are translated and immortalized without experiencing death 
(1 Cor. 15:51, 52;.l Thess. 4:15-17).
But the wicked who are slain by the brightness of the Second Advent will come up in 
the “second” resurrection, at the close of the millennial thousand years (Rev. 20:5), for final 
judgment—and then utter and final destruction through the second death.
6 Fuller portrayal of New Testament eschatology appears in connection with the New 
Testament presentation. See pp. 388-418.
7 See L. E. Froom, Prophetic Faith, vol. 4.
144
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
“The earth is utterly broken down, the earth is clean dissolved, the 
earth is moved exceedingly. The earth shall reel to and fro like a drunkard, 
and shall be removed like a cottage; and the transgression thereof shall 
be heavy upon it; and it shall fall, and not rise again. And it shall come 
to pass in that day, that the Lord shall punish the host of the high ones 
that are on high, and the kings of the earth upon the earth. And they 
shall be gathered together, as prisoners are gathered in the pit, and shall 
be shut up in the prison, and after many days shall they be visited” 
(Isa. 24:19-22).
But this will pass, and the glories of the eternal kingdom 
of the saints continue on forever.
As might be assumed, the Old Testament eschatology 
is simple, logical, and majestic. It is without a single ele­
ment degrading to the highest concepts of Deity and the divine 
philosophy of history, and with nothing to revolt the moral 
senses—nothing of the weird extravagances replete^ in pagan 
speculation and myth. It deals with the glorious destiny of the 
righteous and the irremediable doom of the wicked at the end 
of the age. That is the evidence of eschatology.
CHAPTER 
NINE
Technical Terms and Usages 
Preclude Innate Immortality
An Examination of Nephesh, Neshamah, and Riiach
This chapter, and the one to follow, will take on more of 
a technical turn than has been our wont. But somewhere along 
the way we must pause to examine more critically the Old 
Testament terms that we have occasionally touched upon. And 
this is obviously the place. Some may not be too keenly inter­
ested in this semantic angle, but such a scrutiny is essential to 
a clear understanding of the ground we are traversing. Such a 
follow-through will more than repay the effort required to 
grasp the facts involved.
I. Must Understand Key Old Testament Terms Through Usage
Words represent thoughts, ideas. When employed to por­
tray what can easily be seen—such as tangible and percepti­
ble objects—there is far less likelihood of misunderstanding 
than when used to depict invisible things or abstract ideas. 
Moreover, the difficulty is inevitably increased when such 
terms have to be translated from the idioms of one language 
into the phrasings of another. And this impediment is inten­
sified when rendering from an ancient tongue into a modern 
language. That is because of dissimilarity of thought, habit, 
customs, and forms of expression.
Furthermore, the presence of any parables, metaphors, 
and other figures of speech compound the difficulties. There­
fore the task of transferring the meaning with precision is not
145
146
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
an easy one. Also, as is candidly admitted, the theological 
viewpoint of the translator has often had a definite bearing on 
the translation. But to these challenges we must now turn.
There are five Old Testament Hebrew key words that we 
must survey in order to determine their true import. And this 
must be gained through a comprehensive tracement of their 
Biblical usage. This point cannot be overstressed. The reason 
for this procedure will become increasingly apparent as we 
continue. These terms are 
(1) nephesh 
(soul), 
(2) ruach 
(spirit), (3) neshamah (breath), (4) she’dl (the grave) and
(5) Ge Hinnom, or gehenna (devouring fire)—with their 
similarities and comparisons, contrasts and relationships.
II. Meaning of Nephesh in the Hebrew of the Old Testament
The word “soul” in the K.J.V. of the English Bible is trans­
lated from the Hebrew word nephesh in all but two cases. Since 
the word “soul” has more than one meaning in English, it is 
important to inquire what the word nephesh really means, if 
we are to understand the teaching of the Bible correctly.
1. “Nephesh” 
Has 
Several 
Common 
Meanings.—The 
Hebrew word nephesh, like the English word “soul,” has more 
than one meaning, some being not synonymous with the Eng­
lish meanings of “soul.”
Koehler and Baumgartner in their lexicon give the fol­
lowing meanings for nephesh:
1. Throat.
2. Breath, the breathing substance, making man and animal living 
beings; the soul (strictly distinct from the Greek notion of soul), the seat 
of which is in the blood.
3. Living being.
4. Soul as equal to living being, individual, person.
5. Breath, soul, personality.
6. Breath as equal to life.
7. Breath as equal to soul as the seat of moods, emotions, and passions.1
1 Lexicon in Veteris Testamenti Libros, Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner, eds., 
vol. 2, pp. 626, 627.
Quite parallel with this is the general classification of the 
various usages of nephesh adopted by Bui linger in his lexicon:
(1) “Creature”—“beast,” “thing.”
(2) “Person”—“man,” “men,” “him,” “me,” yourselves,” "himself,” 
“we,” “he,” “myself,” "her,” 
“thee,” “herself,” 
“thyself,” 
“themselves,” 
“dead,” “body,” “one,” “any,” “they,” “own,” “fellow,” “deadly,” “mor­
tally,” “soul.”
(3) “Life” and “Lives”—"ghost,” “breath.”
(4) “Desire”—“mind,” “heart,” “lust,” “pleasure,” "discontented,” 
“will,” “greedy,” “hearty,” “appetite.” 2
2. A General Definition of “Nephesh.”—With this much 
before us, perhaps it is appropriate to attempt a definition 
of nephesh. As a start, at least, we can quote a modern book 
that is the combined work of many scholars “with a thorough 
knowledge of modern scholarship and theology,” to quote the 
jacket-flap description of the book. Here is the definition:
“SOUL (nephesh) means the living being. We might render it ‘person’ 
or ‘personality,’ so long as we remember that in Heb. thought even an 
animal is a nephesh. In passages of dignified or poetic diction the word is 
used instead of the personal pronoun (my soul—I or me); or to give a 
reflexive sense (his soul—himself, etc.). Roughly speaking, it means mind 
as distinct from matter (to quote the terminology of a once familiar dual­
ism), but always includes more than mind in the limited sense of the 
reasoning faculty. It includes feelings, interest, and inclination; cf. 
Jer. 15: l.”3
3. Basic Idea That of Individual Himself.—Nephesh 
comes from the root naphash, a verb used three times in the 
Old Testament (Ex. 23:12; 31:17; 2 Sam. 16:14), in each case 
with the meaning “to revive oneself” or “to refresh oneself.” 
The verb seems to go back to the basic meaning of breathing, 
and in the three times it is used the ordinary English reader 
might be tempted to translate it colloquially as “catch one’s 
breath” or “take a breather,” as after some extreme physical 
exertion.
Nephesh as meaning the individual himself, is best illus­
trated by the portrayal of man’s creation. As translated from
2 E. W. Bujlinger, A Critical Lexicon and Concordance, art.. “Soul,” p. 721.
3 A Theological Word Book of the Bible, Alan Richardson, ea., art. “Mind, Heart,”
TECHNICAL TERMS PRECLUDE INNATE IMMORTALITY 147
p. 144.
148
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
the Hebrew in the R.S.V., it reads: “The Lord God formed 
man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils 
the breath of life; and man became a living being” (Gen. 2:7). 
Since each person is a distinct unit of life, the uniqueness of 
individuality seems to be the idea emphasized in the Hebrew 
word nephesh. And since the obvious evidence of life is breath 
and breathing, it is easy to understand how nephesh is used 
of man as a living being. Thus the R.S.V. translation is an 
accurate rendering of the Hebrew word.
Nephesh is also used of animals, and is appropriately ren­
dered “creature” in both the K.J.V. and R.S.V. Since animals 
breathe as evidence of life, the Hebrew use of the word here 
seems appropriate. As a matter of fact, animals are called 
nephesh chayah (“living creatures,” K.J.V.) in Genesis 1.
The basic idea that nephesh is the individual himself, 
rather than merely a constituent part of the individual, seems 
to underlie the various usages of nephesh. From this basic idea 
springs the idiomatic use of nephesh for the personal pronoun 
—“my soul” for “I” and “me”; “thy soul” for “you,” et cetera, 
to use the common English translations in the Bible.
The majority of the occurrences of nephesh may be prop­
erly translated by “person,” “individual,” “life,” or by the 
appropriate personal pronoun.
There are also a substantial number of places in the Bible 
where nephesh applies to the inner being, if by this term we 
will understand nephesh as the seat of mind, heart, emotions, 
will, et cetera.
III. Nephesh as Translated in the English Versions
1. English Translation Reveals Significant Facts.— 
It seems proper to ask at this point whether the English 
versions really convey to the common English reader the true 
meaning of nephesh. A survey will reveal some interesting facts.
One interesting and useful analysis is to be found in The 
Companion Bible, Appendix 13. The following facts and fig­
ures are taken from it:
TECHNICAL TERMS PRECLUDE INNATE IMMORTALITY 149
Nephesh occurs in the Old Testament 754 times. In the K.J.V. and the 
R.V. it is translated “soul” 472 times, and by 44 different words in 282 
other occurrences.
Nephesh is used of the lower animals only—in 22 instances.
Nephesh is used of lower animals and man—7 times. (The first usage 
of nephesh is Genesis 1:20.)
Nephesh is used of man as an individual—53 times.
Nephesh is used of man as exercising certain powers or performing 
certain acts—96 times.
Nephesh is used of man as possessing animal appetites and passions— 
22 times.
Nephesh is used of man as exercising mental faculties and manifesting 
feelings, affections, and passions—231 times in 20 different ways.
Nephesh is used of man “cut off” by God, and being slain or killed— 
in 54 passages.
Nephesh is used of man as mortal, subject to death, but from which he 
can be delivered—in 243 passages.
Nephesh is used of man as actually dead—in 13 passages.
Finally, nephesh is used of man (all rendered “soul”) as going (1) to 
she’ol, (2) to the “grave,” (3) to “hell,” (4) to the “pit”—hence a grave,
(5) a “deep pit,” and (6) into “silence.” *
Another summary presents the facts in a slightly different
way.
In the K.J.V. the Hebrew word nephesh is translated as follows:
471 times soul (every text in the Old Testament where soul is used 
except two, Job 30:15 and Isa. 57:16).
118 times life (life’s, lives).
29 times person.
15 times mind.
15 times heart.
9 times creature.
7 times body.
5 times dead.
4 times man.
3 times me.
3 times beast.
2 times ghost.
1 time fish.
Nephesh is also translated one or more times as we, he, thee, they, her,
4 Based on [Bullinger] The Companion Bible, Appendix 13, pp. 19-21. Complete references 
for each classification and use appear on these pages, which are thus invaluable for reference 
or study.
150
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
herself, him (and other forms of the personal pronoun), and as will, appe­
tite, lust, thing, breath, etc.8
One thing is abundantly clear from this analysis. The 
Hebrew word nephesh was used in a variety of contexts with a 
variety of meanings. This is common in a language that is as 
word poor as Hebrew. To present the correct meaning it is 
necessary to use many different English words, depending for 
guidance on the context.
2. Interesting Variations in R.S.V.—Let us now turn to 
the Revised Standard Version, and make some comparisons. At 
the time of this writing the R.S.V. is the latest group-produced 
English translation of the complete Old Testament. Others are 
in preparation, and may reveal additional facts for our quest. 
A check of the computer-produced Concordance of the Revised 
Standard Version reveals that the words soul and souls are used 
200 times in the Old Testament. A cross-check with the English­
man’s Hebrew and Chaldee Concordance, which lists every text 
in which nephesh occurs, with the English translation in the 
K.J.V., reveals that only 190 times is nephesh translated soul 
in the R.S.V.
This is interesting, for it reveals that the translators were 
aware of the difficulties presented by the word soul and have 
used the other English meanings of nephesh in 281 more cases 
than the K.J.V. In the R.S.V. many of the uses of soul for 
nephesh refer to the mind, will, emotions, desires. In a few 
cases soul is retained where life or person would be appropri­
ate.
3. Problems Confront the Translators.—One text in 
particular is worthy of mention because it is often used by those 
who believe in an immortal soul that can separate from the 
body. In the R.S.V., Genesis 35:18 reads: “As her soul was 
departing (for she died), she called his name Benoni.” It 
would appear that here the revisers did not follow the principles 
they had been using in the other texts. Nephesh could very well
6 These figures are based on a comparison of The Englishman’s Hebrew and Chaldee 
Concordance, Young’s Analytical Concordance, and Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance. There are 
probably minor errors in these books, so the figures vary slightly.
TECHNICAL TERMS PRECLUDE INNATE IMMORTALITY 151
have been translated life, since the text goes on to explain that 
she died.
Several modern translators have recognized this, for they 
translate this verse in harmony with Hebrew usage to give 
the correct English meaning.
Berkeley: “With her last breath—for she expired— . . .”
Fenton: “But she breathing out her life—for 
she was dying— . . .”
Moffatt: “As her life went from her (for she 
died) . 
. .”
Knox: “. . . her life was ebbing away in her 
pangs . . .”
Quite parallel to this text is 1 Kings 
17:21, 22:
“And he stretched himself upon the child three times, and cried unto 
the Lord, and said, O Lord my God, I pray thee, let this child’s soul come 
into him again. And the Lord heard the voice of Elijah; and the soul of the 
child came into him again, and he revived.”
This child was dead, for in verse 17 it is said, “His sick­
ness was so sore, that there was no breath left in him.” He had 
stopped breathing.
Here the R.S.V. continues the use of the word “soul” 
from the K.J.V., but again in apparent violation of its princi­
ples in other texts. Several modern translations follow the 
Hebrew consistently:
Moffatt: “. . . the child’s life came back and he revived.”
Knox: “. . . the boy’s life returned to him, and he revived.”
Berkeley: “. . . the life of the child returned to him, and he lived 
again.”
Smith-Goodspeed: “. . . the life of the child came back to him again; 
so that he lived.”
Rotherham: “. . . the life of the boy came again within him and he 
lived.”
It should be added that in the new Jewish Publication So­
ciety translation, of which only the Pentateuch is available at 
present, the translators have designedly omitted the English 
word soul altogether, because in their opinion it does not cor­
rectly represent the Hebrew meaning in any text.
4. 
Three Clear Conclusions Concerning “Nephesh.”— 
It is now possible to draw some definite conclusions about 
nephesh.
152
CONDITIONAL1ST FAITH
(1) “Nephesh” is not an independent entity—something 
that is separate, or separable, from the individual himself; 
something put into one when he is brought into being, and 
that lives on after he is dead, a sort of double, another self. 
There are not two personalities in man. Man is an integer, a 
single personality, a unit.
(2) “Nephesh” does not denote something peculiar to 
man alone, distinguishing him from the animals beneath him 
in the scale of being. There is assuredly a radical difference, a 
fixed gulf, between the lowest type of man and the very highest 
order of brute or beast. But nephesh is not the differentiating 
factor, for the term nephesh is applied to lower animals as well 
as man.
(3) “Nephesh” definitely does not designate something 
in man that is immortal and indestructible.
If nephesh does not denote a separate entity that may sur­
vive death and separate from the body, is it possible that the 
word “spirit” can carry such a connotation? The English word 
“spirit” is often the translation of the Hebrew word ruach. 
So let us study this word to discover its real meaning.
IV. Ruach and Neshamah Have a Variety of Meanings
1. 
Context 
M
ust 
Indicate 
Best 
Translation.—The 
Hebrew word ruach occurs some 380 times in the Old Testa­
ment. In the majority of cases (some 360 occurrences) it is trans­
lated by three English words—“wind,” “breath,” and “spirit.” 
Thus the same word is used to carry several different meanings, 
and the context must indicate the English word that best trans­
lates the Hebrew meaning.
In the case of the translation “spirit,” the word has several 
different applications. It is used 76 times in the sense of vitality, 
courage, temper, or anger. It is used to describe the living prin­
ciple in man and animals 25 times; as the seat of the emotions 
3 times, mind 9 times; as will, volition, or heart, 3 times; and 
as moral character 16 times. As applied to God, ruach, “spirit,”
TECHNICAL TERMS PRECLUDE INNATE IMMORTALITY 153
is used some 90 times." The word is also used of angels, both 
good and bad. Since God and the angels are usually invisible 
to human sight, they may be considered spirit beings, spirits, 
and are so spoken of in the Bible.
Since breath, wind, moral character, vitality, principle of 
life, and spirit beings are all invisible, the underlying idea of 
ruach seems to suggest an invisible force, power, or being, 
which acts to produce visible results.
We are dealing with man and his nature, and we may 
therefore properly ignore all the uses of ruach (spirit) that 
refer to God and angels. We are interested in breath as evi­
dence of life, and in the principle of life with which God has 
endowed man.
2. “N
esh
a
m
a
h” and “R
u
a
ch” 
in Poet
ic Pa
r
a
l
l
el
ism.—
 
In Hebrew there is an approximating synonym for ruach 
in the word neshamah. In fact, it is this word that is used in 
the record of the creation of man. “The Lord God formed 
man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils 
the breath [neshamah] of life; and man became a living soul” 
(Gen. 2:7). Neshamah is not a common word, for it appears 
only 24 times in the Hebrew of the Old Testament. It is trans­
lated 17 times as breath; 3 times blast; 2 times spirit; once 
souls; and once inspiration. It is used with ruach in two com­
pound expressions:
“breath [neshamah] of the spirit [ruach] of life” (Gen. 7:22, margin).
"blast [neshamah\ of the breath [ruach] of his nostrils” (2 Sam. 22:16; 
Ps. 18:15, with “thy” in place of “his”).
Neshamah and ruach are also used in poetic parallelism 
in a number of verses:
“By the blast [neshamah] of God they perish, and by the breath [ruach] 
of his nostrils are they consumed” (Job 4:9).
“All the while my breath [neshamah] is in me, and the spirit [ruach] of 
God is in my nostrils” (Job 27:3).
“But there is a spirit [ruach] in man: and the inspiration [neshamah]
6 These figures are based on The Englishman’s Hebrew and Chaldee Concordance and 
Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance. There may be minor differences in the count in different 
concordances, so no claim is here made for absolute accuracy. But the exact number of times 
a word is used or translated a given way is not of prime significance to our quest.
154
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
of the Almighty giveth them understanding” (Job 32:8). ‘‘But it is the 
spirit in a man, the breath of the Almighty, that makes him understand” 
R.S.V.
“The spirit of God [ruach] hath made me, and the breath [neshamah] 
of the Almighty hath given me life” (Job 33:4).
“If he set his heart upon man, if he gather unto himself his spirit 
[ruach] and his breath [neshamah]; all flesh shall perish together, and man 
shall turn again into dust” (Job 34:14, 15).
“He . . . giveth breath [neshamah] unto the people upon it, and spirit 
[rxiach] to them that walk therein” (Isa. 42:5).
3. 
The 
Life 
Principle 
That 
God 
Imparts.—Consider 
Job 33:4, before cited, for a moment. The “spirit of God” is ob­
viously identical with the “breath of the Almighty.” And “the 
breath of the Almighty” is the source of the “breath of life” 
(or “breath [that is] life”)—as in Genesis 2:7—which God 
“breathed” into man’s “nostrils,” thereby causing the inanimate 
Adam to become a “living soul [being].”
When neshamah and/or ruach are used in this sense they 
refer to the life principle which God imparts to each new 
individual on this earth. It is equally clear that the same life 
principle is given to the animals also. In the announcement of 
the Flood to Noah, God said, “Behold, I, even I, do bring a 
flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is 
the breath of life, from under heaven” (Gen. 6:17). In the 
description of the flood catastrophe, in fulfillment of this 
threat, it is recorded, “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” (Gen. 7:21, 22).
Parenthetically we should say right here that the “breath 
of life” common to all breathing creatures does not degrade 
man to the level of a beast or elevate a beast to the level of a 
man. God has organized the various creatures of His hand with 
different qualities and natures. Just as the breath of life does 
not make a lion like a rabbit, neither does it make a man like 
a beast. Man made in the image of God is far removed from 
even the most intelligent animal.
4. 
“Ruach” Has No Separate Conscious Existence.— 
There is nothing in the Old Testament that even hints that 
ruach as the life principle has a separate conscious existence, that 
it is the man himself as distinct from the body. It is given 
to man when he comes into existence, and is withdrawn, or sur­
rendered, when he dies. It is a gift from God, and in one 
sense always belongs to Him, though man may call it his own 
while he lives. The preacher in Ecclesiastes 8:8 depicts the 
helplessness of man when God withdraws the principle of life 
—his breath: “There is no man that hath power over the spirit 
[ruach] to retain the spirit [ruach]; neither hath he power in 
the day of death.”
No, man does not have an undying spirit that continues 
in conscious existence in another sphere.
There is one more text in which ruach appears, translated 
“spirits,” which may trouble some. It is Numbers 16:22, with 
the same expression occurring again in chapter 27:16. It 
reads: “And they fell upon their faces, and said, O God, the 
God of the spirits [ruach] of all flesh, shall one man sin, and 
wilt thou be wroth with all the congregation?” The new Jew­
ish Publication Society Torah renders this as “O God, Source 
of the breath of all flesh.” This would appear to be a better 
English rendering of the Hebrew meaning, and clears up any 
difficulty the text might seem to present.
V. Relation of “Spirit” or “Breath” to Life and Death
1. 
“Breath of Life” and “Spirit of God” the Cause 
of Life.—The “breath of life,” or “spirit,” which brought life 
originally to man, is expressly declared to have been in­
breathed by God. The patriarch Job in characteristic Hebrew 
parallelism, in referring back to the creation of man, utters 
these impressive words: “The spirit [ruach] of God hath 
made me, and the breath [neshamah] of the Almighty hath 
given me life” (Job 33:4).
And in speaking of man’s death, Job states that it is
TECHNICAL TERMS PRECLUDE INNATE IMMORTALITY 155
156
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
brought about by the reversal of the creation process—God 
gathering back to Himself His “spirit [ruach] and his breath 
[,neshamah]” (Job 34:14), which He originally inbreathed, or 
infused, into man. Hence the spirit that God takes back from 
man at death is God’s own vitalizing spirit, or breath, imparted 
to man, and then returning to its originating Source. This ap­
pears also in Ecclesiastes: “Then shall the dust [by metonomy, 
the body] return to the earth as it was: and the spirit [ruach; 
not nephesh, soul] shall return unto God who gave it’’ (chap. 
12:7).
2. 
Spirit 
Distinct 
From 
Life 
It Produces.—In death 
man’s ruach (spirit) goes back to God, from whom it came 
when man was formed. While it is the presence of the spirit, 
or breath, of God that bestows life on man, it is to be par­
ticularly noted that God’s “spirit,” or “breath” (Job 33:4), is 
distinct from the life it has brought into being—just as cause 
is different from effect.
This differentiation is highly important. If the life of man 
were identical with the spirit that produced it, it would pos­
sess all the essential attributes of the spirit. But this is safe­
guarded in the Scripture account, which describes the spirit 
as the cause of life, but distinct and distinguishable from it. 
Thus the effect may perish, but the cause does not perish. 
The life of man may disappear and become extinct, while the 
spirit, or breath, from the Almighty does not. It simply returns 
to Him from whom it came.
Man has the breath, or spirit, of God within him. But the 
spirit may be withdrawn, since it is only a loan from God for 
the duration of man’s lifetime. Job significantly describes life 
as “all the while my breath [neshamah] is in me, and the spirit 
[ruach] of God is in my nostrils” (Job 27:3). Job knew that 
his spirit, or breath, was not his own, with an independent and 
innate right to keep it, but was the spirit, or breath, of God 
in his nostrils—subject to withdrawal at his Maker’s will. Job 
recognized himself as intrinsically but “dust” (Job 10:9; 34:15).
TECHNICAL TERMS PRECLUDE INNATE IMMORTALITY 157
3. 
R
est
or
a
t
ion 
of Spir
it a
t R
esur
r
ect
ion.—As the en­
trance of the spirit into man originally gave him life, so in the 
same way the restoration of the spirit, at the resurrection, re­
news his life. This is foreshown by Ezekiel’s vision of the valley 
of the dry bones—then “very dry” (Eze. 37:2) and entirely 
lifeless, having once had life but now with “no breath [spirit, 
ruach\ in them” (v. 8). And then through the action of the 
figurative “w
in
d” [breath, or spirit, ruach] life was restored 
by God’s causing His spirit, or breath, to enter into them 
again. Thus:
“Behold, I will cause breath [spirit, ruach] to enter into you [the dry 
bones], and ye shall live: and I will lay sinews upon you, and will bring up 
flesh upon you, and cover you with skin, and put breath [spirit, ruach] in 
you, and ye shall live.” “And shall put my spirit [ruach] in you, and ye shall 
live” (Eze. 37:5, 6, 14).
The life that was relinquished when the spirit left the 
body is thus renewed. And it was this renewal, or restoration 
of the spirit, or breath—the breath of God that caused life 
—that was the hope and the promise of a future life for the 
Old Testament worthies. When they knew they were dying, 
and were soon to sink back into their original earth, they com­
mended their spirits into the safekeeping of God. Thus the 
psalmist David, upon the prospect of death, said: “Into thine 
hand I commit my spirit [ruach]: thou hast redeemed me, O 
Lord God of truth. ... I trust in the Lord” (Ps. 31:5, 6).
He made the same committal that Christ later made 
(Luke 23:46). It was because he had been redeemed that 
David was able to commend his spirit with confidence into 
the hands of God. Reiterating then: God gave man his “spirit” 
at creation. But man forfeited his right to the causative spirit, 
and in consequence it is rendered back to God at (the first) 
death, going back to Him to whom it belongs.
And while the spirit is rendered back to God as a forfeit 
because of the original sin, its restoration is pledged by cove­
nant through Christ. It is the believer’s in promise—a promise 
that will not be broken, for it is “impossible for God to lie” 
(Heb. 6:18). It is kept safe for him. The separation is for the
158
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
time when the sleeper lies silently in the dust of gravedom, 
which passage of time will seem as but the twinkling of an 
eye.
VI. Fundamental Distinction Between Man and Beast
1. 
Immortality 
Not 
Conferred 
by 
Inbreathed 
“Breath.”—We would once more stress the fact that there is no 
justifiable basis for the frequent assertion that the inbreathing 
of the “breath of life” into man’s nostrils made the resultant 
“living soul [nephesh chayah]” immortal. Man is not intrin­
sically the breath of life. He simply has the breath of life.
Adam had life through the “breath of life,” or “spirit of 
God,” that was inbreathed, infused, or inspired into him at 
creation (Gen. 2:7). This principle and provision of life came 
to man from God, the sole origin of life, and at death it goes 
back to God, who gave it (Eccl. 12:7). To die is to expire, 
and to expire is to emit the last breath.
Death is therefore the separation of the “breath of life” 
from the body. Man’s present physical life, as with all the ani­
mal creation, is dependent upon the breath. When that is 
gone, both man and beast die. In that respect man has no 
pre-eminence over the beast (Eccl. 3:19). And this is irrespec­
tive of whether good or evil. Such is God’s universal law.
2. Totally Different From Brute Creation.—But, in 
the sight of God there is a vast difference between the nature 
and character and value of the respective lives of man and beast. 
Man was expressly made in the “image” of God (Gen. 1:26, 27; 
9:6; cf. 1 Cor. 11:7; 15:49); the beast was not.
Furthermore, man’s power of speech, his moral nature, 
his distinctive capability for religion and worship, and his 
capability of constant progression and fellowship with God are 
totally different from that of the brute creation, which ever 
remains at the same level of intelligence, and does not have 
fellowship with God. Man is a “son of God” (Luke 3:38); 
the beast is not.
TECHNICAL TERMS PRECLUDE INNATE IMMORTALITY 159
In addition, a fundamental difference was established by 
God in the relationships and destiny of man and beast. Thus 
man was given dominion over the lower animal creation (Gen. 
1:26); never the reverse. And while both man and beast return 
to dust, the brute simply ceases to be thereafter, whereas man 
sleeps under the watchcare of God until the resurrection. Ac­
cording to the Word, man’s “spirit,” or “breath,” goes back to 
God who gave it (Eccl. 12:7; cf. Num. 27:16; Job 12:10; 34:14, 
15; Ps. 104:29, 30; Isa. 42:5; Zech. 12:1; Heb. 12:9), and is 
hid with Christ in God awaiting the glad reunion of spirit, or 
breath, and body at the final resurrection day.
3. 
At Death Beast Ceases to Be.—Such are the funda­
mental distinctions between man and beast. They are as far 
apart as the poles, and were so designed, created, and kept by 
God. At death the beast permanently ceases to be, has no awak­
ening, no future life. That is its end. But redeemed and regen­
erated man will be called forth from his sleep by Christ the 
Life-giver, to a life that measures with the life of God, and in 
eternal communion thereafter with God.
Let none say, then, that because both have life and breath 
from God, man has no fundamental pre-eminence over the 
beast. There is no pre-eminence in this—that both die, or cease 
to live. They both expire. But there the similarity ends. Upon 
man alone will be conferred the gift of immortality, to be be­
stowed at the Second Advent and its concurrent resurrection. 
Thus man is indeed the crown of creation, made in the “image 
of God” (Gen. 5:1; Acts 17:29; 1 Cor. 11:7).
CHAPTER 
TEN
Arguments Formulate 
Unworthy Platform
Two other vital Hebrew terms must be considered ere we 
turn to certain favorite Old Testament problem texts constantly 
invoked by Immortal-Soulists in seeking to sustain their view 
of the persisting consciousness of disembodied spirits, or souls, 
after death and of the Eternal Torment of the incorrigibly 
wicked. We will then bring this survey of the Old Testament 
on the nature and destiny of man to a close. So we now turn, 
first to she’ôl and then to Gé Hinnom.
I. She’ôl’s Most Suitable Rendering Is “Gravedom”
In seeking to grasp the meaning and to understand the 
usage of the basic Hebrew terms that concern the destiny of 
man, we come to the familiar word she’ôl, which we should re­
member is always connected with death. Now, there are two 
principal reasons for the prevalent difficulty in grasping the 
true intent of she’ôl—(1) conflicting translations, and (2) 
popular misconceptions prevalent concerning Hell. These 
must be clarified and the true intent ascertained.
1. 
D
ifficu
l
t
y 
Cr
ea
ted 
by 
Va
r
ia
nt 
T
r
a
nsl
a
t
ions.—
 
First of all, variant translations of the Hebrew word she’ôl 
have made it difficult for the English reader to grasp the basic 
meaning of the word. For example, in its sixty-five occurrences 
in the Old Testament she’ôl has been given three different and 
actually contradictory renderings. In the Authorized Version,
160
WEAK ARGUMENTS FORMULATE UNWORTHY PLATFORM 161
she’ol is twenty-seven times rendered as “hell,” thirty-five 
times as “the grave,” and three times as “the pit.” (It should 
be noted at the outset that “grave,” as here used, means “the 
grave” in contrast to “a grave” [qeber] or mere burial place.)
Added to this primary difficulty is the fact that nine other 
words besides she’ol are also translated “pit.” Furthermore, 
six other words, in addition to she’ol, are translated “grave.” 1 
This obviously complicates the situation.
In the Revised Version she’ol is translated as “hell” four­
teen times, as “grave” fifteen times, and as “pit” six times. In 
thirty instances she’ol is left untranslated—just the plain trans­
literation “sheol.” In the Revised Standard Version she’ol is 
transliterated in all but two occurrences—1 Kings 2:9 and Song 
of Solomon 8:6, in both cases being rendered “grave.” The Jew­
ish Publication Society Torah transliterates she’ol in all cases. 
As a convenience for those who wish to check the various 
translations, the sixty-five instances are listed in the note be­
low.2
2. 
“H
el
l” 
a 
W
ho
ll
y 
U
nsuita
ble 
T
r
a
n
sl
a
t
ion.—The 
second major handicap to correct understanding is the popular 
misconception that Hell (one of the principal words by which 
she’ol is translated in the English versions) is commonly con­
sidered to be a place or state of fiery, endless, present torment 
for the wicked.
As mentioned, in a total of thirty-eight instances out of 
the sixty-five, in the Authorized Version she’ol is rendered 
either “the grave” or “the pit.” Now, if she’ol were to signify 
the lake burning with fire and brimstone in which the wicked 
are generally believed writhing in endless conscious misery, 
then why should she’ol ever be rendered “grave,” or “pit,” 
which it is in more than half the passages? The question is per-
1 See Bullinger, A Critical Lexicon and Concordance, art., “Hell,” p. 368.
2 The sixty-five instances in which she’ol occurs are: Gen. 37:35; 42:38 ; 44:29, 31; Num. 
16:30, 33; Deut. 32:22; 1 Sam. 2:6; 2 Sam. 22:6; 1 Kings 2:6, 9; Job 7:9; 11:8; 14:13; 17:13, 
16; 21:13; 24:19; 26:6: Ps. 6:5; 9:17; 16:10; 18:5; 30:3; 31:17; 49:14 (2), 15; 55:15; 86:13; 
88:3; 89:48: 116:3; 139:8; 141:7; Prov. 1:12; 5:5; 7:27; 9:18; 15:11, 24; 23:14; 27:20; 30:16; 
Eccl. 9:10; Song of Solomon 8:6; Isa. 5:14; 14:9, 11, 15; 28:15, 18; 38:10, 14; 57:9; Eze. 31:15, 
16, 17; 32:21, 27; Hosea 13:14 (2); Amos 9:2; Jonah 2:2; Hab. 2:5.
PAINTING BY HARRY ANDERSON 
© 1 945 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
Placed on Probation in Sinless Eden, Adam and Eve Were 
6
Candidates for Radiant Immortality if Obedient.
162
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
tinent, and the answer is simple and basic: In Old Testament 
times she’dl meant the unseen secret resting place of all the 
dead—not the place of torment for the wicked.
In the first occurrence of she’dl (in Gen. 37:35, “For I will 
go down into the grave [she’dl] unto my son mourning”), 
the revisers in the Revised Version added a marginal note, 
“Heb. she’dl, the name of the abode of the dead, answering to 
the Greek hades, Acts 2:27.” Certain texts seem to suggest this 
definition (“If I wait, the grave is mine house,” Job 17:13), 
and it presents no difficulties if we do not take it to imply 
that the dead are living in she’dl, which is contrary to other 
plain texts describing the state of man in death.
3. “Gravedom”—Most 
Suitable 
Rendering 
for 
“She’ol.”—A careful examination of the sixty-five she’dl pas­
sages will show that the word “gravedom”3—not primarily the 
place of interment or the locality of departed spirits, but the 
condition of death or the death-state—offers the nearest suita­
ble preponderant rendering. The insertion of “gravedom” for 
she’dl into the sixty-five texts where she’dl appears, would 
clarify the whole problem, and afford the nearest possible 
uniform meaning.
Thus harmony and consistency would result, and a sem­
blance of order come out of much confusion. Added to this is 
the fact that the New Testament Greek hades, equivalent of the 
Hebrew she’dl, may likewise be consistently translated grave­
dom. This is further reason for approving this term.4
4. Suspension of Life in “She’ol” Awaiting Resurrec­
tion.—In the Pentateuch and throughout the subsequent 
books of the Old Testament, she’dl is set forth as the place or 
state of death, or the dead, where deepest darkness and silence 
obtains, and in which there is total absence of life in any form. 
In she’dl all human activities cease. It is the awesome terminus
3 Employed by such eminent scholars as Canon Henry Constable, Prof. E. W. Bullinger, 
Congregationalist Chaplain J. H. Pettingell, and many others, as will be seen in volume 2.
* See Bullinger, A Critical Lexicon, art., “Hell,” p. 368; also The Companion Bible, 
Appendix 35, p. 33.
WEAK ARGUMENTS FORMULATE UNWORTHY PLATFORM 16S
toward which all human life moves. The dead who are therein 
give no sign of life. In she’dl nothing is seen or heard. There 
is no thought or perception, no activity of any kind. Good and 
bad alike are there—confined in darkness, with suspension of 
all life.
In she’dl “there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, 
nor wisdom” (Eccl. 9:10). Each is wrapped in heavy, uncon­
scious sleep,5 there to await the call of the Life-giver on the res­
urrection morn. Beyond any question she’dl is the place of 
death, darkness, and silence—gravedom.
The fact is particularly impressive that she’dl, or grave­
dom, stands in complete contrast with the state of the living 
(Deut. 30:15, 19; 1 Sam. 2:6-9), and is never connected with 
the living except by contrast. As to its duration, the dominion 
of she’dl, or the grave, lasts until, and will end only with, the 
resurrection which is its only exit. “I will ransom them from 
the power of the grave [she’ol]; I will redeem them from 
death . . . ; O grave [she’ol], I will be thy destruction” (Hosea 
13:14. Cf. Ps. 16:10 with Acts 2:27).
Man himself, as a person or individual, goes down into 
she’dl, the state of death, and remains in she’dl during the entire 
period of death. Here are confirmatory texts:
“As the cloud is consumed and vanisheth away: so he that goeth doiun 
to the grave [she’dl] shall come up no more” (Job 7:9)—that is, not until 
the resurrection.
“They [the wicked] spend their days in wealth, and in a moment go 
down to the grave [she’ol]” (Job 21:13).
“Like sheep they [the foolish] are laid in the grave [she’dl]; death shall 
feed on them” (Ps. 49:14).
5. 
D
arkness o
f “Sh
e’6l” D
issipated by Light of R
esur­
r
ect
io
n.—The concept of death and she’dl as equivalents runs 
all through the Old Testament (Prov. 5:5; 7:27; Song of Solo­
mon 8:6; Isa. 28:15; Hab. 2:5). Resurrection was understood 
and anticipated. But the sadness of the Old Testament Hebrew 
contemplation of entrance into the dark, silent, lifeless state of
5 Gen. 37:35; Job 14:12, 13; Ps. 6:5; 49:19; Eccl. 9:5-10; Isa. 38:18.
164
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
she’ol, gives way to the New Testament Christian emphasis on 
the exit from the grave under the gospel, where she’ol’s domin­
ion is broken and its rule abrogated by the triumphant resur­
rection of Christ from its power and domain. Job’s words thus 
somberly tie she’dl, darkness, corruption, and the dust, to­
gether in “gravedom.”
“If I wait, the grave [she’dl] 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 where is now my hope? . . . They shall go 
down to the bars of the pit [she’dt], when our rest together is in the dust” 
(Job 17:13-16).
However, under the gospel, the exit from gravedom 
through the assurance of resurrection, becomes luminous and 
central. Thus sadness gives way to gladness.
6. “She’ol”: 
Place 
of 
Death, 
Not 
Life.—She’dl is 
therefore the place or state of death. Not once does the Old 
Testament speak of she’ol in connection with life. Only in the 
poetical imagery of Isaiah 14 are those in she’ol said to perform 
the acts of living beings, as will be noted in Part IV. She’dl 
is therefore invariably connected with death. Hannah the 
prophetess speaks of God as the One who “bringeth down to 
the grave [she’dl], and bringeth up” (1 Sam. 2:6). In other 
words, she’dl is clearly, and always, the place of death.
“What man is he that liveth, and shall not see death? shall he deliver 
his soul from the hand of the grave [she’dl]}” (Ps. 89:48).
“The sorrows of death compassed me, and the pains of hell [she’dl] 
gat hold upon me” (Ps. 116:3).
7. “She’6l” and “Death” Are Frequently Synonymous. 
—She’dl and “death” are often equivalents. Proverbs speaks of 
the strange woman whose “feet go down to death [maweth]; 
her steps take hold on hell [she’ol]” 
(Prov. 5:5). “Her 
house is the way to hell [she’dl], going down to the chambers 
of death” (chap. 7:27). So, we repeat, she’dl and “death” are used 
in Holy Writ as synonyms. Thus: “We have made a cove­
nant with death, and with hell [she’dl] are we at agreement” 
(Isa. 28:15). And Habakkuk describes the proud as one who
“enlargeth his desire as hell [she’dl], and is as death” (Hab. 
2:5). This is invariable from the earliest book of the Old Tes­
tament through to its close.
We therefore rightly conclude that she’dl is the grave, or 
gravedom—the silent, invisible place to which God told sinful 
Adam he must go—“dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou re­
turn” (Gen. 3:19)—not to a land of living ghosts. That was 
the understanding that Job had of she’dl, or the grave, as 
noted:
“If I wait, the grave [she’ol] 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. . . . They shall go down to the bars of the 
pit [she’dl], when our rest together is in the dust” (Job 17:13-16).
II. Origin of “Gehenna” (Ge Hinnom) Symbol of 
Final Destruction
The Old Testament origins of New Testament expressions 
are significantly illustrated by the term Gehenna, frequently 
employed by Christ Himself, but involving definitive allusions 
and backgrounds rooted in the history of ancient Israel, as for 
example in Isaiah 66:23, 24.
1. 
H
istorical 
Background 
of 
“Gehenna.”—Histori­
cally, the Valley of Hinnom (or Ge Hinnom) was a narrow 
glen sweeping down from the southwestern wall of Jerusalem, 
and watered by the brook Kidron. Under the earlier Hebrew 
kings it was laid out in the form of pleasant gardens, groves, 
and pools. Here the wealthy had their summer homes. And at 
the southeastern extremity was the famed garden of Solomon 
with its Tophet, royal music grove, and its singers. But Hin­
nom came to be polluted by idolatrous shrines and “high 
places” in which the cruel and licentious rites of Egypt and 
Phoenicia were introduced, such as worship of the fire-gods by 
Ahaz (seventh century B.c.).a
WEAK ARGUMENTS FORMULATE UNWORTHY PLATFORM 165
0 Other references include “high places [idolatrous places] of Tophet” (Jer. 7:31); “they 
shall bury in Tophet” (v. 32, also 19:6); “even make this city as Tophet” (19:12); “defiled 
as the place of Tophet” (v. 13, also 2 Kings 23:10). It is to be called the “valley of slaughter.”
ISRAEL INFORMATION SERVICE, NEW YORK
Valley of Hinnom, or “Slaughter,” South of Jerusalem, Used for the Burning 
of Carcasses and Rubbish, Became a Symbol of Gehenna, and the Utter Destruc­
tion of the Wicked.
This pollution was intensified under Solomon’s successors, 
like Manasseh in the sixth century b.c. (2 Chron. 33:1-10). 
The hideous fires of Molech were kindled, and the shrieks of 
children being immolated resounded through the beautiful 
valley, as idolatrous Jews passed their infants “through the 
fire” to Molech7—becoming symbolic of the wailing and gnash­
ing of teeth to come. So Tophet came to mean “place of burn­
ing,” and the Valley of Hinnom, of “slaughter” (Jer. 7:32). It 
thus became a type, in prophecy, of all that was flagrantly 
wicked and abominable to the faithful, and of the final judg­
ment by destruction. In succeeding centuries blood flowed 
there in streams. And corpses, buried and unburied, filled 
many of the hollows—the bones of Jews, Persians, Greeks, 
Romans, Moslems, and Crusaders.
2. 
Associated 
With 
Upsurge 
of 
Necromancy.—But 
there is yet another and related angle that needs to be noted: 
“And he [Manasseh] caused his children to pass through the fire in
7 Lev. 18:21; 2 Kings 23:10; 2 Chron. 28:3; 33:6; Jer. 7:31. 
166
WEAK ARGUMENTS FORMULATE UNWORTHY PLATFORM 167
the valley of the son of Hinnom: also he observed times, and used enchant­
ments, and used witchcraft, and dealt with a familiar spirit, and with 
wizards: he wrought much evil in the sight of the Lord, to provoke him 
to anger” (2 Chron. 33:6).
Thus the heathen fires of Molech were associated with an 
upsurge of necromancy, witchcraft, and wizardry.8 They all 
went together. And their later destruction, under Josiah, be­
came a symbol of the final and utter destruction of all perver­
sions—including the false teachings and practices of alleged 
communication with the living spirits of the dead, under the 
simulating deceptions of evil angels.
3. 
Josiah Transforms Valley Into Refuse Pit.—In the 
sixth century B.C., when Josiah came to the throne, as part of 
his religious reformation the groves were burned down, the 
pleasant gardens laid waste, and the idolatrous shrines ground 
to powder. To render the valley forever unclean the bones of 
the dead were strewn over its surface. Thenceforth it became 
a vast refuse pit, into which the offal of the city was cast, and 
the carcasses of animals, along with the dead bodies of crimi­
nals so wicked as to be adjudged unworthy of burial. Here 
worms preyed upon their putrefying flesh, and fires were kept 
burning to consume the corruption. It was the place where 
refuse was burned up.
Whatever was worthless was cast into the Gehenna fires, 
there to be utterly consumed. And in case any part remained 
unburned it was devoured by worms. So there was nothing left. 
Thus Isaiah wrote prophetically: “For Tophet is ordained of 
old; . . . the pile thereof is fire and much wood; the breath of 
the Lord, like a stream of brimstone, doth kindle it” (Isa. 
30:33).
By New Testament times the idolatry had ceased and the 
ancient human sacrifices were no longer offered. But the fires 
were still burning continually for the destruction of the refuse 
of Jerusalem. 
Hence 
the 
Greek 
term 
Gehenna 
(trans­
literation of the Hebrew Ge Hinnom) was used by Christ to
8 On Spiritualism see last twelve chapters of volume 2 of Conditionalist Faith.
168
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
designate the final fires of the destructive judgments of God. 
The dread word Gehenna occurs twelve times in the New 
Testament,9 eleven of which issued from the lips of Jesus Him­
self in solemn warning of the consequences of sin. Gehenna 
is synonymous with the coming “lake of fire’’ of Revelation 
19:20; 20:10, 14, 15.
4. 
Vivid Symbol of Final Doom Portrayed.—Thus it 
was that the symbolism of the fires of the valley came to por­
tray the final destruction of the wicked in the quenchless fires 
of Gehenna. Hence Isaiah prophesied of the devouring worm 
and fire:
“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” 
(Isa. 66:24).
The dead bodies of the wicked lie in the valley, unburied 
and rotting, slowly burning amid the heaps of Jerusalem’s 
refuse, devoured by the undying worm and quenchless flame 
until the whole is consumed. But the worm consumes only 
dead flesh—thus excluding the idea of sensibility and unend­
ing torment. And the fire precludes the concurrent presence 
of the worm.
But the two together symbolize complete destruction of 
the being that has ceased to live. And the work of the worm 
and fire is eternal—not in their duration but in their eternal 
results. The sight was an awful warning to all beholders, signi­
fying an end, a dissolution, a disintegration, and a final disap­
pearance—the doom of the wicked dead!
III. Three Supporting Citations Break Down Under Scrutiny
1. 
Recourse to Weak Arguments an Unworthy Proce­
dure.—It is regrettable to see how, when bereft of strong, clear, 
positive statements from the Word declaring Innate Immor­
9 The twelve New Testament references to Gehenna (always rendered “hell”) are: 
Matt. 5:22, 29, 30; 10:28; 18:9; 23:15, 33; Mark 9:43, 45, 47; Luke 12:5; James 3:6.
WEAK ARGUMENTS FORMULATE UNWORTHY PLATFORM 169
tality for all men—and deprived of clear-cut assurances of 
persisting, conscious existence of the soul (or spirit) follow­
ing the crisis called “death”—how many Immortal-Soulists 
grasp at certain hazy, disputed passages, parables, and figura­
tive statements to sustain their views.
Such a procedure would almost appear to be an act of 
desperation that would be disdained as unworthy under vir­
tually all other circumstances. Recourse to such doubtful evi­
dence would seem to indicate an inherent weakness of their 
case. A dubious assortment of such props does not provide a 
trustworthy platform for a fundamental belief. It will not bear 
much weight or strain, and cannot endure close scrutiny. Nev­
ertheless, draft upon such is frequently made.
We must not close this Old Testament survey without 
examining, briefly, a few such citations and contentions that 
are commonly invoked. Then we will look into the inevitable 
Saul and the witch of Endor episode—always brought forward 
from Old Testament annals as primary testimony.
Without direct proof of Innate Immortality, recourse is 
often had to indirect supports—some of them of rather strange 
character. Curious Old Testament citations are claimed by 
certain believers in the immortality of the soul to support the 
postulate of disembodied life after death. First, there is the 
case of the prophet Jonah in she’61, in the belly of the great fish 
(Jonah 2). Second, there is Isaiah’s parabolic taunting ode on 
the king of Babylon in she’ol (Isa. 14:4-11). And third, there 
are the parabolic dirges by Ezekiel on the fate of Pharaoh and 
other monarchs, likewise in she’ol (Eze. 31; 32). These will 
suffice.
2. 
Jonah Not Dead: So Case Is Dismissed.—As to the 
first episode, it can be dismissed with a couple of paragraphs 
—for the simple reason that Jonah was not dead, but living and 
conscious while in the “she’ol,” or grave as it were, of the fish’s 
belly. Consequently this dramatic episode can have no bearing 
on the question of consciousness in death. Jonah’s recorded 
prayer, offered while in the belly of the fish, was this: “I cried
WILLIAM HUTCHINSON, ARTIST 
© 1955 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
The Episode of Jonah, Swallowed by the Great Fish When Cast Overboard Alive, 
Had Nothing to Do With Life After Death—for Jonah Remained Alive.
by reason of mine affliction unto the Lord, and he heard me; 
out of the belly of hell [she'ol; or margin, “the grave”] cried 
I, and thou heardest my voice” (Jonah 2:2).
Jonah went down into “she’61” he said, when he de­
scended into the waters in this living “submarine,” where none 
but dead men had ever been before. It seemed to him that 
he was practically dead. The darkness and horror of his ex­
tremity made it a veritable grave. So Jonah cried out as if he 
were already dead—and he surely would have been dead in that 
living tomb had not God heard and speedily delivered him.
But to draw from this graphic narrative of life in extrem­
ity any valid conclusion as to man’s continuing consciousness 
in death is reasoning from a totally false premise. The recital 
is not dealing with death. The case must consequently be dis­
missed forthwith, as the contention breaks down before it 
starts.
IV. Isaiah’s Parabolic Taunting Ode on King of Babylon
The taunting ode, or parable, of Isaiah 14:4-11, is like­
wise presumed by various Immortal-Soulists to teach that 
she’dl is a land of active ghost life, with ghostly memories and
170
WEAK ARGUMENTS FORMULATE UNWORTHY PLATFORM 171
thoughts of life on earth. But in the narrative itself Isaiah 
twice plainly identifies she’ol with “the grave” (vs. 9, margin, 
and 11), while personifying for the moment the eerie shades 
of the dead as infused with life, in order to utter God’s doom 
upon the tyrannical king of Babylon.
In the story conquered kings are parabolically repre­
sented as having thrones in she’ol, and sitting upon them as 
they had sat in the royal palaces from which they had been 
rudely ejected by the conquering arms of Nebuchadnezzar. 
And now, when the haughty king of Babylon, himself de­
feated and dead and descending to the grave, joins them in 
their dark domain, these departed monarchs are portrayed as 
rising up from their shadowy thrones to mock the fallen tyrant 
with feigned obeisance—but actually with insult and derision 
—just as in life they rendered him feigned homage.
1. 
Personified Trees Rejoice Over Fallen Monarch. 
—The whole earth rejoiced in Nebuchadnezzar’s overthrow, 
and here the “she’ol-eans” rejoice over the downfall of this 
tyrannical king of Babylon, as the scene shifts from earth to 
she ol, region of the dead. Even the fir trees and the cedars 
(v. 8) are introduced as uttering a derisive taunt over the 
fallen tyrant, and voicing their new security now that he is no 
more.
But this impressive parable was all in imagery—the in­
spired poet creating one of the classic odes of the Old Testa­
ment, to cast contempt upon the pride of Babylon, while its 
broad walls and mighty gates still stood imperiously on the 
plains of Chaldea. It was all in the striking figure of prosopo­
poeia/° or personification, by which the dead are represented 
as speaking.
In the same passage the prophet makes the fir trees and 
cedars of Lebanon to speak (vs. 8-10)—thus to portray, through
ln Students of literature and language are well aware of the figure of prosopopoeia, or 
personification, wherein things are frequently represented as persons. In the Sacred Writings 
these include the members of the human body (Gen. 48:14; Ps. 35:10); animals (Gen. 9:5; 
Job 12:7); products of the earth (Nahum 1:4); inanimate things (Gen. 4:10); kingdoms, states, 
and countries (Ps. 45:12)—with human actions attributed to things (Gen. 18:20; Ps. 85:10).
172
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
this literary device, how death will reduce the king of Baby­
lon to the same level as his subjects, and become fellow prison­
ers in the realm of death.
2. 
Paths of Glory Lead but to Grave.—So this she’ol, 
to which these royal inhabitants were made to descend, was 
actually the silent grave (v. 11; v. 9, margin), or gravedom. 
And these kings are so represented under this figure of per­
sonification, thus to describe their real condition, and to say to 
the king of Babylon:
“Art thou also become weak as we? art thou become like unto us? Thy 
pomp is brought down to the grave [she’ol], and the noise of thy viols: 
the worm [rimmah, “maggot”] is spread under thee, and the worms cover 
thee” (Isa. 14:10, 11).
Thus in the mind and teaching of Isaiah she’dl was none 
other than the grave, the place where worms revel in their 
feast on the dead—worms being grossly material, not spiritual. 
No one was to assume that the characters portrayed actually 
acted or spoke as pictured. The term “proverb,” 11 as here used, 
simply means a parabolic taunt (v. 4, “taunting speech,” 
margin).
It was never Isaiah’s purpose, in this impressive ode, to 
reveal the conditions of the death state. Rather, it was to fore­
cast in graphic pictorial language God’s coming judgment 
upon Israel’s great oppressor, and to show that the paths of 
cruel glory “lead but to the grave.” Thus the second argument 
in behalf of conscious persistence of the soul after death like­
wise collapses.
V. Ezekiel’s Parabolic Dirge Over Pharaoh of Egypt
The third plank in this wobbly platform of indirect evi­
dence in behalf of Immortal-Soulism is this: In Ezekiel 31 
and 32 a parabolic dirge of similar strain over Egypt proclaims 
the doom pronounced on Israel’s foes—Egypt, Babylon, Assur,
11 The Heb. mashat is rendered “proverb” nineteen times, and “parable” eighteen times 
in the Old Testament, “parable” being preferable here.
WEAK ARGUMENTS FORMULATE UNWORTHY PLATFORM 173
Elam, and Edom. The same figure of personification is em­
ployed in describing the overthrow of Pharaoh the oppressor. 
Here Pharaoh and his hosts, slain in battle against the king 
of Babylon, are portrayed in similar fashion. The “strong 
among the mighty” are represented as speaking from their 
graves in the midst of “hell” (she’dl), or gravedom, as he enters 
that dark domain to await his fate.
1. “She’ol” Contrasted W
ith State of Living.—Thus 
she’dl—“the nether parts of the earth” (Eze. 32:18, 24), full of 
graves, and so the land and state of the dead—is contrasted 
with the land and state of the living. The victims of slaughter 
had “gone down” to she’dl with their “weapons of war,” and 
with their swords laid “under their heads” (v. 27). And when 
Pharaoh, figuratively portrayed as lying among them, saw 
the “multitude” of his enemies that also were slain, he was 
“comforted” by the sight (vs. 31, 32). It is all highly figurative 
and impressive, and not at all literal. But prediction of bitter 
overthrow is spoken of the conqueror of Israel. Here is the 
dirge:
‘‘Thus saith the Lord God; In the day when he went down to the 
grave [she’ol] I caused a mourning: I covered the deep for him, and I 
restrained the floods thereof, and the great waters were stayed: and I caused 
Lebanon to mourn for him, and all the trees of the field fainted for him. 
I made the nations to shake at the sound of his fall, when I cast him down 
to hell [she’ol]12 with them that descend into the pit [she’dl]: and all the 
trees of Eden, the choice and best of Lebanon, all that drink water, shall 
be comforted in the nether parts of the earth. They also went down into 
hell [she’dl] with him unto them that be slain with the sword; and they that 
were his arm, that dwelt under his shadow in the midst of the heathen” 
(Eze. 31:15-17).
2. Parabolic Scourge Not Construed Literally.—The 
portrayal was wholly parabolic, like Jotham’s famous parable 
to Abimelech, making the trees elect a king over them, choos­
ing a bramble, et cetera, in Judges 9:8-15. Then the imagery 
of the parable is openly applied: “This is Pharaoh and all his
12 It is to be noted that the three terras “grave,” “hell,” and “pit” in these verses are 
all variant translations of the selfsame Hebrew word she’ôl.
174
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
multitude, saith the Lord God” (Eze. 31:18). Then there fol­
lows, in chapter 32, an enumeration of the various forces of 
the slain that in life had caused such terror, but are now in 
she'ol (gravedom), “whose graves are set in the sides of the pit 
[she’61]” (chap. 32:23)—their “princes” and mighty warriors 
“slain by the sword” (v. 29), which have “gone down to hell 
[she’ol, the grave] with their weapons of war” (v. 27).
They are there simply personified as speaking “out of the 
midst of hell [she’ol]” (v. 21). But the parabolic dirge is not 
to be construed literally. She’ol is the place of the silence of 
death. But the parable had nothing to do with the interme­
diate state. The lesson was that, having raised up a heathen 
nation to chasten His own people because of their moral depar­
tures, when that instrument has executed His will, God will 
not allow it to go beyond His purpose, but will send retri­
bution upon it for its own sins and cruelties.
Such literary devices are samples of testimony sometimes 
unworthily brought forward to bolster the theory of conscious­
ness in death, and of the persistence of disembodied souls or 
spirits in the nether world. But these have no actual bearing 
on the question.
VI. Saul Deceived by Necromancy of Medium of Endor
Turning from the figurative side, let us now examine a 
problem passage, constantly cited in support of Immortal- 
Soulism. Modern Spiritualism, or spiritism, is not new in its 
operations. Its ancient counterpart and forerunner had al­
ready made its tragic appearance back in ancient Israel’s day, 
and before. But so grave was this corrupting and forbidden 
practice considered by God, and so sinister were its involve­
ments, that under the theocracy those who sought out the prac­
titioners of this evil art were to be “cut off,” or excommuni­
cated, from the commonwealth of Israel.
So heinous was the fraudulency of this pretended com-
WEAK ARGUMENTS FORMULATE UNWORTHY PLATFORM 175
T. MORAN, ARTIST
The Witch of Endor Per­
petrated a Cruel Hoax on 
King Saul When a “Familiar 
Spirit” 
Simulated 
the 
Prophet Samuel—a Capital 
Offense in the Time of the 
Theocracy.
munication with the dead regarded that the mediums, when 
apprehended, were to be summarily put to death by stoning. 
The solemn warning against necromancy or consulting with 
“familiar spirits,” was written thus into law by Israel: “Regard 
not them that have familiar spirits, neither seek after wizards, 
to be defiled by them: I am the Lord your God” (Lev. 19:31).
1. 
Evil Spir
it
s Per
sona
ting 
t
h
e D
ea
d.—“Familiar spir­
its” were none other than “evil spirits,” or demons—fallen an­
gels personating the dead—appearing at the beck and call of a 
medium who had entered into sinister league with them. And 
here was the dread penalty then provided for such transgres­
sion, first for the seeker and then the medium:
“The soul that turneth after such as have familiar spirits, ... I will 
even set my face against that soul, and will cut him off from among his 
people” (Lev. 20:6).
176
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
“A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, 
shall surely be put to death: they shall stone them with stones” (v. 27).13
That was the gravity of the evil traffic.
Later, this further admonition was given by the prophet 
Isaiah:
“And when they shall say unto you, Seek unto them that have familiar 
spirits, and unto wizards that peep, and that mutter: should not a people 
seek unto their God? for the living to the dead? To the law and to the 
testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is 
no light in them” (Isa. 8:19, 20).
This peeping and muttering refers to the incoherent in­
cantations of the pagan mysteries, which they simulated. Such an 
inspired admonition surely constitutes a most solemn warning 
against all ancient or modern spiritism, and is an appeal to 
heed the declarations of the Word regarding the true nature 
and condition of man in death. And it should be added that 
the traditional belief that death is but life continuing on in 
spirit form, is the foundational basis of Spiritualism in its 
various forms, which has blighted the centuries, climaxing in 
these latter times.
2. 
Saul’s 
Recourse 
to 
Forbidden 
C
raft 
of 
Necro­
mancy.—Nevertheless, the case of Saul and the witch of En- 
dor is constantly and fervently invoked by those maintaining 
the continued consciousness of the dead. Let us therefore ex­
amine the circumstances of that dramatic episode. Israel’s apos­
tate King Saul, when the Lord refused to answer him, sought 
out “a woman [or medium] that hath a familiar spirit” (1 Sam. 
28:7), to inquire of her. Here is the story:
Disguising himself to avoid recognition, Saul came to the 
woman, significantly under the suggestive shelter of “night,” 
and asked her to bring up the prophet Samuel, who had been 
dead for some time, to elicit information from him (v. 8). 
After being assured by an oath that she would not be betrayed 
or harmed for cooperation (vs. 9, 10), she then brought up
13 Compare Deuteronomy 18:10-12 where witches and wizards, consulters with familiar 
spirits, or necromancers (i.e., seekers unto the dead) are declared to be an abomination unto the 
Lord. The modern counterpart is dealt with fully in the closing chapters of volume 2.
WEAK ARGUMENTS FORMULATE UNWORTHY PLATFORM 177
(not down, or forth) “out of the earth” (v. 13)—allegedly 
some subterranean region—one of the “gods” in characteristic 
spirit manifestation, whom she described as an “old man,” and 
“covered with a mantle” (v. 14).
This materialization took place in the questionable abode 
of a forbidden, outlawed sorceress, invoking the alleged 
“shade” of the old prophet said to be wearing a “mantle.” (It 
might be asked, If it was Samuel’s “spirit,” supposed to be 
with God, why the mantle? If it was Samuel’s body, up from 
the grave, would it not rather be with “graveclothes,” as with 
Lazarus [John 11:44]?)
3. Saul Deceived; Slain for His Transgressions.—The 
record then states that Saul “perceived”—that is, understood 
indirectly, for he himself saw nothing—that it was “Samuel.” 
But this evil “spirit,” impersonating Samuel, first chided Saul 
for disquieting him when the Lord had departed from the king. 
This alleged “spirit” then proceeded to predict Saul's defeat 
and death. Perhaps this “lying spirit” here gave a true mes­
sage, as in the case of Ahab of old (2 Chron. 18:19-22). But 
the sad sequel was simply this:
“So Saul died for his transgression which he committed against the 
Lord, even against the word of the Lord, which he kept not, and also for 
asking counsel of one that had a familiar spirit, to enquire of it; and en­
quired not of the Lord: therefore he [the Lord] slew him, and turned the 
kingdom unto David the son of Jesse" (1 Chron. 10:13, 14).
So back through the centuries this question of the nature 
and destiny of man, and purported communication with the 
“dead,” has been a vital issue, constantly fraught with disaster 
for those disobeying the Word of God. Saul’s act was a trans­
gression, punishable with death. Why, then, is such testimony 
valid? But let us probe into this unsavory episode a little 
deeper.
4. Crux of the Whole Portrayal.—The crux of this 
whole occurrence hinges on whether this appearance, or ma­
terialization, was wrought by the power of God or was maneu-
178
As in the Séances of Ancient 
Necromancy, So the Mediums 
of Modern Spiritualism Pro­
duce Conniving Spirits to 
Simulate the Dead and De­
lude the Living.
vered by Satan. If by Satan, we may well look for deception, for 
he began his duplicity back in Eden by asserting the Innate 
Immortality of man, and has ever since persisted in his trickery 
by tenaciously perpetuating his original contention wherever 
and whenever he can gain a foothold.
Note the facts closely: Saul was violating God’s express 
command by communicating with such a character and by en­
gaging in a sinister practice sternly forbidden by God. He was 
deceived by this “familiar spirit” simulating Samuel, who first 
of all significantly put the medium on her guard as to the iden­
tity of Saul. And the appearance in the night, under the in­
cantations of an abandoned woman, was that of “an old 
man” “with a mantle.”
It is to be particularly noted that Saul had to ask the 
medium, “What sawest thou?” “What form is he of?” 
(1 
Sam. 28:13, 14). Saul himself never saw the simulating spirit
© 1959 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
WILLIAM HEASLIP, ARTIST
WEAK ARGUMENTS FORMULATE UNWORTHY PLATFORM 179
that was brought “up” through the agency of Satan. And while 
the appearance was actual, it was simply a manifestation of an­
cient necromancy, sorcery, witchcraft, spiritism. It was a gross 
deception, a simulation of Samuel by a depraved “spirit,” 
palmed off on the desperate apostate king, and with fatal results.
5. Cruel 
Hoax 
and 
Its 
Modern 
Counterpart.—One 
major difference between ancient and modern spiritism is that 
the medium of Endor then pretended to bring the spirits “up” 
from the lower regions. Now their present counterparts claim 
to bring them “down” from the upper spheres.
How dare any firm believer in the Word of God presume 
to appeal to this episode of Saul and the witch of Endor to 
prove the continuing living existence, or immortality, of the 
soul—unless he is prepared to deny the express declarations 
of the Inspired Word, and to maintain that ancient necromancy 
and modern spiritism are a divine gift, and that the blasphe­
mous pretensions and contradictions of such lying spirits are to 
be accepted instead of the verities of the Scriptures of truth?
The Word of God expressly declares that when a man 
dies “in that very day his thoughts perish” (Ps. 146:4). But 
fallen angels do have supernatural knowledge and mystifying 
malign powers. And they have uncanny powers of deception. 
Of these we are to beware. We trespass at our peril.
Incidentally, the invoked “spirit” told Saul (through the 
medium), “To morrow shalt thou and thy sons be with me” 
(1 Sam. 28:19). Might it not be pertinent to ask, Where was this 
rendezvous to be?—in the grave? or in Heaven, where the Im- 
mortal-Soulist would expect the Lord’s prophet to be? or per­
chance in some kind of Purgatory or intermediate place? Where, 
we ask, and in what state? Further question: Do God’s prophets 
and apostate kings go to the same place—if conscious?
6. Grandeur 
of 
God’s 
W
ondrous 
Provision.—In the 
face of such artificial negativisms, how comforting it is to have 
not only the clear, positive, consistent testimony of the Old 
Testament concerning the actual mortality of man, but the
180
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
glorious assurance of immortality for the righteous as a gift 
from God through Christ, bestowed at His second advent and 
its attendant resurrection.
How good to know that in the interim of death man 
quietly sleeps until the great awakening. And finally, that the 
incorrigibly wicked will, after due and just punishment for 
their sins—and their rejection of the overtures and saving pro­
visions of God—be ultimately and utterly destroyed, passing 
out of existence.
The infinite love, righteousness, justice, grace, and mercy 
of God, as the wondrous hope of man, stand out in impres­
sive grandeur all the way from Genesis to Malachi. The in­
spired testimony of the Word is consistent and satisfying—and, 
above all, authoritative and final. Happy the lot of all who put 
their trust in the revealed provisions of God. And all this is 
amplified and intensified in the New Testament portrayal, now 
to be studied in fullness in Part II.
PART II
Comprehensive Witness of the 
New Testament
Consummating Testimony of Christ and the 
Apostles on the Origin, Nature, and Destiny
of Man
CHA PTER 
ELEVEN
Christ’s Infallible Testimony on 
Life Versus Death
I. Definitive Testimony of Jesus, Supreme Witness of All Time
1. 
Jesus 
Christ—Star 
Witness 
of 
All 
Time.—The 
apostle John presents the Lord Jesus Christ pre-eminently as 
“God.” That is the characteristic difference between John’s Gos­
pel and that of the Synoptists, who largely emphasize His human 
side. Together they make up the perfect portrayal. So John pre­
sents the God-man. Jesus’ utterances consequently have an 
authority unapproachable by any other witness or spokesman. 
Beyond challenge, He is the supreme authority, the Star Wit­
ness, than whom there is none greater and from whom there is 
no higher court of appeal. His declarations are consequently the 
ultimate in this area of inquiry. Jesus is the One for whom the 
worthies of old had waited all through Old Testament times. 
Now He speaks.
As might be expected, His witness is primarily affirmative 
rather than negative. He emphasizes life rather than death, 
though He deals definitively with both. But He is definitely 
affirmative and positive, and is never evasive. He gave no an­
swers with dual intent, as was the custom of the Delphic ora­
cles. Further, His teachings are changeless and abiding, not 
transitory or ephemeral. And He is inerrant, not faulty and 
fallible. There are no revisions or reversals of His positions. 
And Christ is unequivocal in His utterances. His declarations 
cannot be classed as “doubtful disputations” (Rom. 14:1), 
though they were the subject of acrimonious debate. His re-
183
HARRY ANDERSON, ARTIST 
© 1956 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
The Birth of the Christ Child United God With Man and Made It Possible 
for Him to Live and Die on Earth, and Rise as Conqueror of Death Forevermore.
sponses are frank and firm, never elusive or ambiguous. And 
He spoke with authority (Matt. 7:29).
2. 
Fatal Clash Comes Over Man’s Destiny.—From Him, 
then, we shall get the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but 
the truth on the nature and destiny of man. And that is just
184
CHRIST’S INFALLIBLE TESTIMONY ON LIFE VS. DEATH 185
what we need, and precisely what we want. As noted, Christ’s 
presentations were always straightforward, explicit, and faith­
ful. But because of His fidelity to truth concerning life and 
death, His utterances of necessity ran counter to tragic Jewish 
departures that had become entrenched in this area of vital 
teaching.
Christ came to earth. He came to die that others might 
have life—more abundant life, eternal life, and immortality, 
for through sin man had forfeited that imperative. He came to 
dispel error and confute falsehood, that truth might be exalted 
and right might prevail. He came to seal the doom of error and 
to crush its author. And He was ever faithful to His Heaven- 
born mission. But first let us go back to the beginnings, and to 
the foundations of the plan of redemption manifested in the in­
carnation, as disclosed in the opening chapters of John’s Gospel.
II. Transcendent Scope and Significance of Incarnation
The incarnation of the Son of God was the most stupendous 
event in the history of the world—yes, of the universe—to 
that time. God then became man. Through this mysterious 
means Christ became identified with the human race. The 
plan of redemption, conceived in the inscrutable wisdom and 
infinite power of God from the foundation of the world (Rev. 
13:8), was formulated to meet the contingency of sin’s tragic 
entrance into the newly created earth, and the fatal fall of 
man. The incarnation, then, is the core of God’s redemptive 
method for the recovery of lost man and his forfeited life. It is 
the center, the essential, the transcendent heart of Christianity 
(John 3:16).
1. 
Master Key to All Redemptive History.—The in­
carnation was not a strange isolated event, breaking suddenly 
into human history. Everything before led up to it; and all that 
followed after—the cross and the resurrection, the ascension 
and heavenly ministry, and the final restitution of all things—
186
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
grew out of it and were dependent upon it. It was the initial 
step, and thus constitutes the master key to all redemptive his­
tory.
Everything moved toward the incarnation until its ac­
complishment. The messages of prophets and seers all forecast 
and led up to it. The Gospels are the record of its accomplish­
ment, and the New Testament is the unfolding of its won­
ders. It was the mysterious “secret,” held in silence through 
eternal times (1 Cor. 2:7; Eph. 3:3-5; Col. 1:26). And it was in 
this chosen way that Christ “brought life and immortality 
to light through the gospel” (2 Tim. 1:10).
To effect the restoration of man, God became man and 
dwelt among men. And the supreme purpose of this entrance of 
the Eternal Son into our nature was to accomplish man’s re­
demption, to save him from destruction, and to restore the 
endless life he had forfeited. The incarnation invasion of hu­
man history was to snatch the scepter from the malign usurper 
and effect his overthrow. In this divine plan Christ’s humanity 
was representative, for He became the “second Adam,” the head 
of a new race, and thus provided the way back to God. So it was 
that Cod adopted humanity in the person of His Son.
2. 
Becoming Man, He Retains Humanity Forever.—In 
the incarnation, eternity entered into the conditions of time. 
At His incarnation Christ became what He was not before. He 
accepted the limitation of a human bodily life as the mode 
of His existence while on earth. And upon His ascension He 
carried His glorified body into highest Heaven (Acts 1:9-11; 
7:56; cf. Dan. 7:13), there to retain it forever, for when He 
returns at the Second Advent He comes as the Son of man 
(Matt. 24:39; 25:13, 31; 26:64; Mark 8:38; 13:26; Luke 21:36; 
Rev. 14:14).
Thus the incarnation is the most stupendous event that 
human thought can conceive—whether in itself or in its conse­
quences, which have no limit. It was actual union of the Crea­
tor with the creature, effected in the person of the Eternal 
Son of God. When He became man He did not cease to be
HARRY ANDERSON, ARTIST 
© 1957 BY THE NEW YORK CENTER
The Only Scars to Be Borne Throughout Eternity Will Be Upon the Person of 
Our Saviour, Who Died in Our Stead.
God, but became the one and only God-man. He bridged the 
gulf between God and man. Through this means He assumed 
the headship of the human race, and became the “second 
man,” the “last Adam” (1 Cor. 15:45-47).
In this way humanity was wedded to divinity in the adop­
tion of perpetual humanity by Jesus Christ. But, we repeat for 
emphasis, in the union of the Godhead with humanity, divinity 
did not destroy the humanity, and the humanity remained in 
its integrity that divinity might be revealed in and through it. 
In His incarnation Christ became the focal point of redemp­
tion’s converging lights. In Him was embodied light, life, 
love, righteousness, wisdom, power, and glory—the sevenfold 
revelation of God’s power to save.
3. 
Retains Only Scars of Sin in Universe.—Christ did 
not choose between dying at one time instead of at another. 
Rather, He chose between dying and not dying. His death was 
a death for sin, and sin is rebellion against God. His death 
canceled the curse, lifted the ban, purchased our pardon, and 
restored lost man and his forfeited life. That is why the incarna­
tion is of such transcendent significance.
Jesus Christ united Heaven and earth in one person—God 
and man—and since His return to Heaven He has not ceased to
187
188
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
be man. In His own body He will bear the only scars of sin left 
in eternity—the scars on His hands, His side, and His feet. 
Sin’s ugly scars on man will be healed forever. When Christ 
returned to the throne He carried with Him the manhood He 
had assumed, and bore it into the glory in which the Eternal 
Word had dwelt from the beginning. He is thus identified 
with man forever. That was the price of our redemption. That 
was the cost of our recovery of the life lost in Eden. That is the 
wonder of His love and grace.
4. 
Purpose of Incarnation Was Fivefold.—Summariz­
ing, we may say that the purpose of Christ’s incarnation was—
(1) To reveal God to the world (John 1:14, 18; 17:6, 26; 
1 Tim. 3:16).
(2) To redeem man by bearing the sin of man (Isa. 53: 
4-16; John 1:29, margin; Heb. 9:28; 1 Peter 2:24; 1 John 3:16).
(3) To bring God and man together 
(Gen. 28:12; 
Matt. 1:23; John 1:51; 1 Peter 3:18).
(4) To bring back endless life to dying man (John 3:15, 
16; 4:14; 5:24; 10:28; 11:25, 26; 14:19; 17:3).
(5) To destroy the devil and his works (John 12:31; 16:33; 
Rom. 8:1-4; Heb. 2:14; 1 John 3:8).
III. Eternal Life—Throbbing Heart of John’s Gospel Story
The Gospel of John, written by the “disciple whom Jesus 
loved” (John 21:20), is the best-loved book of all time. Sub­
lime in thought and unsurpassed in word, it has, more than any 
other New Testament message, captured the heart of man­
kind. Now John’s portrait of Christ is pre-eminently the por­
trayal of His deity. And “love” and “life,” as revealed and em­
bodied in Christ, are the predominant points of emphasis 
throughout.
It may rightly be said that the central message and constant 
emphasis of the Gospel of John is that of life eternal through 
Jesus Christ as God’s sole provision for escaping the sinner’s
CHRIST’S INFALLIBLE TESTIMONY ON LIFE VS. DEATH 189
designated doom of utter and ultimate destruction (John 3: 
16). The basic distinction between the lot of the saved and the 
fate of the lost is pre-eminently one of life—life without end, 
life through Christ alone, and with Him forever in His eternal 
kingdom to come. But only as one senses the dreadful destiny 
of sinful man apart from Christ, as involving total death and 
utter destruction, does the gospel of life stand out in its sub­
lime grandeur and glory. Now let us go back to the beginnings.
1. From Bleakness of Sin to Radiance of Salvation.— 
The opening chapters of the Old Testament part of the Book 
of God set forth the account of the sin and fall of our first 
parents from their estate of original innocence, and the doom 
they brought upon themselves and their posterity. This formed 
the bleak background for the radiant gospel of salvation that 
immediately began to unfold with steadily increasing clarity.
The law set forth the fearful penalty of death, that the 
gospel might present its wondrous offer of life. After the dark­
ness of sin, came the glorious light of salvation. Thus a mes­
sage of hope was commingled even with the thunders of Sinai. 
From the time of Eden onward the depression of the long 
night of estrangement from God was relieved by the outshin­
ing of the twin stars of hope and promise, as men watched and 
waited for the appearing of the Saviour throughout Old Testa­
ment times.
2. New Testament a New Revelation 
of Life.—We 
now come to the New Testament times. The New Testament 
is not merely a fuller and clearer revelation of the divine truths 
already disclosed in the Old. It is all that. But it is vastly more 
—it is a new revelation. While embracing and confirming, 
and harmonizing with, all the truths unfolded in the Old Tes­
tament—and revealing them even more clearly—the New Tes­
tament contains, we stress, other and higher truths that dis­
tinguish it as a distinctly new revelation. We use this ex­
pression advisedly. And this, as just stated, is pre-eminently a 
revelation of life through Jesus Christ alone. The Old Testa­
190
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
ment contains in undeveloped form—in type and symbol, 
prophecy and promise—inklings of truth only unfolded in full­
ness in the New Testament. There is an unmistakably progres­
sive unfolding of revelation.
And that broad and deep line of demarcation between the 
Old and the New is this clear revelation of life and immortality 
for mortal man, through Christ, effected by a new birth now 
and a resurrection from the dead at Christ’s second advent. 
And along with these comes the inseparable corollary of the 
ultimate destruction of all evil through the almighty power 
of the Son of God our Saviour, now set forth in fullness and in­
escapable clarity.
3. 
Brought About by New Spiritual Ingeneration.— 
This life is a new and higher life than our natural life, and 
he to whom it is given becomes a “new creature.” Thus: “If 
any man be in Christ, he is a new creature [ktisis, “creation”]” 
(2 Cor. 5:17).
In a way, it is the Genesis story all over again. A new life 
is generated in a responsive man by the Spirit of God. And it 
is as superior to the old Adamic life as it is more enduring. 
The first generation is natural and earthly, and because of sin 
leads to death. The second is supernatural, from above, and 
leads to eternal life with its wondrous, ultimate immortality 
bestowed at the resurrection.
This new life is “begotten” not of flesh and blood, nor of the 
will or power of man, but solely of God (John 3:3-7; 1 Peter 
1:23). And it will, in time, be invested with a new and trans­
formed spiritual body, like unto Christ’s glorious body, that 
will rise to meet Christ the Life-giver at His second coming 
(1 Cor. 15:49-53), thus to take its purchased and destined 
place in His everlasting kingdom.
Hints and foregleams of this new life are scattered through­
out the pages of the Old Testament. These are but anticipatory. 
Let it never be forgotten that only in the New Testament is it 
distinctly revealed as the gift of God through Jesus Christ
CHRIST’S INFALLIBLE TESTIMONY ON LIFE VS. DEATH 191
(Rom. 6:23; John 3:16), by whose own death and resurrec­
tion eternal life is unimpeachably assured to the believer.
IV. Two Progenitors, Two Births, Two Contrasting Destinies
Two matching lines of thought run through John’s Gos­
pel— (1) The incarnation of Deity (the divine nature) in the 
person of Jesus Christ of Nazareth that involved the union of 
the divine and human in Christ, in order that He might redeem 
man. He was both God and man, yet not two but one, in the 
unity of one person. And (2) the parallel affirmation, from the 
first paragraph to the last, that this incarnation of the divine 
Word had for its supreme object the giving of everlasting 
life to mankind through redemptive union with Christ, the 
Light of life. But it was these twin truths that aroused the 
incredulity and awakened the intense hostility of many of the 
Jews.
At the very outset of the Gospel of John the sublime dec­
laration is made: “In him [Jesus] was life1 [that is, the foun­
tain of life]; and the life was the light of men” (John 1:4). 
“Life,” as we have seen, is one of the two characteristic 
words of John’s Gospel, appearing many times in this short 
missive. Jesus came not, as did John the Baptist, merely to 
bear witness of the light of life, but pre-eminently as the 
actual Life-giver, “the way, the truth, and the life” (John 14:6).
He is the very source and embodiment, the herald and be- 
stower of eternal life. The “first man Adam was made a living 
soul [psuchen zosan];” but “the last Adam was made a quick­
ening spirit [pneuma zoopoioun],” or life-giving spirit (1 
Cor. 15:45). And John’s whole Gospel is the unfolding and ap­
plying of that glorious truth and provision. But let us pause to 
define and differentiate that life.
1. Sig
n
ifica
n
ce 
and Scope 
of 
t
h
e T
er
m 
“Lif
e.”—Cer­
1 That life was manifested (John 1:4); is obtained (3:16); is possessed (4:14); is 
sustained (6:35); is ministered (7:38); is abounding (10:10); and is resurrective (11:24, 25).
192
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
tain words are characteristic in John’s Gospel. One of the most 
conspicuous and striking is “life” (zoe), which appears 36 
times. The verb “love” (agapad) is used 37 times. And “light” 
(phos) is found 23 times, and is used especially of Christ and 
of God (John 1:4, 5; 8:12; 1 John 1:5). But the zoe-life holds 
a unique place. It is essential that we grasp John’s use of the 
term “life.” There are three Greek words rendered by the 
one word “life.” Note the fundamental distinctions:
(1) Zoe (life) is the opposite of death, which is the end 
of life—the result of the sentence and punishment of God 
against sin. Zde is life in all manifestations. It is the principle 
and essence of life. Its one and only source is God—the Living 
One, the Fountain of Life. We live only in and by His life. 
He originates and sustains life by giving it out of Himself. “In 
him we live, and move, and have our being” (Acts 17:28).
(2) Psuche (life) is used of the life of man—which can 
be lost, destroyed, saved, laid down, et cetera—58 times in the 
New Testament, and is rendered “life” 39 times and “soul” 19 
times. It is used of man as an individual 14 times.
(3) Bios is manner of life, the period or duration of life, 
the means of living.2
John uses zoe in a theological sense to describe the life 
that comes to the Christian through Christ. Actually he calls 
it zoen aionion (eternal life, everlasting life) 16 times in his 
Gospel. In other cases the context makes it clear that it is 
eternal life that he is talking about.
This life {zoe) belongs to those to whom it is communi­
cated. It is the life the Christian has now in Christ, as the “gift of 
God” (Rom. 6:23), by faith in Christ (John 6:27; 10:28). “He 
that hath the Son hath life [zoen\ and he that hath not the 
Son of God hath not life” (1 John 5:12).
In general, the other New Testament writers use zoe in 
this theological sense, even where the word “eternal” is not 
connected with it. Now let us continue.
2 See Bullinger, Critical Lexicon, p. 462; The Companion Bible, Appendixes 170 (p. 191) 
and 110 (p. 153).
2. Natural Dying Life; Supernatural Endless Life.— 
From Adam, our natural progenitor, we obtained only a mor­
tal, transitory life received through natural generation. Noth­
ing else, and nothing higher, could come from or through him. 
But in our glorious Spiritual Progenitor is vested the life that 
is spiritual and undying, which He gives through re-genera­
tion. This distinction between the natural life and the super­
natural is very real, and is everywhere drawn throughout the 
New Testament, and particularly in the Gospel of John.
In general the two words psuché and zóé in the Greek are 
used to designate and differentiate them. But the translation 
of these two distinct and often antithetical terms by the single 
word “life” (as the English does not have the dual equivalents) 
has obscured this distinction. Nevertheless, there are two sepa­
rate progenitors, two separate births, and two separate des­
tinies. Christ came that whosoever believeth in Him might be 
“saved” from death and unto life. He came to confer eternal 
life upon repentant, believing, mortal men.
This was the sublime and revolutionary truth that Christ, 
at the very outset of His public ministry, enunciated and 
pressed home to Nicodemus. Note the precise phrasing:
“Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he 
cannot see the kingdom of God.” “That which is born of the flesh is flesh; 
and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said 
unto thee, Ye must be born again.”
“As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must 
the Son of man be lifted up: that whosoever believeth in him should not 
perish, but have eternal life.8 For God so loved the world, that he gave 
his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not per­
ish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world 
to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved” 
(John 3:3, 6, 7, 14-17).
3. Nicodemus the Pharisee Held to Innate Immortal­
ity.—Nicodemus, the Pharisee and believer in Innate Immor­
tality, had but vague notions of life beyond the present. He
3 Zóé aidnios (life everlasting). Note that the adjective “everlasting” (aidnios) appears
only with zóé, never with psuché. (See John 3:15, 16, 36; 4:14, 36; 5:24, 39; 6:27, 40, 47,
54, 68; 10:28; 12:25, 50; 17:2, 3.) Aidnios occurs with zóé 16 times in John’s Gospel ana
6 times in 1 John.
CHRIST’S INFALLIBLE TESTIMONY ON LIFE VS. DEATH 193
7
HARRY ANDERSON, ARTIST
© 1954 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
As Moses Lifted Up the Brazen Serpent of Old That the Dying Israelites Might 
Have Life, So Must Christ Be Lifted Up on Calvary for Dying Humanity, to 
Restore Lost Immortality.
obviously held to a prolongation of man’s natural life beyond 
the present state, not the reception of a new life. It was the 
same old immortal life of the “soul” of Platonic philosophy,
194
Jesus Tells the Woman of 
Samaria of the Living Water 
—the Everlasting Life—That 
He Came to Give to Her and 
to 
Every Other Thirsting 
Soul Who Would Seek It.
accentuated by Philo, after the soul has escaped from the en­
cumbering body—a kind of ghostly, innate, immortal entity 
—that he and others had imbibed from the widespread pene­
trations of Greek philosophy current among the Pharisees. Nico- 
demus therefore not only had no conception of that new 
spiritual life, which comes from a new spiritual birth—and 
which is presented in the New Testament as the sole founda­
tion for man’s hope of immortality—but alas he was destitute 
of the means of conceiving it, for—“the natural [psuchikos] 
man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are 
foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they 
are spiritually [pneumatikos] discerned” (1 Cor. 2:14).
4. 
“Living Water” 
Springing Up 
Unto “Everlasting 
Life.”—It was this same essential doctrine that Christ next at­
tempted to teach, from a slightly different approach, in convers­
ing with the woman at the well in Samaria. But neither could 
her mind, unillumined by the Spirit of God, apprehend such 
spiritual realities. She understood the impressive figures used by
H. HOFMANN, ARTIST
195
196
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Christ only in their lower material sense. But scriptural figures 
are employed to represent realities, and not something fanciful. 
This spiritual life of which Christ spoke was not unreal but 
actual—even more real and substantial than the natural life 
of man. Observe Christ’s approach:
“If thou knewest the gift of God [eternal life through Christ], and 
who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have 
asked of him, and he would have given thee living water [hudor ion]. . . . 
Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again: but whosoever drink- 
eth of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that 
I shall give him shall be in him a well [pege, “fountain,” “spring”] of 
water springing up into everlasting life” (John 4:10-14).
5. 
Central Doctrine of John’s Gospel.—The Gospel of 
John is pre-eminent in setting forth this great doctrine of life 
eternal only through Christ. The doctrine of a future life was 
definitely revealed in the ancient Hebrew Scriptures. And in 
their earlier centuries—during the time of the living Hebrew 
prophets—Israel had generally held thereto. But in the later 
inter-Testamental period, under the impact of Greek philoso­
phy, the Jewish religion had been gravely marred and cor­
rupted.
The Pharisees had come to hold the philosophical doctrine 
of the natural immortality of the natural life of man as the 
peculiar inheritance of the children of Abraham. This blinded 
their eyes to the truth that Christ brought to them. Their 
minds were closed, their understanding darkened, so they could 
not comprehend.
That was the great barrier.
Then when Christ showed the fallacy of their hopes in 
any immortality except through Himself, and that there was 
nothing in the Old Testament Scriptures—which they meticu­
lously invoked—to justify their philosophical hopes and ex­
pectations, they were affronted and angered. If they would but 
“search the scriptures,” Christ said wistfully, going to the 
heart of the issue, they would find no doctrine of immortality 
for man, save through the promised Life-giver. That was the 
stumbling block.
CHRIST’S INFALLIBLE TESTIMONY ON LIFE VS. DEATH 197
6. 
Contr
over
sy O
ver Bread Fr
om H
eaven 
and R
esur­
r
ect
io
n.—In the sixth chapter of John, Christ’s prolonged dis­
cussion with the Jews is recorded, designed to prove that He is 
indeed the Bread of Life, that while the fathers actually ate 
manna in the wilderness, nevertheless they died; but that He 
is the life-giving Bread that came down from Heaven that, 
should a man eat thereof, he would not die the second, or final, 
death (John 6:50). This basic declaration He iterated and re­
iterated to them in various ways.
But He was actually pressing upon one point—that His 
work on earth was to give life, everlasting life, and to prevent 
men from ultimately dying and perishing in the second death. 
He declares that whoso eateth His flesh and drinketh His blood, 
“hath eternal life”; and that He “will raise him up at the last 
day” (v. 54).
“As the living Father hath sent me,” Christ declared, 
“and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he 
shall live by me.” And “he that eateth of this bread shall live 
for ever” (vs. 57, 58). He insists, “Except ye eat the flesh of the 
Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you” (v. 53). 
This vital discourse, delivered in Capernaum, presents the crux 
of the conflict with the Jews, and discloses the basic battle­
ground of the entire controversy. What is said beyond this is 
but a repetition of what is here declared, only with a persist­
ence and fullness that aroused great consternation and marked 
antagonism on the part of the Jewish leaders. Now let us get the 
setting.
7. Jew
ish 
Cha
ll
enge 
of 
Advent, 
R
esur
r
ect
ion, 
Da
m­
n
a
t
io
n.—Christ was at Jerusalem at one of the feasts, and had 
healed the impotent man at the pool. He declared that the 
power of raising the dead and giving them life rests with Him­
self. Heated controversy ensued, ostensibly because it was the 
Sabbath day, and the Jews challenged Christ’s right and au­
thority to heal on that consecrated day. Observe it in some de­
tail, in the precise words of John, for here is the heart of 
Christ’s continuing controversy with the Jews. Here He leads
198
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
on into His second advent, and the “resurrection of life’’ and 
the “resurrection of damnation.” Note His bold claims and 
searching declarations:
“For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth [zdopoieo, 
“make alive,” giveth life to] them; even so the Son quickeneth whom he 
will” 
(John 5:21).
“Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth 
on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into con­
demnation [krisin, “judgment”]; but is passed from [out of] death unto 
life” (v. 24).
“For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son 
to have life in himself” (v. 26).
But under the impact of Greek philosophy, such life as a 
special gift from God had been wholly obscured by the perva­
sive false hope of Innate Immortality. They were therefore 
offended at Christ’s declaration that there was life only in 
Himself. But, He said:
“Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are 
in the graves [not in Heaven or Hell] shall hear his voice, and shall come 
forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they 
that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation [kriseos, “judg­
ment,” condemnation unto death; cf. v. 24]” (vs. 28, 29).
“[Ye] Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal 
life: and they [the Scriptures] are they which testify of me [the Life- 
giver]. And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life” (vs. 39, 40).
8. 
Blinded 
by Platonism, Jews Reject Life-Tr
uth.— 
There was no abatement in Christ’s continuing emphasis. He 
proclaimed the same truth after the miracle of the loaves and 
fishes, with its feeding of the five thousand (John 6). Here 
again Christ presses on His persistent theme of life and death. 
He declared that man cannot of himself “live for ever.” This 
emphatic assertion is repeated twenty-eight times in the first 
six chapters of John.
“Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that 
meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of 
man shall give unto you” (John 6:27).
As the life of the body is sustained by material food, so this 
higher life—this spiritual life which He gives—must likewise
CHRIST’S INFALLIBLE TESTIMONY ON LIFE VS. DEATH 199
have its spiritual life and nourishment, and from the same 
divine source. This physical life cannot be sustained forever, 
even if manna were supernaturally given from Heaven, as of 
old. The Jewish fathers, who ate the manna in the wilderness, 
were all dead (vs. 49, 50). So Christ’s immediate hearers 
must die not only a natural death but also the second death if 
they have no higher, divine principle of life ingenerated into 
them. And this new life, received from Christ, can be main­
tained only by the closest union with Him. To such a life there 
will be no end.
9. 
Many Followers Turn Away Because of Claims.— 
This entire chapter 6 is remarkable for the constant reitera­
tion of this one basic truth. But the Jews could not, or would 
not, receive it. Christ’s bold—and to them brazen—claims as to 
being the Divine Giver of the higher, supernatural life were ab­
horrent to them. The concept of the Innate Immortality of the 
soul had so captivated and possessed their minds as to block 
completely their understanding of the great gospel truth of 
the life and immortality received solely by a new birth through 
a Divine Saviour. And not only were the scribes and Pharisees 
affronted, but many also of Christ’s former followers were of­
fended at His doctrine (v. 61). Be it particularly observed that 
it was this emphasis that caused the final break with the Jews 
and the separation of numerous disciples.
“From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no 
more with him. Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away? 
Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast 
the words of eternal life” (John 6:66-68).
Here is the Biblical recital. Though it might appear tedi­
ous, it is the heart of the testimony of the New Testament 
gospel witness. Read the inspired words:
“And Jesus said unto them, I am* the bread of life [artos tés zóés]: 
he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me 
shall never thirst” (v. 35).
4 This is the first of a series of “I am” utterances—I AM the bread of life (John
6:35, 41 j 48, 51); the light of the world (8:12; 9:5); the door of the sheep (10:7); the 
resurrection and the joe-life (11:25); the true and living way (14:6); and the true vine
200
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
“And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth 
the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise 
him up at the last day”5 (v. 40).
“Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath ever­
lasting life. I am that bread of life. Your fathers did eat manna in the 
wilderness, and are dead. This is the bread which cometh down from 
heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die" (vs. 47-50).
“I am the living bread [ho artos ho zon, the Living One] which 
came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for 
ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh [Myself], which I will give 
for the life of the world" (v. 51).
Bread is figurative of the maintenance of substance. That 
is what Christ came to supply.
“Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh [Heb. idiom 
for believing and receiving] of the Son of man, and drink his blood 
[blood, symbol of life], ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh, 
and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at 
the last day" (vs. 53, 54).
“As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he 
that eateth me, even he shall live by me. This is that bread which came 
down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: 
he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever [opposite of second death]” 
(vs. 57, 58).
“It is the spirit that quickeneth [zdopoieo, “to make alive,” “to 
give life to,” especially eternal life]; the flesh profiteth nothing: the 
words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life” (v. 63).
That was Christ’s unwavering witness to the Jews in His 
crisis hour.
V. Rejection Comes Over Amazing “Zoe-Life” Claims
1. 
Conflict 
Develops 
Into 
Supreme 
Crisis.—It is in 
John 8, after Jesus had declared, “I am the light of the world: he 
that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have 
the light of life” (v. 12), that His claims were sharply chal­
lenged. Nevertheless He again affirmed that God in Heaven 
was His Father. And now He stressed the matter and relation­
ship of death, life’s opposite and redemption’s alternative. And
6 “Last day,” used only in John, and appearing six times—6:39, 40, 44, 54; 11:24; 
12:48—meaning at the end of the age, and coming of Christ.
CHRIST'S INFALLIBLE TESTIMONY ON LIFE VS. DEATH 201
such death would, He declared, result from rejection of Him. 
Solemnly He said:
“I go my way, and ye shall seek me, and shall die in your sins [losing 
the true, eternal life]: whither I go, ye cannot come” (v. 21).
“Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am 
not of this world. I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your 
sins: for if ye believe not that I am he [the sole Giver of life], ye shall 
die in your sins” (vs. 23, 24).
Christ’s declaration of His deity, and pronouncement of 
judgment, aroused their deepest indignation. After they had 
maliciously charged Him with being “born of fornication” 
(v. 41) instead of “from above” as He claimed (v. 23), and 
Christ had reaffirmed that He indeed “proceeded forth and 
came from God” (v. 42), He next sternly charged them with 
being children of “your father the devil [the accuser and tra- 
ducer]” (v. 44). And He added with penetrating significance:
“He was a murderer [for death came through him] from the begin­
ning [of the human race], and abode not in the truth. . . . When he 
speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of 
it” (John 8:44).
Christ thus harked back to the original lie in Eden—“Ye 
shall not surely die” (Gen. 3:4)—with all its train of unutter­
able woe. Then follows Christ’s tremendous declaration, “If a 
man keep my saying, he shall never see death” (John 8:51). 
That is, he shall not be visited with the forever-death, eternal 
death, the “second death,” from which there is no resurrec­
tion.
Jesus’ final affirmation was, “Before Abraham was [came 
into existence, or was born], I am” (v. 58). It was following this 
incredible utterance that they took up stones to cast at Him.
2. 
Again Sought to Stone H
im Because 
of Claims.— 
The same truths are enforced in chapter 10, under the meta­
phors of “the door of the sheep” (v. 7)—by which they were to 
enter into life—and the “good shepherd” (v. 11). Of the 
door Christ said:
“I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved,
and shall go in and out, and find pasture. ... I am come that they 
might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly” (vs. 9, 
10).
Christ, then, is the solitary door to eternal life. Through 
Him mortal man again has right of access to the tree of life 
(Rev. 2:7).
Then as to the Good Shepherd:
“I am die good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of 
mine. As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father: and I lay 
down my life [psuchen, the natural life, and not, be it noted, zoe] 
for the sheep. And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: 
them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall 
be one fold, and one shepherd” 
(John 10:14-16).
‘‘And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, 
neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand” (v. 28).
It was for this bold twofold claim that they “took up stones 
again to stone him” (v. 31; cf. 8:59) for “blasphemy,” because, 
they said, Thou “makest thyself God” (chap. 10:33). “They 
sought again to take [arrest] him: but he escaped out of their 
hand” (v. 39). The crisis was on in dead earnest. Thus there 
was deep significance to Christ’s outspoken utterances on the 
nature and destiny of man.
3. 
M
iraculous Raising of Lazarus From Dea
th.—This 
great truth of Christ as the Life-giver is next graphically il­
lustrated in chapter 11, in the dramatic episode at the grave of 
Lazarus. Mary and Martha had some knowledge of the doc­
trines of the resurrection, the judgment, and the life to come. 
They did not share the views of the Sadducees. So when Jesus 
came, Martha said to Him, “Lord, if thou hadst been here, my 
brother had not died” (v. 21). Then Jesus assured her, “Thy 
brother shall rise again [anistemi, “stand up”]” (v. 23). And 
when she boldly confessed that she knew that her brother would 
“rise again in the resurrection at the last day” (v. 24), Jesus 
immediately uttered another of His great “I am” sayings:
‘‘I am the resurrection, and the life [he zbe]: he that believeth in 
me, though he were dead [even though he should die], yet shall he live: 
and whosoever liveth [or is alive at My second coming] and believeth in
202 
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
COURTESY OF STANDARD PUBLISHING COMPANY
203
The Transfiguration Symbol­
ized the Two Categories of 
the 
Redeemed — Moses 
by 
Resurrection and Elijah by 
Translation—to 
Occur 
Si­
multaneously at the Second 
Advent.
me shall never die [never perish in the final, irrevocable second death *]” 
(vs. 25, 26).
So, according to Christ it is not conscious survival of those 
who believe on Him that occasions immortality, but their 
future resurrection from the dead. Those who have died 
the first, or natural, death, believing in Christ, will be raised. 
And those believers who will be alive at His coming again shall 
be changed, transformed without dying. And together both 
shall simultaneously enter upon that life that shall never end, 
and over which the second death has no power—when they 
shall have received their immortality.
This declaration by our Lord brought the recognition and 
confession from Martha, “I believe that thou art the Christ [the 
Messiah], the Son of God, which should come into the world”
6 The first death is only a relatively short sleep (Ps. 146:4; 1 Cor. 15:20, 21, 51-55; 
1 Thess. 4:13-18). It is a brief lying down to rest “from the evil to come’’ (Isa. 57:1, 2). 
during which time the life of the righteous is “hid with Christ in God” (Col. 3:3). Physical 
death comes to righteous and wicked alike, but the righteous have the promise that they will 
not be hurt of the “second death” (Rev. 2:11; cf. 20:6).
204
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
(v. 27; cf. Matt. 16:16). Then it was that Jesus, at the tomb, 
lifted His voice and commanded, “Lazarus, come forth” 
(John 11:43), just as if He were arousing him from a deep 
sleep. “And he that was dead came forth” (v. 44). Lazarus, 
receiving life, heard and obeyed the summons. Lazarus, it 
should be noted, was sleeping in the grave (v. 44), not singing 
praises in Heaven, when Christ called him.7
It was a startling exercise, while Jesus was here on earth, 
of the divine, life-giving power He claimed to possess. There is 
no hint that any “soul” had left Lazarus’ body and had as­
cended to Heaven, thence to be brought back. Jesus did not 
address an independent, conscious “soul.” He did not say, 
“Soul or spirit of Lazarus, come back down to earth, and live 
again in the flesh.” The four days in the tomb were to Lazarus 
a period of oblivion and unconsciousness (Ps. 146:4). He gave 
no account of the glories and activities of Heaven—for Lazarus 
had nothing to relate. He had been asleep, in unconscious sleep. 
Now he was awakened.
Death might be defined as the great hiatus, the appointed 
break between the initial probationary earthly life, and the life 
that is to come following the resurrection. It is the little period 
of quiescence before the full immortal life for eternity for the 
redeemed.
As a result there was a large increase of disciples (John 11: 
45), which fact alarmed the Jewish leaders. Then comes the sig­
nificant statement: “Then from that day forth [the day of the 
raising of Lazarus] they [the Jewish leaders] took counsel to­
gether [in their Council, or Sanhedrin, John 11:47] for to put 
him to death” (v. 53)—seeking some juridical pretext. They 
thus rejected the Life, refused the Light, and spurned the Love 
incarnate. And the record further states that thenceforth Je­
sus “walked no more openly among the Jews” (v. 54). So they 
sought for Him, “that they might take him” (v. 57).
4. Burden of Christ’s High Priestly Prayer.—And just
7 It 5s specifically those who are "in their graves” whom Christ will call forth and raise 
up at the last day (John 6:39, 40, 44, 54; 11:24; 12:48).
CHRIST’S INFALLIBLE TESTIMONY ON LIFE VS. DEATH 205
before the close of His earthly life and mission, this same doc­
trine of Life Only in Christ was finally set forth in His inter­
cessory high priestly prayer, recorded in John 17.
“These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and 
said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may 
glorify thee: as thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should 
give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him. And this is life eternal, 
that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom 
thou hast sent. I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the 
work which thou gavest me to do" (John 17:1-4).
That was the climax of the remarkable and cumulative 
series of life incidents—Christ’s unchanging burden and wit­
ness to the close of His life and ministry.
5. “Life Solely in Christ” John’s Paramount Theme.— 
The foregoing leading citations are all from the Gospel of 
John, though there are other similar passages. The conclusion 
seems inescapable that this was one of the main themes of 
John’s Gospel, as also of his Epistles. This is evident from the 
fact that in the first six chapters of John he declares, in varying 
forms, in no less than twenty-eight times—and more than fifty 
times in his several writings—that Christ is the sole source of 
eternal life, of which our Lord testified so earnestly and with 
such constant reiteration during the brief period of His earthly 
incarnation.
This was the boon He came to bring to dying men. To 
provide this He gave up His own natural life (John 10:11, 
14), which purchased salvation and restored the wondrous life 
that He freely offers to all who truly believe in Him.
6. Contingent Immortality Gives Honor to Christ.— 
This life is not something that men can rightfully claim as 
their own inalienable, or inherent, prerogative. Rather, it is a 
life Christ has purchased back for man by the shedding of His 
own precious blood, that may be ours by gift. And it is to be 
remembered that man’s immortality, even in the endless days 
of eternity, will ever and only be contingent immortality— 
dependent always upon God. There is consequently no place
206
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
for pride, independence, or self-sufficiency concerning the 
divine provision of life.
This glorious doctrine of life and immortality, which il­
luminates the pages of John’s Gospel, while humbling to the 
pride of man, extols the honor and glory of Christ. But ever 
since the days of Eden, Satan has sought to rob Christ of His 
peculiar glory as the Giver of eternal life to His followers. Christ 
indeed saves from sin, suffering, and misery. But He does in­
finitely more; He saves from actual, final death, perishing, de­
struction 
(Rom. 5:9; 1 Thess. 1:10)—the “second death,” 
from which there will be no awakening.
It is because Christ has risen triumphant over death, and 
ever liveth, that we shall rise at His “trumpet” call (1 Cor. 
15:22; 1 Thess. 4:16, 17), to live forevermore with Him. And the 
life, which He bestows, is a life of unending joy and blessedness 
in His everlasting kingdom and presence. That is the fullness of 
the gospel of salvation, the more abundant life, the endless life 
for all eternity! Such is God’s unspeakable gift.
This revelation of the eternal life through Christ, in the 
Gospel of John, surely makes it luminous with new meaning 
and significance. It throws a fresh and radiant light upon these 
familiar passages that makes them central in our comprehen­
sive survey of the testimony of the Supreme Witness concern­
ing the nature and destiny of man.
CHAPTER 
TWELVE
linates All Aspects of Life. 
Death, and Destiny
I. Significance of Christ’s Life and Death in 
Plan of Redemption
Before we turn to another related truth, likewise taught 
by Christ and centering in Him, let us note again the founda­
tional principles and provisions of salvation in, and only in, 
Christ Jesus. This is essential to the balanced understanding of 
all special outworkings, manifestations, and teachings emanat­
ing from and centering in Him.
1. 
Chr
ist—
R
evea
l
er o
f G
od and R
edeem
er o
f M
a
n.—
 
Jesus Christ came as the revealer of God, and the redeemer 
of man from the power both of sin and of death. And both of 
these enemies He overcame in His own person, and made His 
victory effective for us through His triumphant resurrection, 
and thus brought “life and immortality to light,” and made 
them operational “through the gospel” (2 Tim. 1:10). That, 
in a word, is the tremendous scope—the height, depth, length, 
and breadth of salvation through Jesus Christ our Saviour 
and Sacrifice, Priest and Judge, and coming King.
We have already noted the foundational incarnation side. 
Now let us observe its outworking in Christ’s atoning death. 
Christ’s sinless life and vicarious atoning death met all the just 
and holy requirements of the divine law (Rom. 7:12), in 
order that divine love and grace might be poured forth freely, 
and reclaim and forgive sinful, dying man, and restore him both
207
® 1956 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
© 1949 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
From Bethlehem’s Manger, to the Temple Recognition, to His Inauguration 
as Messiah at His Baptism, Jesus Prepared for His Mission to Restore Life to
Dying Men.
to holiness and to his forfeited life. In accomplishing this, 
Christ lived sinlessly and died voluntarily as our atoning Sub­
stitute. As another has impressively put it, He bore the full 
consequences of the sin in which He had no personal part, that 
we might share the full benefits of His triumph in which we 
had no personal part.
It was a case of complete substitution. It is therefore all 
of grace. And efficacious, atoning grace not only accounts right­
eous but actually makes righteous all who receive it, through 
justification and then sanctification. And these will be fol­
lowed in turn by glorification at Christ’s return. Such right­
eousness, it must be added, is the prerequisite for seeing God 
(Heb. 12:14) and dwelling in His presence forevermore. To 
provide these for man was the primary purpose first of Christ’s 
incarnation and then specifically of His passion. That is the 
wonder of His love and the marvel of His grace. Let us now 
look at the death side more closely.
2. 
Life-giving 
Scope 
and 
Significance 
of 
Christ’s 
Death.—Christ’s atoning death, with its vast significance, was
208
COORDINATES ASPECTS OF LIFE, DEATH, AND DESTINY 209
PERCY LEASON, ARTIST
© 1959 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
Death, Burial, and Resurrection of Christ Was the Means Whereby Christ 
Took Our Place. His Resurrection Is the Assurance of Our Resurrection.
all foreordained, foretold, and then actualized in Christ. The 
fateful history of sin and death, and the antithetical righteous­
ness and life, may be summarized thus, as attested in both 
Testaments. This is the Biblical foundation for our hope and 
confidence. Here is an epitome in six points:
(1) Christ is the source of all life (Job 12:9, 10; Ps. 36:9; 
66:8, 9; Jer. 2:13; John 5:27; Acts 17:24, 25, 28).
(2) Life from God was imparted to man in the original 
creation (Gen. 2:7; Job 33:4; Isa. 45:12; Jer. 27:5).
(3) This life was forfeited through sin (Gen. 2:17; 3:19; 
Rom. 5:12, 15, A.R.V.).
(4) The Son of God has life in Himself, and came to bring 
that life back to lost man (John 1:4; 5:21, 25; 6:33, 47-51; 
10:10, 27, 28; 14:6; 17:2; Rom. 6:23; Col. 3:4; 1 John 1:1-3).
(5) This life is acquired by accepting and receiving the 
Son of God for all He offered Himself to be (John 3:15, 
16, A.R.V.; 3:36; 4:14; 6:40; 20:31; 1 Tim. 1:16; 2 Tim. 1:1; 
1 John 5:11-13).
(6) Every sinner who truly turns to Christ is thus saved 
from merited death—Christ dying in his stead (James 5:19, 
20). And the repentant sinner is restored to life, and destined 
to receive glorious immortality at the resurrection or transla­
tion day.
RUSSELL HARLAN, ARTIST
VERNON NYE, ARTIST
© 1952 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
© 1947 BY SOUTHERN PUBLISHING ASSN.
The Irrevocable Decisions of the Judgment 
Man, the Sinner, Does Not Face the Searching
Will Determine Every Individual’s Future— 
Judgment Alone. He Has an Advocate—the
Whether Eternal Life or Everlasting Death. 
One Who Died to Redeem Him, Arose to
And We Shall All Stand Before the Judg- 
Justify Him, and Ascended to Mediate for
ment Bar of Christ. 
Him.
3. 
Christ’s Death Summit of Sacrifice for Man.—Note 
that death phase in greater depth. The laying down of His 
life, by Christ, was the consummating act in His transcendent 
self-sacrifice for man. This act of satisfaction and submission, in 
behalf of the race, to the full death penalty deserved by the 
race because of sin is truly unfathomable to the human mind.
It scales the summit as well as plumbs the depths of divine 
love and grace. As to its central importance, 33 per cent of 
Matthew’s Gospel is devoted to the record of the last week of 
Christ’s life; of Mark’s, 37 per cent; and of John’s, 42 per cent. 
That is the proportionate emphasis given by Inspiration.
210
Let it never be forgotten that Christ did not choose be­
tween dying at one time rather than another, but instead, be­
tween dying and not dying for man. He died voluntarily, 
vicariously, and victoriously. He died to cancel the curse, to lift 
the ban, to bestow divine grace, to purchase pardon, to ransom 
sin’s captives, to restore life—and to once and for all defeat 
and end Satan’s malign work of rebellion, enslavement, and 
murder of the human race. Christ died as the representative 
of man—His death, as we have seen, being voluntary, vicari­
ous, sinless, and sacrificial. It was purposeful, propitiatory, 
reconciliatory, once-for-all, and all-sufficient. It afforded com­
plete atonement for all who will accept it, and thus come un­
der the application of its provisions.
4. 
Rejection 
of 
Christ’s 
Redemptive 
Provisions 
Su­
preme Sin.—In the light of all this, it therefore follows that, in­
asmuch as Christ is the supreme revelator, mediator, sole 
propitiator, and the reconciliator of God and man, the most 
fearful and fatal form of sin and rebellion is willful rejection 
of Christ as our atoning sacrifice, and of what He has done 
and what He offers Himself to be as the restorer of the lost 
life, and the sole giver of Immortality. The rejection of Christ 
and His teaching on this supreme provision of love is therefore 
the gravest of sins, and the rejector deserves and will experience 
everlasting death. That is the gravity of the ground we are 
traversing.
II. Pivotal Place of Christ’s Teachings on Life, Death, 
and Destiny
Christ came both to restore obscured and lost truths and 
to enunciate new truths that confirmed, explained, expanded, 
and completed the original truths of the Old Testament— 
much of which concerned the origin, nature, and eternal 
destiny of man. These truths had first been enunciated after 
Creation and the Fall and were increasingly revealed during 
the patriarchal period. They were further developed during
COORDINATES ASPECTS OF LIFE, DEATH, AND DESTINY 211
212
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
the Mosaic dispensation, and continued to be clarified and un­
folded during the period of the prophets.
But in the two centuries preceding the birth of Christ 
false philosophical teachings regarding man’s essential nature 
and destiny made fatal inroads into large segments of Jewish 
thought. These Innate Immortality concepts came directly out 
of Greek paganism, as we shall see, through the channel of 
Platonic philosophy, and profoundly affected the Hebrew con­
cept of man and his destiny and his relationship to God and 
immortality.
1. 
Pr
ocl
a
m
a
t
ion of T
r
ut
h and Co
n
fu
t
a
t
io
n of Er
r
or. 
—Much of Christ’s great mission was the proclamation of truth 
and the confutation of error concerning the basic relation­
ships between God and man. And the truth He proclaimed was 
personalized and embodied in Himself. He was the predicted 
hope and Redeemer of Israel. He was the way, the truth, and 
pre-eminently the life. There was no other. He was the door of 
the sheepfold and the shepherd of life. He was the bread 
and the water of life. And significantly enough, He placed spe­
cial emphasis during His incarnation on life—eternal life, 
vested in Himself—with immortality for man dependent upon 
the acceptance of Himself as atoning Saviour, transforming 
Life-giver, and immortal King of the coming age.
But the Jewish mind had become obsessed with the Platonic 
concept of the universal Innate Immortality of the soul, and the 
contingent and corresponding Eternal Torment of the incor­
rigibly wicked. So it was that Jesus, as we have seen, sought to 
correct these gross misconceptions and to point out the impera­
tive necessity of man’s acceptance of Him as the Life-giver.
Christ’s death on the uplifted cross was the transcendent 
fulfillment of the Old Testament types of the Divine Substitute 
offered in the sinner’s stead—dying that he might not die but 
have life. And Christ’s triumphal resurrection was not only a 
vindication of His astonishing claims but the divine guarantee 
of the resurrection at the last day of all who believe in and re-
HARRY ANDERSON, ARTIST 
© 1945 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
213
The Glad Reunion as the 
Sleeping Saints Are Called 
Forth From Gravedom at the 
Second Advent and Its At­
tendant Resurrection. Fam­
ilies Are Forever Reunited.
ceive Him for what He offered Himself to be. That is man’s 
only guarantee and security.
2. 
Key 
to Understanding Conflicts 
of 
Centuries.— 
Consequently, the mission of Christ on earth was tied in in­
extricably with the restoration of the truth and the divine pro­
vision of assured eternal life now, vested in Christ, with actual 
and realized Immortality at the resurrection and Second Ad­
vent. A realization of these sublime truths and provisions is es­
sential to a recognition and understanding of the ceaseless con­
flict of the centuries over the nature and destiny of man— 
whether conditional or innate, contingent or natural—and of 
death as ultimate utter destruction, or eternal life in torment. 
That is the essence of the issue.
This constitutes the key that unlocks the most crucial con­
troversies of the centuries concerning Hell, Purgatory, in-
214
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
dulgences, invocation of saints, spiritual resurrection, Univer- 
salism, Spiritualism, and kindred issues that have wracked the 
church across the centuries. That is why Christ’s infallible tes­
timony is not only ultimate but also indispensable in this field.
That is why we need to know not only His express teach­
ing on life (already surveyed) but also His express teachings 
on the first, or natural, death as a sleep, with its inevitable 
resurrection awakening, and on the punishment of the wicked 
through utter destruction by means of the second death. Every 
major teaching of Christ is related to these basic considerations. 
His teaching on the “last things,” for example, makes them 
luminous with new and larger meaning. To this we now 
turn.
III. Sets Pattern for Eschatological and Chronological Sequence
Let us now examine another related facet of our Lord’s 
many-sided teaching emphasis. As would naturally be expected, 
Christ, the Supreme Preacher and Master Teacher of all 
time, set the eschatological pattern for all His followers to 
sense and follow. He presented the foundational truths of life, 
death, and destiny, not as isolated abstractions but always in 
their basic eschatological perspective and orderly sequence.
They were always set forth in vital relationship to the last 
things, the end events, the judgment scenes and finalities. They 
were ever presented in the light of the climactic Second Ad­
vent with its tremendous accompaniments—its final rewards 
and punishments, and its resurrection unto eternal life and hap­
piness for the righteous and its resurrection unto damnation 
and utter destruction for the sinful rejectors of salvation and 
truth. In other words, the eschatological overtone could al­
ways be heard in His utterances. That was one of the distin­
guishing characteristics of His message to men.
More than that, Christ presented these end events as the 
culmination of the impelling sweep of the centuries. No events 
are merely isolated and unrelated. Christ outlined the over-all
HARRY ANDERSON, ARTIST 
® 1944 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
The Saved Will Welcome Christ With Unspeakable Joy; the Lost Will Face 
Him With Unutterable Anguish. To One, His Second Advent Brings Im­
mortality; to the Other, Destruction.
life history and vicissitudes of the church He was founding, 
tracing its course clear across the Christian Era. But, to make 
the picture more comprehensive, He portrayed the church in 
the midst of the outer turbulence and oppressions of the na­
tions and the world, along with her own inner departures 
from the faith.
And still more significant, He tied them in with the great
215
HARRY ANDERSON, ARTIST 
© 1946 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
Human Destiny, Pictured Through Prophetic Symbol, Is to Climax in Our Day. 
We Live in the Period of the Multikingdom Feet of Commingled Iron and Clay.
216
outline prophecies of Daniel (Matt. 24:15), that reach to the 
end of the age and the setting up of the kingdom of God, when 
the nations are to be overthrown by divine interposition at the 
end of the age. Such is the unity of the Old and the New 
Testament eschatology, brought into focus by Christ.
1. 
Pr
o
ph
et
ic R
epet
it
io
n 
fo
r Empha
sis 
and Am
pl
ific
a­
t
io
n.—True to the characteristic pattern of Bible prophecy, 
Christ thrice goes back over the Christian Era, and retraces in 
part, each time with increasing fullness and greater detail the 
closer He carries us, in His portrayal, to the end of the age and 
to His own second advent in power and glory, which will 
terminate the affairs of mankind. There were diversions, but 
there was an undeviating progression. The continuity is un­
mistakable.
However, Jesus left to John the revelator and to Paul and 
Peter and others the portrayal of the tremendous multiple 
events of the coming day of the Lord, which is introduced by 
the Advent—along with the accompanying conditions and con­
tingent events of the subsequent millennial period, which fol­
lows the Second Advent and the cataclysmic end of the age. 
And all this is, in turn, succeeded by the oft-foretold establish­
ment of the everlasting kingdom of righteousness, presented 
under the term the “new heavens and a new earth” (2 Peter 
3:13; Rev. 21:1), to continue forevermore.
2. 
R
epet
it
io
n—
Clea
r
ly 
Esta
blished 
Pa
t
t
er
n 
of 
Pr
o
ph
ecy.—It is generally recognized that Daniel the prophet 
presented four paralleling lines of prophecy, depicting dif­
ferent approaches and emphases, in his multiple comprehen­
sive outline of the world history of the centuries. These are re­
corded in chapters 2, 7, 8, 9, 11, and 12—each in the series 
climaxing with the establishment of the kingdom of God. And 
in the Apocalypse, John the revelator likewise presents a series 
of paralleling prophecies covering the Christian Era—the seven 
churches, the seven seals, the seven trumpets, and the consecu­
tive beasts of Revelation 12-14 and 17-19—each prophetic out-
COORDINATES ASPECTS OF LIFE, DEATH, AND DESTINY 217
218
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
line going back and repeating, and all ending at the Advent, 
prior to the unique period of the millennium, set forth in 
chapter 20.1
Each and all are followed by the final destruction of sin 
and sinners, along with the author of sin, at the millennium’s 
close. In the same way Christ, the fountainhead of prophecy, 
three times covers the Christian Era with cumulative force in 
His master prophecy of Matthew 24. His portrayal thus har­
monizes with the characteristic pattern of all Bible prophecy.
This reiteration was all necessary to bring out and unmask 
the fatal penetration of apostasy from within, along with perse­
cution from the nations from without, and the complex con­
flicts between the two, reaching their close only at the Second 
Advent and final disposition of all things. This multiple por­
trayal was necessary, in order comprehensively to compass it 
all—just as four Gospels were required in order adequately to 
portray the matchless single life of Christ. This master prophecy 
is all presented in Matthew 24, and the paralleling recitals re­
corded in Mark 13 and Luke 21.
3. 
First Coverage Leads Up to the “End.”—The first cov­
erage of the Christian Era appears in verses 3-14 of Matthew 
24. Beginning with the destruction of Jerusalem, in a.d. 70, 
Christ carries us through the early period of the appearance of 
“false Christs” and their deceptions, and the “wars and ru­
mours of wars” that were to characterize the breakup of the 
Roman Empire, and then into the Middle Ages. Christ here 
adds this cautionary note, “These things [that He had just de­
picted, up to this point] must come to pass, but the end is not 
yet” (v. 6).
Next He portrays the subsequent wars, uprisings, famines, 
pestilences, and the dreadful betrayals and religious persecu­
tions that would mark the subsequent centuries. Then comes 
another outbreak of false prophets and deceivers. But now He 
reaches the significant time when some would “endure unto
1 Comprehensively covered in L. E. Froom, The Prophetic Faith o/ Our Fathers, vols. 1-4.
the end,” and be saved. The “end” is now near. And finally 
comes the “end,” ushered in with this identifying feature: 
“And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the 
world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end 
come” (v. 14).
That is the supreme sign of the “last days,” or “time of 
the end.”
4. 
Second Coverage L
ikew
ise Leads t
o Advent.—Christ 
then reverts to the time of Daniel’s prophecy of the great 
“tribulation,” under the gross ecclesiastical apostasy of the 
Middle Ages and subsequent centuries. So devastating was its 
decimation that the days of religious persecution had to be 
“shortened,” else no flesh would be saved (v. 22). Next comes 
the final irruption of false christs and false prophets, and an­
other attempt to deceive the very elect. But none need be de­
ceived by sensational claims of Christ’s coming in the “desert” 
or in the “secret chambers” (through the latter-day phenomena 
of Spiritualism). Thus the second time Jesus leads up to the 
“end,” and the Second Advent. “For as the lightning cometh 
out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also 
the coming of the Son of man be” (v. 27).
5. Cel
est
ia
l 
Signs 
Are 
Chr
onol
ogica
l
ly 
Pla
ced.—Fi­
nally, in the third recapitulation, Christ presents a series of 
unconcealable celestial signs that would slightly precede His 
actual advent. He places the first of these chronologically just 
after the terrible “tribulation” part of “those days” (near 
the close of the fateful 1260 years of Daniel 7, extending from 
a.d. 538 to a.d. 1798),2 as He declares:
“Immediately after the tribulation of those days [ending mid­
eighteenth century] shall the sun be darkened [May 19, 1780], and the 
moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven [Nov. 
13, 1833],3 and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: and then 
shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all 
the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming 
in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory” (Matt. 24:29, 30).
2 See L. E. Froom, Prophetic Faith, vols. 1-4, for documented evidence.
3 Ibid., vol. 4, chap. 13, app. H.
COORDINATES ASPECTS OF LIFE, DEATH, AND DESTINY 219
220
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Thus we are brought up the third time to the climactic 
“end” and Advent when “he shall send his angels with a great 
sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from 
the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other” (v. 31).
And that gathering of the elect is by means of the resurrec­
tion of the righteous from among the dead and by the transla­
tion of the living righteous. Hence this over-all portrayal is 
tied in inextricably with our theme and quest, and deals with 
the final, eternal destiny of all men.
6. 
“H
our” N
ot Know
n, Imminence Can Be Know
n.— 
As a reinforcing postscript Christ tells how, in the closing days 
before His coming, conditions similar to those preceding the 
Flood will be repeated, with its sudden, unexpected, universal 
destruction:
“But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son 
of man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating 
and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe 
entered into the ark, and knew not until the flood came, and took them 
all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be” (vs. 37-39).
But “no man” will know beforehand the “Aour” or pre­
cise time of Christ’s coming—not even the angels (v. 36). But 
all men can know when it is near (vs. 37-44). That is why 
Christ gave this chronological outline prophecy—to disclose 
the proximity, so men can prepare for the coming event. Never­
theless, the “hour” will come as an unexpected surprise, when 
the “Son of man cometh” (vs. 44, 50). Especially searching is 
Christ’s denunciation of those appointed as spiritual guard­
ians and teachers in the church, who will nevertheless be un­
aware of the proximity of the time and the certainty and the 
crucial outcome of the impending Advent. Such, our Lord 
solemnly says, shall be cut off, or cut asunder, amid “weeping 
and gnashing of teeth” (v. 51). Here again is disclosed the fate 
of the wicked and the doom of the hypocrite.
That, in brief, is the Master’s great eschatological prophecy 
of the Christian Era and the consummating end of the age. It 
is the “Master Outline of the Centuries” of the Christian Era.
COORDINATES ASPECTS OF LIFE, DEATH, AND DESTINY 221
There is nothing comparable to it in the Word. It is the foun­
dation portrayal for the diversified but eventful details added 
by Paul, Peter, John, and others, who wrote under inspiration, 
and in conformity therewith, as we shall see in subsequent chap­
ters.
IV. Transcendent Events Mark “End of the World”
1. 
Pr
epa
r
a
tor
y 
Events, 
Com
ing 
in 
G
l
or
y, 
Fina
l 
Sep­
a
r
a
tio
ns.—As we have just seen, in discussing His second com­
ing and the “end of the world” (Matt. 24:3), Christ tells of 
identifying preparatory events and movements to take place 
in the last days, and declares, “Then shall the end come” 
(v. 14)—not simply the ending of an expiring state but really 
the beginning of a new and perfect state. That is highly sig­
nificant.
It is in this connection that Christ says:
“And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and 
then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son 
of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory” 
(v. 30).
As we have seen, that involves and necessitates separation 
of the good from the evil, among the living as well as the dead. 
Here is the inspired portrayal:
“When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy 
angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: and 
before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them 
[autous, masc., individuals, not ethne, neut., nations] one from another, 
as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats” (Matt. 25:31, 32).
Then Christ depicts the purpose of the final separation:
“Then shall he [the “Son of man”] say also unto them on the left hand, 
Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil 
and his angels” (v. 41).
“And these [the wicked] shall go away into everlasting punishment: 
but the righteous into life eternal” (v. 46).
Such are the events that follow the ripened “harvest” at 
the world’s end. “When the fruit is brought forth, immedi-
COURTESY OF STANDARD PUBLISHING COMPANY
Separation of the Wheat and 
Tares—the Tares for Burn­
ing and the Wheat for the 
Granary — Symbolic of the 
Contrasting Destinations of 
the Two Classes, With Ulti­
mate 
Destruction 
of 
the 
Wicked.
ately he putteth in the sickle, because the harvest is come” 
(Mark 4:29).
This compasses the final destiny of all mankind.
2. 
“Wheat” 
Into God’s Garner; 
“Tares” 
Into Fire. 
—In His paralleling parable of the tares, Christ elaborates and 
defines His terms: “The harvest is the end of the world; and 
the reapers are the angels” (Matt. 13:39).
And the twofold result of the reaping is this:
“Let both [the wheat and the tares—vs. 24, 25] grow together until 
the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers [angels], 
Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn 
them: but gather the wheat into my barn” (v. 30).
And the Master’s inerrant “end of the world” explanation 
is this:
“The harvest is the end of the world; * and the reapers are the angels. 
As therefore the tares [“children of the wicked one”—v. 38] are gathered
4 The Old Testament portrayal of the harvest, in Joel 3, is in connection with the 
retributive scenes of the “day of the Lord”: “Put ye in die sickle, for the harvest is ripe:
222
COORDINATES ASPECTS OF LIFE, DEATH, AND DESTINY 223
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. Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom 
of their Father” 
(vs. 39-43).
Such are the opposite eternal destinies of the two groups. 
And that stupendous reaping time predicted by Christ is por­
trayed in actual fulfillment in Revelation 14.
V. Apostles’ Descriptions Agree With Christ’s
The basic harmony between Christ’s eschatology and that 
pictured by Paul and John is impressive. In His prophetic dis­
course of Matthew 24, answering the disciples’ inquiry as to 
“the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world” (Matt. 
24:3), Christ leads His listeners up to His “coming in the 
clouds of heaven with power and great glory” (v. 30), and de­
clares:
“And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and 
they shall gather together his elect [eklektous, chosen] from the four 
winds, from one end of heaven to the other” (Matt. 24:31).
1. 
Second Advent Ushers In “Day of the Lord.”—And 
now observe how Paul’s description agrees with that of Christ:
“For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which 
are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent 
[phthano, “to precede”] them which are asleep. For the Lord himself 
shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, 
and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: 
then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with 
them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever 
be with the Lord” (1 Thess. 4:15-17).
And this is presented by Paul in immediate connection 
with the transcendent scenes of the “day of the Lord”
come, get you down; for the press is full, the fats overflow; for their wickedness is great. 
Multitudes, multitudes in the valley of decision [“threshing” (margin, or judgment)]: for the 
day of the Lord is near in the valley of decision” (vs. 13, 14).
224
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
“The day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night. For when 
they [the wicked] shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction 
cometh upon them, . . . and they shall not escape’’ (1 Thess. 5:2, 3).
2. Second Advent Is Day of Separ
ation.—Christ further 
describes the momentous events at His coming in these words 
in the parable of the talents. Note them again in greater detail:
“When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy 
angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: and be­
fore him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one 
from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: and he 
shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left” (Matt. 
25:31-33).
And the King’s sentence from the throne, to those on His 
left, will be:
“Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire [<o pur to aion- 
ion, age-lasting fire], prepared for the devil and his angels.” “And these 
shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life 
eternal” (vs. 41, 46).
But mark that “everlasting punishment” is not everlasting 
punish/ng, but is eternal in results, and is analogous to the 
“eternal judgment” of Hebrews 6:2 (not eternal judging), 
“eternal redemption” of Hebrews 9:12 (not eternal redeem­
ing), “eternal salvation” of Hebrews 5:9 (not eternal saving). 
That is, it is the eternal effect of an act. The act here in Matthew 
25:46 is an act of punishment, as in Matthew 3:12, where “he 
will burn up [katakausei, “consume entirely”] the chaff with 
unquenchable fire.”
3. Eternal Results of Final Reaping.—The harvest, or 
reaping time, tersely pictured by Christ, is portrayed in full 
by John in Revelation 14. Note it:
“And I looked, and behold a white cloud, and upon the cloud one 
sat like unto the Son of man, having on his head a golden crown, and 
in his hand a sharp sickle. And another angel came out of the temple, 
crying with a loud voice to him that sat on the cloud, Thrust in thy 
sickle, and reap: for the time is come for thee to reap; for the harvest 
of the earth is ripe. And he that sat on the cloud thrust in his sickle on the 
earth; and the earth was reaped. And another angel came out of the 
temple which is in heaven, he also having a sharp sickle. And another
COORDINATES ASPECTS OF LIFE, DEATH, AND DESTINY 225
angel came out from the altar, which had power over fire; and cried 
with a loud cry to him that had the sharp sickle, saying, Thrust in thy 
sharp sickle, and gather the clusters of the vine of the earth; for her 
grapes are fully ripe. And the angel thrust in his sickle into the earth, 
and gathered the vine of the earth, and cast it into the great winepress 
of the wrath of God” (Rev. 14:14-19).
First, the second advent of the Son of man is pictured, 
then the garnering, or gathering, of the ripened harvest of the 
golden grain of earth. Finally comes the climax—the gathering 
of the ripened clusters of grapes of wrath for casting into the 
“great winepress of the wrath of God” (v. 19). Thus are the 
transactions of the great “day of the Lord” portrayed by John.
There are consequently two distinct developments, or 
phases: First, the gathering of the righteous, represented by the 
fully ripened grain; and second, the gathering up of the wicked, 
as fully ripe grapes, which are cast into the wine press of the 
fury of His wrath. Thus they are brought to an utter end. That 
is John’s elaboration of Jesus’ basic prophecy.
Now let us turn to Christ’s portrayal of man’s condition in 
death, pictured as a “sleep.” In this He is strongly buttressed 
by Paul.
VI. “Sleep” of Death Followed by Resurrection “Awakening”
Jesus and then Paul are the principal New Testament 
witnesses to the truth that the “sleep” of the “first” death em­
braces both saints and sinners, and is an unbroken slumber 
until the resurrection morn, when the sleeping saints will 
awaken to the call of the Life-giver. The Biblical concept of 
unbroken rest, or sleep, accentuates the necessity of the Sec­
ond Advent and its concurrent resurrection. Holy Writ re­
peatedly declares death to be an unbroken sleep, from which 
none will awake until Jesus comes to summon forth the right­
eous dead. It was because of this that the Second Advent was 
the radiant hope of the Early Church, the goal of all holy ex­
pectation.
We repeat, the first death, as a “sleep,” comes upon all men
8
226
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
alike, irrespective of character, whereas the “second death” is 
the retributive punishment for willful, unrepented sin, and is 
executed only after the due determination of the judgment. 
And it is also to be remembered that the awakening of the 
sinner for that retribution comes a thousand years after that of 
the righteous—in other words, at the close of the millennium, 
instead of at the beginning. They are not synchronous or 
simultaneous.
1. 
Christ and Paul Both Employ Metaphor of Sleep. 
—As we have seen, Jesus spoke definitively of death as a 
“sleep.” Thus:
“Our friend Lazarus sleepeth [koimad, “to lie down in sleep”]; but 
I go, that I may awake [exupnizo, arouse] him out of sleep. . . . 
Howbeit Jesus spake of his death” (John 11:11-13).
The two expressions, sleeping and awakening, thus stand 
out in logical antithesis. On another occasion Jesus said, “The 
maid is not dead [in the sense of being beyond the summons 
of the Life-giver], but sleepeth” (Matt. 9:24). And the record 
adds, then “he . . . took her by the hand, and the maid arose” (v. 
25). In this connection it is interesting to note that our English 
word “cemetery” comes from the Greek koimeterion, a sleep­
ing chamber or burial place (from koimad, to put to sleep). 
Paul likewise uses the same metaphor of “sleep” with telling 
force:
“If Christ be not raised, your faith is vain. . . . Then they also 
which are fallen asleep [keomaomai, to fall asleep involuntarily] in 
Christ are perished. . . . But now is Christ risen from the dead, and be­
come the firstfruits of them that slept” (1 Cor. 15:17-20).
In John 12:1, 9, 17 the variant verb egeiro 8 (to rouse from 
sleep, to raise) is used by John in referring to the “raising” of 
Lazarus.
Anastasis is one of the most common Greek terms for “resur­
rection.” It was often used by Christ, as in discussing the resur-
5 According to Companion Bible, of the 141 uses of egeird (to awaken, wake up, arouse
from sleep) 70 usages refer to the resurrection. (For example: Matt. 10:8; 27:63, 64; Luke
20:37; 24:10, 34; John 12:1, 9, 17; Eph. 1:20; 5:14, et cetera.)
rection with the disbelieving Sadducees (Matt. 22:23, 28, 30, 
31), and in referring to the “resurrection of the just” (Luke 
14:14). It was likewise used by the apostles in referring to 
Christ’s own resurrection (Matt. 27:53; Acts 1:22; 2:31; etc.), 
and by Paul in the great resurrection chapter (1 Cor. 15:12, 
13, 21, 42), as well as by Peter (1 Peter 1:3).
The noun anastasis (a standing up, as from the dead; 
hence, resurrection), occurring 42 times, is always translated 
“resurrection,” except in Luke 2:34. The verb anistémi occurs 
111 times, 35 of which refer to resurrection. (For example: 
Matt. 17:9; 20:19; John 6:39, 40, 44, 54.)
2. 
No Conscious La
pse 
of 
T
im
e 
Bet
w
een 
D
ea
t
h 
and 
R
esur
r
ect
ion.—Death as a deep unbroken sleep is the in­
spired depiction, enshrining a wondrous and blessed truth. For 
the sleeper himself there is no perceptible interval, no con­
scious lapse of time, between the moment of falling asleep in 
death and the instant of awakening, or resurrection. The clos­
ing of the eyes in the death slumber is succeeded immediately, 
as far as he is concerned, by the hearing of the sound of the last 
trump and the awakening call of Christ on the resurrection 
morn. Thus the passage of time is annihilated. It is more 
rapid than the lightning’s flash across the sky. It will be like 
the “twinkling of an eye.”
It cannot be overstressed that there is complete uncon­
sciousness during the entire interval. The saints are not in 
Heaven, but in gravedom. Though thousands of years should 
elapse—as with righteous Abel 
(Heb. 11:4)—there is no 
wearisome, frustrating passage of time. A long or a short period 
is identically the same to the one who is insensible. The mo­
ment of loss of consciousness is, to him, immediately followed, 
the next moment, by the regaining of consciousness, only now 
with the body in glorified, immortalized form (1 Cor. 15: 
52-54). In the light of this comforting fact of the sleep of the 
saints, the second coming of Christ is as near to every in­
dividual in the embrace of death, and to every generation, as 
to any and all others. That should never be forgotten.
COORDINATES ASPECTS OF LIFE, DEATH, AND DESTINY 227
228
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
3. 
Pr
em
ise 
o
f 
“Sl
eep” 
O
nly 
W
ay 
of 
U
nder
sta
nding 
Pa
u
l.—Paul, in comforting the Thessalonians, along with all 
other Christians, always speaks of the dead as sleeping, and 
holds out the assurance of glorious final awakening, or resur­
rection. Indeed, the only way the apostle can be understood in 
all of his many statements is on the premise of a state of sleep 
between death and the resurrection. And as in natural sleep 
there is suspension of the senses, so in death there is cessation 
of all the functions of life.
We therefore believe it to be clearly established that the 
state of death is, in the New Testament, set forth as one of un­
conscious sleep between death and the resurrection—that un­
consciousness continuing until the actual moment of awak­
ening, which is the resurrection. Hence the Greek verb egeiro, 
we repeat, commonly rendered “to raise,” may, when used in 
the context of those who have died, be properly translated 
“to awake,” “arouse,” “rouse up.” This is strikingly set forth 
in 1 Corinthians 15, the great resurrection classic, where the 
“waking” is frequently placed close beside the “sleeping” 
expressions of death. Thus:
“That Christ died for our sins . . . ; and that he was buried, and 
that he rose [egeiro, “hath been raised,” or “awakened”] again the third 
day according to the scriptures: and that he was seen of Cephas, then of 
the twelve: after that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at 
once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are 
fallen asleep [koimad]" (1 Cor. 15:5-6).
And now read verses 12-18, and 20, where egeiro may be 
uniformly rendered “awakened,” and is, in fact, the alternative 
reading in various translations:
“Now if Christ be preached that he rose [egeiro, “awakened”] from 
the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of 
[from among] the dead? But if there be no resurrection of the dead, 
then is Christ not risen [awakened]: and if Christ be not risen [awak­
ened], then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. Yea, 
and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of 
God that he raised up [awakened] Christ: whom he raised [awakened] 
not up, if so be that the dead rise [wake] not. For if the dead rise 
[wake] not, then is not Christ raised [awakened]: and if Christ be not 
raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. Then they also which
COORDINATES ASPECTS OF LIFE, DEATH, AND DESTINY 229
are fallen asleep in Christ are perished [from which there is no awaken­
ing]. . . . But now is Christ risen [awakened] from the dead, and be­
come the firstfruits of them that slept [or, have fallen asleep, from 
koimao]” (vs. 12-20).
Awakening is clearly the converse of falling asleep.
4. Sleeping Dead Do N
ot Precede t
he Living.—Another 
point should be noted. 1 Thessalonians 4:15—“We which are 
alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not pre­
vent [anticipate, precede, or go before] them which are 
asleep”—assures us that those who are still living and remain 
at the coming of the Lord shall not precede those who “are 
asleep” in death. Obviously Paul is not saying, “before those 
who have been before us in glory for centuries.”
Neither the “quick” (living) nor the “dead” (sleeping) 
shall precede or be gathered, before the other. But the 
changed living and the awakened “sleepers,” both immortal­
ized at one and the same time, “shall be caught up together,” 
to “meet the Lord in the air,” thenceforth ever to be “with the 
Lord” (1 Thess. 4:15-17).
5. Intent of the “Quick” 
and the “Dead.”—It should 
be added that the term “quick” appears thrice:
Acts 10:42—Christ was “ordained of God to be the Judge of quick 
[zonton, “the living,” from zao, “to have life”] and dead [nekron? persons 
once living but alive no longer].”
2 Tim. 4:1—“die Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick 
and the dead.”
1 Peter 4:5—“him that is ready to judge the quick and the dead”
No passage of Scripture employing this metaphor of sleep 
says that it is merely the body, or any single part of man, that 
sleeps, but always the person himself—the man as a man, or 
personality (see Job 7:21; Deut. 31:16). Thus Jesus said, “Our 
friend Lazarus sleepeth.” And Paul declares, “Then they also 
which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished.” It is the dead 
who sleep, not simply their corpses.
9 Nekros denotes the person who was once living but who is alive no longer, that is, 
dead persons as distinct from merely dead bodies. (See Matt. 22:32; Acts 26:23; 1 Cor. 15:12, 
13, 15. 16; Heb. 13:20.)
GUSTAV RICHTER, ARTIST
Christ, the Life-giver, Raises 
the Daughter of Jairus—a 
Token of His Power and Pur­
pose to Resurrect the Re­
deemed at His Coming.
VII. The Resurrection Provision Pivotal in Christ’s Teaching
In both the private and the public teaching of Jesus the 
resurrection was set forth as pivotal—both for Himself and for 
His followers, with the latter contingent upon the former. More 
than that, the resurrection of all who have died is empha­
sized. But there are two resurrections, Jesus declared—that of 
the “good,” unto “life”; and that of the “evil,” unto damna­
tion” (John 5:29). All the dead will hear the resurrection 
call of our Lord (v. 25). Thus, "All that are in the graves shall 
hear his voice, and shall come forth” (vs. 28, 29). And all will 
come forth (1 Cor. 15:22) as surely as all men die the first, or 
natural, death. The determination of which resurrection—that 
of the “just” or the “unjust”—is conditional, just as immortal­
ity is conditional. But not the fact and certainty of a resurrec­
tion; that is absolute and universal.
1. 
Christ’s Resurrection Prerequisite to Ours.—Resur­
rection was necessary for Jesus Christ. If He had remained the
230
prey of death, He could not have opened the way to immortal­
ity for man, and the plan of redemption would have been 
aborted. Moreover, Christ’s resurrection was a bodily resurrec­
tion, just as is to be that of His faithful followers. It was ac­
tual, and real—albeit a glorified, spiritual body. When the 
disciples saw Christ after His resurrection, the record is:
“They were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had 
seen a spirit [pneuma, here “a spirit being”]” (Luke 24:37).
But Jesus said:
“Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and 
see; for a spirit [pneuma] hath not flesh and bones [“body,” v. 3], as ye 
see me have” (v. 39).
It is only the risen and living Saviour who can and will 
raise to eternal life all who have become united to Him by faith 
(1 Cor. 15:42-44; Phil. 3:21). Indeed, He declares from 
Heaven:
“I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for ever­
more, Amen; and have the keys of hell [hades, the grave] and of death” 
(Rev. 1:18).
These keys He will use on the resurrection morn. Our 
sole hope of immortality is bound up with this supernatural, 
consummating act of resurrection. There is no immortality 
apart from the resurrection assured by Christ’s resurrection, 
and bestowed upon us at the time of Christ’s return (1 Cor. 
15:52, 53). Clearly, then, the safety and assurance of those 
who are “in Christ” is bound up with the resurrection as the 
consummation of life, and the sole exit from death and the 
grave.
“This is the Father’s will which hath sent me, that of all which 
he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again 
at the last day” (John 6:39; cf. v. 40; chaps. 11:25; 14:6; Col. 3:4).
2. 
Resurrection Is x>f 
the 
W
hole 
Person.—Jesus left 
to Paul and to John the unfolding and development of many 
great truths centering in and about the resurrection. But He 
laid the complete groundwork therefor, and established the 
certainty. He declared the truth that the resurrection is a bod­
COORDINATES ASPECTS OF LIFE, DEATH, AND DESTINY 231
232
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
ily resurrection. The definition and the nature and the actuality 
are fixed by Christ’s own resurrection. It cannot signify one 
thing for Christ and another thing totally different for us.
Both Old and New Testaments alike speak of the person 
as being buried. “David ... is both dead and buried, and his 
sepulchre is with us unto this day” (Acts 2:29). Said the an­
gels at Christ’s tomb, “Come, see the place where the Lord 
lay” (Matt. 28:6). The Lord Himself lay there until the mo­
ment of resurrection. They laid Jesus in the tomb. They 
“took him down, and wrapped him in the linen, and laid him 
in a sepulchre” (Mark 15:46). “There they laid Jesus” (John 
19:42). Jesus was in the grave.
3. 
Cer
t
it
ud
e o
f R
esur
r
ect
ion R
ests on Ch
r
ist’s In
fa
l­
l
ibl
e W
or
d.—Jesus predicted not only His own death on the 
cross but His triumphant resurrection from the dead, His re­
turn to His Father, and His coming again for His followers, 
that they might be with Him forevermore (John 14:3). De­
claring Himself to be “the way, the truth, and the life” 
(v. 6), and repeating His prediction, “I will come again, and 
receive you unto myself” (v. 3), He added, “Because I live, ye 
shall live also” (v. 19). He likewise said:
“I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though 
he were dead, yet shall he live: and whosoever liveth and believeth in me 
shall never die [the second death]” (John 11:25, 26).
The second death is the only real death, eternal death, 
from which there is no awakening. The first death is but a 
sleep, from which there is a certain and a universal awakening.
Again and again Jesus says of all who believe on the Son 
that they may have “everlasting life” now, in Christ, and three 
times asserts, “I will raise him up at the last day” (John 6: 
40). So the certitude of the resurrection rests upon the formal 
and inviolable promise of the Son of God:
“This is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth 
the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will 
raise him up at the last day” (John 6:40).
His resurrection becomes the unbreakable pledge of our 
own. If Christ was not raised, there would be nothing to guar­
antee a life beyond the grave (1 Cor. 15:13-23). Buried in the 
profound slumber of she’ol (or hades), the saints would never 
awaken from that heavy sleep, apart from the resurrection.
4. 
N
ot 
U
nin
t
er
r
u
pt
ed 
Sur
vival 
but 
R
esur
r
ect
ion.—
 
Let there be no confusion, then, over the issue of uninter­
rupted survival.
“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 
[Gehenna]'’ (Matt. 10:28).
This categorical statement, that God is able to destroy both 
soul and body in hell, rules out the thesis of innate indestructi­
bility or indefeasible immortality of man. Though one be slain 
by human hands, God will raise him up, soul and body, at the 
resurrection day. This was the argument that Christ used to si­
lence the Sadducees—not the uninterrupted survival of Abra­
ham, Isaac, and Jacob, but resurrection (Luke 20:37, 38). So 
the resurrection is the second of the two fundamental truths 
of the gospel—next to, following upon, and joined inseparably 
to, the atoning death of Christ.
COORDINATES ASPECTS OF LIFE, DEATH, AND DESTINY 233
CHAPTER 
THIRTEEN
Christ’s Great Parable of the 
Lost Opportunity
I. Problem Text (Luke 16:19-31): Parable-Fable of Dives 
and Lazarus
The parable of the rich man and Lazarus is often cited as 
the chief cornerstone in support of the postulate of man’s in­
herent immortality and the endless duration of the incorrigi­
bly wicked in sin and misery. It is frequently invoked to silence 
all dissent or question as to Immortal-Soulism. It is persistently 
set forth as proving beyond all peradventure that the souls of 
both the godly and the ungodly continue to live on uninter­
ruptedly after death, separate from the body—but which, as we 
shall presently see, is simply Plato’s contention that death is 
identical with life, only in another sphere. This Platonic con­
cept presents retribution as beginning immediately upon en­
tering the state of death.
The parable depicts Lazarus as already safely in “Abra­
ham’s bosom,” and Dives as already suffering the torment­
ing flames of “hell”—and all this before the resurrection, and 
prior to the judgment. It is alleged that the portrayal estab­
lishes three things: (1) That the dead are all keenly conscious;
(2) that the souls of all men are immortal; and (3) that upon 
leaving this world all men go at once either into a state of 
blessed joy forever or to unchangeable Eternal Torment. 
That is the common contention based on this passage.
The story of the rich man and Lazarus is the only passage 
in the New Testament in which a person, said to be in hades,
234
HARRY ANDERSON, ARTIST 
ROBERT BERRAN, ARTIST 
RUSSELL HARLAN, ARTIST
© 1963 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD 
© 1959 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD 
© 1950 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
In Public Teaching, in Healing the Sick of Body and Soul, and in Personal Counseling 
Christ Set Forth the Way of Life He Came to Restore.
is supposedly suffering the torments of the eternal flames of 
Hell. That in itself is so startling as to warrant special care in 
checking the recital from all angles. Is this an exception to the 
general rule? Does this constitute determining evidence?
The case necessitates careful investigation, not only of all key 
expressions of the text, in their context, but of ascertaining 
contemporary backgrounds and side lights that have a bearing 
thereon.
1. 
Clearly One of Christ’s Many Parables.—To be­
gin with, Christ uttered some forty or fifty major parables to 
illustrate God’s mercy and justice, the plan of salvation, the 
reception or rejection of truth, the transformation of charac­
ter, prayer, humility, the utilizing of present opportunities, re­
lation to fellow men, His own return, the final judgment, and 
eternal reward—and especially the kingdom of Heaven. It was 
His characteristic form of teaching in the latter part of His 
ministry. That the story of the rich man and Lazarus is a 
parable has been widely recognized across the centuries. But 
not by all.
235
The Parable-Fable of the Rich Man and Lazarus, Appearing in a Sequence of 
Parables, Taught a Vital Spiritual Truth Concerning This Life, Not Historical 
Events of Life After Death.
While Jesus usually introduces His parables by saying they 
are parables (or likening them to “such-and-such”), He does 
not always do so. For example, there is the universally recog­
nized parable of the prodigal son, in the preceding chapter of 
Luke’s Gospel, introduced by the phrase, “A certain man . . 
(Luke 15:11-32). This is followed, in chapter 16, by the par­
able of the unjust steward, which likewise begins with “There 
was a certain rich man . . ” (chap. 16:1-13).
Even on the basis of such an identical beginning, in this 
next recital of the rich man and Lazarus—“There was a certain
236
CHRIST S GREAT PARABLE OF THE LOST OPPORTUNITY 237
rich man . . .” (vs. 19-31)—we might make bold to say that in 
such a sequence this story would likewise logically be a para­
ble, unless proof were forthcoming to the contrary. All three 
are recorded in succession by the same writer (Luke), and he is 
obviously using the same expression in the same parabolic 
sense.
2. 
U
t
t
er
ed 
W
hen 
Jew
s 
D
er
ided 
H
is 
T
ea
chings.—As 
noted, Jesus had just presented the parable of the unjust stew­
ard (v. 12), as stressing the principle that the use of present 
opportunities determines future destiny. Christ was not con­
doning the unethical schemes of the unjust steward, only em­
phasizing his foresight and applying the principle of prepara­
tion for the life to come. But the Pharisees had refused to ac­
cept His teachings. Now He presses the point that man’s future 
destiny is settled forever in this present life. But “the Phar­
isees also, who were covetous, heard all these things: and 
they derided him” (v. 14).
But because they openly scoffed at Him, Christ gives them 
a parable based on one of their own well-known beliefs. Many 
expositors believe that, for one thing, it was designed’ to show 
to the proud, self-righteous Pharisees, to whom high religious 
privileges had been accorded, how completely their condition 
and that of the despised Gentiles would later be reversed. The 
rich man of the narrative erred in thinking that salvation is 
based on Abrahamic descent rather than on character. Under­
stood in this light, it will be seen to be strikingly prophetic— 
fulfilled to the very letter. But the lesson is deeper and very 
important. Let us first search into Christ’s extensive and in­
tensive use of parables.
II. Significant Place of Parables in Christ’s Teaching
1. 
“Pa
r
a
bl
e” 
a
nd 
“Fa
bl
e,” 
Defin
it
io
n
s 
and 
D
ist
inc­
t
io
n
s.—The line of demarcation between parable, simile, met­
aphor, legend, folklore, and fable cannot always be sharply 
drawn. Often they merge and blend. A parable is a figurative
238
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
illustration, an extended proverb or metaphor. It is more than 
a similitude (in which two things are compared), or a meta­
phor (suggesting a likeness or comparison). It is a word pic­
ture, an illuminating story.
Technically, a parable signifies a complete and often 
imaginary story from which a moral or lesson is to be drawn. 
Etymologically, a parable (parabole, “a placing alongside”) 
signifies the placing of two or more objects, or events, or circum­
stances alongside each other for the sake of comparison, and to 
illustrate and inculcate some moral lesson or higher spiritual 
truth. Parables are often based on folklore, or fables. And in 
this case of Dives and Lazarus, it is a trenchant story, based on 
contemporary Jewish belief and employed by Christ to ad­
monish and rebuke the smugness of the Pharisees.
Christ’s parables deal with the majesty of truth. Our Lord 
used parables to unfold great verities, placing a simple story 
“alongside,” to illuminate a profound truth. But that truth 
conformed to fact and reality and to Scriptures, though not al­
ways to all aspects of the illustration that was employed. Be­
neath the outward form, or framework, is always to be found 
the inward meaning; beneath the visible, the invisible; be­
neath the temporal and passing is the eternal and abiding.
The intended meaning is not always expressed in the 
words used, but becomes clear by the intent of the comparison. 
A parable, therefore, conceals from one group what it reveals 
to another, as will later be noted. Parables must be rightly in­
terpreted, or erroneous conclusions will be drawn.
A fable, or apologue, is likewise a fictitious narrative—a 
legend, myth, or bit of folklore—similarly designed to enforce 
some wholesome truth. But it is usually a story in which un­
usual actions are ascribed to animate or inanimate objects— 
and which could not actually happen—but which nevertheless 
reflect a helpful truth or principle. A fable builds the case in 
point upon an artificial setting—and, as noted, one in which it 
could not actually happen. Consequently its design and mean­
ing are often the more easily discerned.
The story of the rich man and Lazarus was not specifically 
called a parable, evidently because it was really a parabolic 
fable based on contemporary Pharisaic tradition, but brought 
over into Jewish usage, according to Bishop Joseph Lightfoot, 
from pagan backgrounds.1 It is obviously a blending of parable 
and fable—the truth of the teaching not being in the precise 
words or setting employed but in the designated lesson of the 
comparison.
With this as a setting, let us turn to Christ’s parables in 
general. These were spoken with such frequency that Mat­
thew wrote, “Without a parable spake he not unto them” 
(Matt. 13:34).
2. 
Pa
r
a
bolic 
M
et
h
od Adopted 
t
o 
Cir
cum
vent 
Pr
eju­
d
ice.—At the outset of His ministry Christ used direct teach­
ing methods and plain-spoken discourses. He uttered beati­
tudes, sayings, laws, promises, prophecies, and similitudes 
that explained themselves. He thus began the proclamation of 
His gospel message. But a change came after His first year of di­
rect teaching, which was met with scorn, unbelief, and rising 
resistance. He then began to adopt the parabolic form of teach­
ing, which had been in vogue for a century or so among Jewish 
teachers.
This astonished His disciples, as He changed from pro­
claiming the kingdom of Heaven in His former fashion. But 
He continued to employ, increasingly, the familiar form of rab­
binic teaching—parables and “dark sayings,” such as they had 
reserved for their own chosen disciples.
Christ evidently chose this medium because the Jews were 
spiritually blind and deaf (Matt. 13:10-13), and had now 
braced themselves against His direct teachings. There was a 
penal element in this. The Jews had set themselves against the 
light, or truth, as it was in Jesus. Therefore it was hidden in 
forms not easy for His antagonists to recognize. He deliber­
ately withdrew light from those who “loved darkness rather
CHRIST’S GREAT PARABLE OF THE LOST OPPORTUNITY 239
1 J. B. Lightfoot, Works, vol. 12, pp. 159-168.
240
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
than light” (John 3:19, 20; 1:5; 12:35, 36). And the Platonic 
concept of the soul was now one of their cherished positions, 
molding their thinking.
Thus it was that truth was protected from the mockery of 
the scoffer. But the genuine seekers for truth asked the meaning 
of His parables, and the Master Teacher explained them step 
by step until they understood them. Thus truth was advanced 
despite the untoward circumstances. The underlying laws and 
principles governing parables were a sufficient safeguard 
against misunderstanding in their day. And they should be 
in ours. The disciples understood the Master’s teachings on 
death and destiny, which ran counter to those of the Pharisees. 
They were aware of the sharp divergence.
So it was that the parable searched out the sincere hearers 
and led them on into the increasing light of truth. Christ’s ob­
jective was unchanged, but His mode of communicating 
truth was altered to meet the changed conditions. Truth was 
now wrapped in a parabolic veil. In this way He surmounted 
the barricade of prejudice, reached the honest in heart, and in­
structed His circle of disciples. More than that, Christ was 
speaking for all classes and conditions to the end of time. 
Such was the paramount place of the parable in the climactic 
period of our Lord’s ministry.
3. 
R
evea
led 
t
o 
D
iscipl
es; 
Concea
led 
Fr
om 
H
ostil
e 
Jew
s.—As stated, by the second year of Christ’s ministry, the 
leaders and the bulk of the people had refused to accept Him 
for what He offered Himself to be—the Way, the Truth, and 
the Life. Christ then directed His teaching increasingly to His 
followers, and in so doing adopted the parabolic form of pres­
entation, and became the supreme Teacher by the parabolic 
method. The purpose was obviously both to reveal to His dis­
ciples and to conceal from the hostile Jews. Here are Christ’s 
words to the twelve after He had uttered the parable of the 
sower:
“And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the 
kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not
CHRIST’S GREAT PARABLE OF THE LOST OPPORTUNITY 241
see, and hearing they might not understand” (Luke 8:10; cf. Matt. 13: 
11-17; Mark 4:9-12).
It is therefore established that Christ adopted a method 
of teaching truth that concealed it from those unwilling to be 
molded by it. And in this method it is not the circumstantial 
setting or staging of the parable that is significant, but the 
higher spiritual lesson springing therefrom, which constitutes 
its essence. For this we must watch in the parable we are 
about to survey. But first note another angle.
4. Number and Scope of Christ’s Parables.—As to the 
number and scope of Christ’s parables, Adam Fahling, in his 
Harmony of the Gospels (page 228), lists fifty-six parables ut­
tered by our Lord. Others—such as Orville Nave, in his Topical 
Bible—tabulating only the major ones, list but thirty or forty. 
Some say seventy or more. But there is actually no conflict. The 
variation simply depends upon whether minor instances are 
included. And the distribution is interesting. They are con­
fined to the three synoptic Gospels, with Matthew (32), Mark 
(14), and Luke (36). Next note another factor that is vital in 
our quest.
5. Parables Not a Sound Basis for Doctrine.—For cen­
turies hundreds of the most discerning scholars have recog­
nized that parables, although rich in spiritual truth, do not 
form a proper basis for doctrinal faith or argument, because of 
their circumstantial settings and indirect character. The Latin 
expression, 
Omnia similia claudicunt 
(“All comparisons 
limp”), is applicable to parables. We repeat, No point of doc­
trine can safely be established on figurative passages of Scrip­
ture. Its doctrinal value lies only in its accordance with the 
nonfigurative declaration of Scripture, clearly expressed else­
where.2 That is particularly true of this parable. Bloomfield 
declares that “the best commentators, both ancient and modern, 
with reason consider it a parable.”
Accordingly, scholarly Dr. Alfred Edersheim, in Life and
2 See R. C. Trench, Notes on the Parables of Our Lord; cf. Terry, Biblical Hermeneutics.
242
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Times of Jesus the Messiah, wisely says that doctrine cannot 
be derived from this parable (the rich man and Lazarus), 
concerning either the other world or the character or duration 
of future punishments, or the moral improvement of those in 
Gehenna. Prebendary Henry Constable calls such a position 
the “general sentiment of Christians.” And Dr. William Smith 
insists: “It is impossible to ground the proof of an important 
theological doctrine on a passage which confessedly abounds in 
Jewish metaphor.” 3
But, it is to be observed, if this passage is conceded to be 
but a parable, then it clearly cannot be used to prove the 
eternal conscious torment of the wicked, for, as noted, no doc­
trine can safely be built upon, or buttressed by, a parable or 
allegory—especially when it squarely confutes the plain and 
uniform teaching of Scripture.
III. Doctrinal Dogmas of Pharisees in Time of Christ
1. 
Pl
a
t
onic Postula
tes Embr
a
ced 
by T
im
e 
o
f Ch
r
ist. 
—Before we proceed to the parable, let us observe that this 
narrative was addressed to the Pharisees in particular, who were 
by now fully committed to the twin Platonic postulates of the 
immortality of the soul and the Eternal Torment of the 
wicked. The acceptance of these dual principles of Platonic 
philosophy and the consequent revolution in the theology of 
the Pharisees had transformed she’dl (and hades, its Greek 
equivalent) into an animated abode of disembodied spirits. It 
was now accepted as a place of throbbing life, instead of sterile 
death. And along with this, two characteristic terms used by 
the Pharisees—“Abraham’s bosom” and “Paradise”—were now 
tied into this Platonic picture.
Under the insidious inroads of Platonism such Jews had 
become declared Immortal-Soulists, as seen in several of the 
inter-Testamental apocryphal and pseudepigraphal books, and 
pre-eminently in Philo of Alexandria. (See pp. 718-740.)
* William Smith, Dictionary oj the Bible, vol. 2, p. 1038.
CHRIST’S GREAT PARABLE OF THE LOST OPPORTUNITY 243
But neither the Old nor the New Testament ever speaks of 
she’61 (or hades) as a realm of life. Only in the poetical imagery 
of Isaiah 14 in the Old Testament as clearly stated, and here in 
this parable of the rich man and Lazarus in the New, are those 
committed to she'ol, or hades, said to perform the acts of the 
living. And by this time there was grave confusion over the 
distinctions between Hades and Gehenna. Such was the con­
temporary setting for the parable.
Christ was not, it should be added, necessarily supporting 
the pagan concept of death as life, that had now corrupted the 
Jewish faith. He was simply using a current concept to instill 
a totally different spiritual lesson.
2. Paralleling Allegories in OT Imagery.—It should 
also be noted that the nearest Old Testament parallel to the 
Dives-Lazarus parable is the parabolic imagery of Isaiah 14:4-11, 
which represents dead kings, though actually in their graves, 
as rising up and sitting on thrones in she’ol. They were there 
portrayed as conversing and rejoicing over the downfall of 
Nebuchadnezzar, the great Babylonian conqueror who had put 
them to death, and was then on his way to take his throne 
among them in the nether regions. (See pp. 170, 171.)
Then there was Jotham’s parabolic story of the trees, the 
vine, and the bramble engaging in animated discussion 
(Judges 9:8-16; 2 Kings 14:9)—but never, of course, taking 
place in reality. It was purely and clearly figurative—a fictional 
narrative. As someone has phrased it, it presented a “substan­
tial truth” in the framework of “circumstantial fiction.” So 
there is no determinative help from the Old Testament. Here, 
in the parable of Luke 16:19-31, the unconscious dead are rep­
resented as carrying on a conversation—but without neces­
sarily involving the actual consciousness of the dead, according 
to Old Testament precedent.
3. Not Biographical Sketch 
but Parabolic Fable.— 
This New Testament portrayal is obviously an illustrative 
parable, not a biographical sketch. It is to be understood and
244
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
treated as a parable—designed to portray and enforce a moral 
lesson. Its personages—the rich man and Lazarus—were not 
actual historical figures, but imaginary characters representing 
classes of people. And, we repeat, one cannot admit certain 
portions to be parabolic, and at the same time insist that other 
portions are literal. The narrative is a unit and stands or falls 
together. In a parable the various details do not have individual 
significance in themselves. They simply constitute an appropri­
ate setting for the story. Consistency, reasonableness, or truth­
fulness are not prerequisite. But it is vastly different with 
historical narratives. Conflict with fact is fatal there.
The fundamental principle illustrated in the parable of 
the rich man and Lazarus is unquestionably that eternal des­
tiny is decided in this present life; and that there is no second 
probation. It clearly declares that there can be no alteration or 
improvement of the condition of those who die outside the 
provisions of salvation. Moreover, if this story were historical, 
it would have to be in harmony with the general teaching or 
tenor of Scripture. But, as we have observed, the idea that 
good and bad alike enter upon their reward at death is not 
in harmony with the general tenor of Scripture. These para­
bolic details and divergences have nothing to do with any basic 
doctrinal teaching on the intermediate state; nor do they bear 
on the character and duration of the future punishment of 
the wicked. Such do not come within its scope. These princi­
ples are determinative.
We should also recognize that a parable may illustrate 
some fundamental aspect of truth based upon current customs 
or contemporary sayings, however erroneous such may be in 
themselves. And such parables must always be understood in 
the light of the truth they are designed to teach. In reality 
this parable has no reference to future punishment or to the 
condition of man between death and the resurrection. And not 
a word is said as to the duration of the flame in Hades, in which 
the scene is placed. Yet Eternal Torment is the main point 
of the contender for the immortality of the soul.
Christ’s Parables of the Lost Sheep, the Lost Coin, and the Lost Son Form the Setting for 
His Further Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus.
ALFRED SOORD, ARTIST 
REVIEW PICTURES
JOHN EVERT MILLAIS, P.R.A., ARTIST 
REVIEW PICTURES
HARRY ANDERSON, ARTIST 
© 1956 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
IV. Christ’s Great Parable of the Lost Opportunity
The story of Dives and Lazarus was the last in a series of 
moving stories, addressed primarily to the Pharisees, as re­
corded by Luke. The fact that Jesus talked with outcasts and 
sinners drew sharp censure from the Pharisees, who mur­
mured, “This man receiveth sinners, and eateth with them” 
(Luke 15:2). These narratives were the stories of the lost 
sheep, the lost coin, the lost son, then of the unjust steward, 
and finally that of the lost opportunity.
1. 
Rejoicing in Heaven; Resentment by Pharisees.— 
The same underlying lesson runs through them all—“more 
joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine 
righteous persons who need no repentance” (v. 7, R.S.V.). 
There is obvious satire in Christ’s reference to the “righteous” 
persons. As with the lost coin and the lost son, there is heavenly
245
246
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
rejoicing over the recovery of the lost—but resentment by the 
Pharisees. More than a hundred times the expression “king­
dom of God,” or “kingdom of heaven,” appears in the Gos­
pels, often stressing joy and rejoicing over the reclaiming of 
the sinner. But the Pharisees, with their stultifying rules and 
repressive regulations and traditions and smug racial arro­
gance, found no place for rejoicing over the recovery of the lost.
In the parable of the unjust steward Christ emphasized the 
necessity of building friendships for the future, drawing a les­
son even from this man’s questionable shrewdness concerning 
his earthly future. How much more important to prepare for 
the life to come. But these important lessons were all spurned 
by the Pharisees, and they “derided” Christ (Luke 16:14). 
Their perverse attitude and actions drew a stern rebuke. They 
were seeking to “justify” themselves before men, but their at­
titudes were an “abomination in the sight of God” (v. 15).
Thus it was that “the kingdom of God is preached, and 
every man presseth into it” (v. 16). Outcasts, without a knowl­
edge of the law and the prophets, were pressing into the king­
dom of God, while those who exulted in having the Sacred 
Oracles committed into their hands concealed cancerous sin 
in their hearts. Meticulous over professed piety, they were ex­
ceedingly lax as to morals, such as with divorce (vs. 17, 18).
2. 
Logical Climax of “Lost Opportunity” Parable.— 
The timing of these parables is also significant. They were 
spoken near the close of Christ’s public ministry. He was mak­
ing His last appeals, based on the shepherd’s love, the woman’s 
diligent search, the wonderful love of the father over his way­
ward son, then preparation for the life to come. And now the 
Master brings forward His last parable in the series—the ne­
cessity of being ready for the day of death and the futility of 
counting on a second probation. Its burden was the tragedy 
of the lost opportunity and the eternal fixity of man's destiny 
when life ends.
It was likewise to show that riches, instead of assuredly 
leading into the “everlasting habitations” of the saved (Luke
CHRISTS GREAT PARABLE OF THE LOST OPPORTUNITY 247
16:9), might prove a fatal barrier against salvation. So the 
story of the rich man and Lazarus logically belongs where it is 
—at the end of this series.
V. Salient Points and Perplexing Problems Outlined
1. 
Terse Outline of the Parable.—Let us first get the 
story before us in a few broad strokes. Two scenes are por­
trayed: (1) life in the present world, and (2) eternal destiny 
in the nether world. First, there was a “certain rich man” who 
“fared sumptuously” on earth (Luke 16:19). Then there was 
Lazarus, a poverty-stricken beggar, in hunger and misery, and 
covered with sores (vs. 20, 21). Death came to both, Lazarus 
being “carried by the angels into Abraham’s bosom” (v. 22). The 
rich man was “buried,” but finding himself in torment, lifted 
up his eyes and saw Abraham in the distance, with Lazarus “in 
his bosom” (v. 23).
Addressing “Father Abraham” rather than God—thus 
relying on his relationship to Abraham—Dives pleaded for 
mercy, asking that Lazarus “dip the tip of his finger in water” 
to cool his tongue, and thus relieve his suffering, for he was 
“tormented in this flame” (v. 24). But Abraham refused, re­
minding Dives that in his earthly lifetime he had the “good 
things,” while Lazarus suffered “evil things.” But now this is 
reversed, Lazarus being “comforted” while Dives is “tor­
mented” (v. 25). And Abraham further reminded Dives of 
the “great gulf fixed” between them, which made any passage 
or relief impossible (v. 26).
The appeal for himself failing, Dives next asked that 
Lazarus be sent to his five brethren still on earth, to warn 
them “lest they also come into this place of torment” (vs. 27, 
28). But Abraham’s significant reply was, “They have Moses 
and the prophets [the OT Scriptures]', let them hear them” 
(v. 29). Then Dives protested that if only “one went unto 
them from the dead, they will repent” (v. 30). But Abraham 
reiterated his position: “If they hear not Moses and the
i
248
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
prophets, neither will they he persuaded, though one rose 
from the dead” (v. 31).
Dives’s very request was, of course, a reflection upon God 
—“If Thou hadst more adequately warned me, I would not 
now be here.” Anyway, that was the tale. And the Pharisees 
had many such folklore stories of imaginary conversations.
2. 
Key Terms and Expressions Examined.—Now let us 
examine the key expressions in this parabolic fable. The nar­
rative takes in earth, Hades, and Paradise—a large coverage. 
The rich man was the Pharisees’ ideal. He fared sumptuously 
—lived in abundance. The translation of plousios (“rich”) 
by dives in the Latin Vulgate, gave rise to the notion that his 
actual name was Dives, as he is frequently dubbed—and 
which we here use for brevity.
There was nothing flagrantly blameworthy in the rich 
man’s outward life. He was not voluptuous or debauched. He 
was philanthropic in his way, and permitted Lazarus to beg at 
the gate of his beautiful mansion. In the concept of the Phari­
sees, Dives’s place in the hereafter, with Abraham and the 
other worthies, was assured. But when his account was closed 
an impassable gulf separated him from Abraham. His whole 
life had been lived in false security. Now he was outside the 
kingdom of God forever.
The “beggar” was named Lazarus. The Pharisees held 
the beggar in disdain, and gloried in the success of the rich 
Dives. While both died, the record does not say the beggar 
was buried. At that time, unknown and unclaimed beggars 
who were overtaken by death along the roadside were car­
ried to Tophet, outside of Jerusalem, and flung into the per­
petual fires, kept burning there to destroy the offal, and corpses 
and carcasses such as this. Although nothing is said about an 
intangible immortal soul having left the body at death, these 
two characters are, by proponents of Innate Immortality, com­
monly regarded as disembodied spirits *
* Thus Van Osterzee, and various other commentators, maintain that the story teaches 
the uninterrupted continuance of the soul separate from the body, in eternal blessedness or woe.
RALPH PALLEN COLEMAN, ARTIST
Those Searching Eyes Are Ever Seeking for Responsive Hearts That Will Accept 
His Offer of Character Restoration and Life Eternal.
As to the “angels,” the Pharisees taught that there were 
sets of angels—one for the wicked, the other for the good.5 
And “Abraham’s bosom” was, of course, not literal, but a fig­
ure of speech—a Jewish idiom meaning Paradise, with Abra­
ham welcoming the newcomers at their death, just as many 
modern Christians conceive of Saint Peter as welcoming the 
righteous at the gate of Heaven. The reference to the “bQsom” 
can perhaps be understood in the light of Christ’s statement 
that He dwelt “in the bosom of the Father” (John 1:18).
B Lightfoot, op. cit., vol. 12, pp. 159-163.
249
250
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Curiously enough, the Pharisees also taught that in life two 
men may be “coupled together,” so that one sees the other 
after death, and they converse together.* In fact, the Pharisees 
had numerous legends and tales of similar imaginary situa­
tions, according to Bishop Lightfoot.
3. 
Sufficiency of Scripture; Unwillingness to Believe. 
—Then Dives lifts up his eyes and strangely sees Abraham 
afar off. But consistency is not called for in a parable. The 
narrative here puts Heaven and Hell within seeing and speak­
ing distance—but with a yawning, impassable gulf between. 
It is a curious situation. Mark it: This “gulf” was too wide 
and too deep to cross over, but narrow enough to see and con­
verse across. (It was such a concept, incidentally, that gave 
rise to Jonathan Edward’s strange contention that the sight of 
the agonies of the damned enhances the bliss of the redeemed. 
Think, however, of a godly mother eternally witnessing the 
excruciating agonies and pleadings of a lost son or daughter!)
“Father Abraham” is addressed as if he were God, with 
Lazarus at his beck and call. The question inevitably arises for 
Christians, Can those who die in Christ, forever converse across 
the dividing chasm with those who have died out of Christ? 
But, for our consolation, Christ was not teaching the geog­
raphy of the underworld. The question of the future world 
was not under discussion. It was not a theological but an 
ethical problem—the right use of opportunity and of wealth 
(for the chapter opens with the parable of the unjust steward). 
The introductory principle was, “Ye cannot serve God and 
mammon” (see Luke 16:11-13). And the climax of the para­
ble is, What saith the Scripture?
Rather, the parable represents the irrevocable separation, 
fixed by death, between the good and the evil at the close of 
their earthly probation. Each must remain in the class in 
which death finds him, until the great assize. And no one is 
assigned to the last fearful second death prior to the judg-
8 ibid.
ment. Today, in life, one may pass from condemnation to 
pardon (John 3:18). But when death comes it is forever too 
late. The gulf is “fixed.” The obvious purpose of the parable 
was to influence the living, and was adapted to the miscon­
ceptions of the Jews at the time. 
It was actually an 
argumentum ad hominem (“to the man”)—an argument di­
rected at, and appealing to, their prejudices rather than to 
their intellect.
Dives demanded additional evidence—extra-Biblical evi­
dence—for his brothers. But Abraham’s firm answer was, 
"They have Moses and the prophets [common designation 
for the Old Testament Scriptures]; let them hear them” 
(Luke 16:29). That is the source of ample information. The 
Scriptures are declared to be a true and sufficient guide to sal­
vation. They are the authoritative source of information, 
available in this life, here and now, concerning human destiny 
and the future life. That is where we too must go, not to hu- 
m«n tradition.
CHRIST S GREAT PARABLE OF THE LOST OPPORTUNITY 251
CHAPTER 
FOURTEEN
Gravity of Ascribing False 
Teachings to Christ
I. Josephus Illuminates Dives-Lazarus Story
Most fortunately for our investigation, Josephus left on 
record a “Discourse to the Greeks Concerning Hades,” 1 which 
illuminates Jesus’ Dives and Lazarus story. Not only does it 
parallel Christ’s narration, showing that it was based on a cur­
rent Jewish belief, but it amplifies and explains the contem­
porary concepts and expressions of the Jews, frankly drawn 
from Platonism.
But it does more. It reveals at the same time how Chris­
tian advocates of Immortal-Soulism and Eternal Torment 
have, in their ardor, gone beyond the specifications of the 
parable, and read into it present eternal suffering for the 
wicked in the unquenchable fires of Gehenna, and this prior 
to the judgment—neither of which is justified by the original 
record. An epitome of Josephus’ “Discourse on Hades,” as 
currently held in the first century a.d., is here given rather 
fully because of its importance to our analysis. But first let us 
note the pertinency, relevancy, and admissibility of Josephus’ 
testimony.
1. 
Representative Character of Josephus’ Depiction. 
—Flavius Josephus (d. c. a.d. 100), celebrated Jewish priest
1 An extract out of Josephus’ “Discourse of the Greeks Concerning Hades,” in The
Works of Flavius Josephus (Whiston tr.).
252
HARRY ANDERSON, ARTIST
© 1945 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
HARRY ANDERSON, ARTIST
© 1945 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
Sin 
and 
Sacrilege in Antediluvian Days 
Multiplied Until God Had to Destroy a 
Polluted Race and Start Man Afresh With a 
New Opportunity. That Is the Grace of God.
God’s Covenant Was Given That the Earth 
Would Never Be Destroyed Again—Until the 
Final Deluge of Fire for the Destruction of 
All Obdurate Sinners.
and historian, was a Pharisee.2 He was not only highly trained 
in Jewish law but recorded the contemporary Jewish teach­
ings, sayings, and traditions of the times. In fact, his writings 
constitute the most comprehensive Jewish history of the cen­
tury. He was an enthusiastic admirer of Rome and its institu­
tions, and basked in the sunshine of the favor of the emperors 
Vespasian and Titus, becoming adviser to Vespasian and serv­
ing as interpreter to Titus during the siege of Jerusalem, in 
a.d. 70—which act aroused the antipathy of the Jews. But this 
did not alter his competence as a witness.
3 Josephus’ autobiography appears at the outset of his Works. Of priestly descent, he 
came from the “first of the twenty-four courses.” He first studied the teachings of all three 
major sects—Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes—and finally identified himself with the Pharisees.
253
254
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Josephus received Roman citizenship, together with a 
pension, and adopted the name Flavius, after that of the im­
perial family. Thenceforth he devoted himself solely to writ­
ing. His works were highly esteemed by the Church Fathers, 
especially Jerome. And he was ever loyal to the Jewish customs 
and religion, as then held—particularly that of the Pharisees, 
in whom we are most interested. His works are still the most 
comprehensive source of information on the times and the be­
liefs and teachings of the Jews in the period of Christ and the 
apostles. Such is his competence and credibility as a firsthand 
witness.
2. Multiple Features 
of Hades Described.—Josephus 
explains that Hades is considered to be a “subterraneous re­
gion,” where the “souls of righteous and unrighteous” are 
alike “detained,” and wherein there is “perpetual darkness.” 
It is a “place” for the “custody of souls,” where “angel” 
guardians distribute “temporary punishment.” In an adjacent 
but separate section is a “lake of unquenchable fire”—but into 
which, Josephus explicitly adds, “we suppose no one hath 
hitherto been cast.” That is significant, and should be remem­
bered.
It is prepared for a “day afore-determined by God,” “in 
which one righteous sentence shall deservedly be passed upon 
all men.” The “unjust” and “disobedient” will then, and only 
then, be assigned to “everlasting punishment,” while the 
“just” will obtain an “incorruptible and never-fading king­
dom.” Both groups are “confined in Hades, but not in the 
same place.”
3. “Just” Guided by 
“Angels” to “Bosom 
of Abra­
ham.”—There is but “one descent into this” subterraneous 
region, “at whose gate . . . stands an archangel with an host” 
of angels. All who pass that way are “conducted down by the 
angels appointed over souls.” “The just are guided to the 
right hand,” which is a “region of light,” with a “prospect of 
good things” to come. There is for them no toil, heat, or cold.
GRAVITY OF ASCRIBING FALSE TEACHINGS TO CHRIST 255
They ever look upon the “countenance of the fathers and of 
the just.” Here they wait for “eternal new life in heaven” 
And now comes the climactic sentence—“This place we call 
The bosom of Abraham.” That is unmistakable identification, 
and must be remembered.
4. “Unjust” Dragged to “Neighborhood” of Hell.— 
Turning next to the “unjust,” Josephus says that they are 
“dragged by force to the left hand by the angels allotted for 
punishment.” He refers to such souls as “prisoners driven by 
violence.” The angels “reproach” them, “threaten” them, and 
“thrust them still downward.” In fact, they are dragged “into 
the neighborhood of hell itself [Gehenna],” “hard by it,” 
where they “continually hear the noise of it,” and where they 
are near “the hot vapour itself.” They have a “near view of 
this spectacle, as of a terrible and exceeding great prospect of 
fire,” and are in “fearful expectation of a future judgment,” 
and are “in effect punished thereby,” in a preliminary way.
5. Impassable Gulf Separates the Two Groups.—But 
that is not all. They “see the place of the fathers and the 
just,” which sight in itself is a punishment. And here is the 
second telltale parallel—“a chaos deep and large is fixed” be­
tween the two groups, so that neither can “pass over” to the 
other side. That is the next major point to be remembered. 
And this, Josephus declares, is Hades, wherein the souls of all 
men are confined until a proper season, which God hath de­
termined. Then He will “make a resurrection of all men 
from the dead,” “raising again those very bodies,” which the 
Greeks erroneously think are “dissolved” forever, and will not 
be resurrected.
Then, declaring that “according to the doctrine of Plato” 
(who is thus frankly named), the Greeks believe that the 
“soul is created” and “made immortal by God,” Josephus as­
serts that God is also able to make “immortal” the “body” He 
has “raised” to life. So, he continues, the Jews believe that the 
“body will be raised again,” and although it is “dissolved, it
R. M. ELDRIDGE, ARTIST
The Terror of the Wicked Will Parallel the Joy of the Redeemed as Our Lord 
Appears in the Clouds of Heaven at His Second Advent.
is not perished.” Again, “to every body shall be its own soul 
restored.”
6. 
Eternal Torment 
for Wicked After Judgment.— 
So, Josephus concludes, after just “judgment” at the “judg- 
ment-seat,” the righteous will have an “everlasting fruition.” 
But the wicked will then be allotted to “eternal punishment” 
—“unquenchable fire, and that without end, and a certain 
fiery worm, never dying.” But that, according to Josephus, is 
still future, not present. The fire and the worm will not de­
stroy the body, and the worm will continue its erosion with 
“never-ceasing grief.” “Sleep” will not afford relief. And 
“death will not free them from their punishment”—which 
ideas again bear the earmark of Platonism. “Nor will the in­
terceding prayers of their kindred profit them.”
That, in careful epitome, is the portrayal of Hades, by 
Josephus. The startling similarity to circumstances in the par­
able of Dives and Lazarus is inescapable. Missing details are 
here supplied. Hazy points are here clarified. Jesus was clearly 
using a then-common tradition of the Jews to press home a
256
GRAVITY OF ASCRIBING FALSE TEACHINGS TO CHRIST 257
moral lesson in a related field. And this Jewish concept of 
Hades was frankly derived from Platonism, through Apoc­
ryphal writers, but climaxing with Philo.
7. 
D
efl
ect
in
g Inroads in Int
er-Test
a
m
ent
a
l Per
iod.—
 
Several pertinent points should here be noted. This period 
was critical. It was the Jewish transition hour. Ph
il
o Judaeus 
(d. c. a.d. 47), of Alexandria, had lived in the generation just 
prior to Josephus. Under Philo the inroads of Greek Plato­
nism reached their peak in deflecting the faith of a large seg­
ment of the Jews from the primal Mosaic teachings on Con­
ditional Immortality and its inseparable corollary, the ul­
timate destruction of the wicked.
Over a period of some two hundred years prior to Christ, 
tangent positions had been developing under the impact of 
Platonic philosophy. Thus the concept that Hades contained 
two chambers appeared in 4 Ezra 4:41, along with the idea 
that the righteous inhabit one chamber {Wisdom of Solomon 
3:1), while the wicked are accursed, scourged, and tormented 
in the other (1 Enoch 22:9-13). The Midrash (on Ruth 1:1, 
Proem) likewise assigns one chamber to the righteous, with 
the other to the wicked. The Talmud (Erubin 19l) also tells 
of the torment of the wicked.
The visibility of one company to the other, in the respec­
tive chambers, is similarly in the Midrash (on Eccl. 7:14). And 
the wicked see the angels guard the righteous (4 Ezra 7:86). 
Both the Talmud (Kethuboth 104“) and 4 Ezra 7:85-87, 91- 
95, tell of the welcoming of the righteous by companies of 
ministering angels. And 4 Maccabees 13:17 mentions the 
righteous as welcomed in Hades by Abraham, Isaac, and 
Jacob. And finally, the righteous, as part of their reward, are 
privileged to sit “in Abraham’s lap” 
(Talmud Kiddushin 
72b). That is the third major point that should be borne in 
mind.
In his Antiquities, Josephus also gives this terse added testi­
mony:
“They [the Pharisees] also believe that souls have an immortal
9
258
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
vigour in them, and that under the earth there will be rewards or pun­
ishments, according as they have lived virtuously or viciously in this 
life; and the latter are to be detained in an everlasting prison, but that 
the former shall have power to revive and live again.”8
It is therefore obvious that the principal points in the para­
ble of Dives and Lazarus were based upon current Jewish 
folklore, which had infiltrated from Platonic philosophy. 
Christ met them on their own familiar ground and drew a 
fundamental moral lesson therefrom, capitalizing upon their 
preconceived opinions.
8. 
Advocates 
In
jec
t 
U
nw
a
r
r
a
nted 
Additions.—But 
the construction placed upon the parable of Dives and 
Lazarus by many modern proponents of Immortal-Soulism, 
who invoke the sanction of this parable by reading into it 
what is neither there in the original narrative in Luke nor 
sanctioned by Josephus’ definitive elucidations, is both re­
grettable and unethical.
Please note the following in Josephus’ discourse: First of 
all, Hades, in the section for wicked souls, here under discus­
sion, is not Gehenna (which is defined as the “lake of fire’’), 
but is only near Gehenna, or in the “neighborhood of hell.’’ 
Second, according to Josephus, no one had yet been cast into 
the lake of fire. That is important and decisive. Third, any 
contemporary “punishment” 
is but “temporary,” as 
the 
wicked may feel the breath of the “hot vapour.” It is not 
eternal envelopment in the fires of Hell, as often pictured. 
Fourth, at the appointed time there will be a resurrection of 
the body, which will then be made immortal.
In that feature the Jews differed from the Greek Plato- 
nists, as well as on the concept of transmigration. And fifth, 
according to Josephus’ elucidation, the eternal punishing and 
the visitation of unquenchable fire will come only after the 
future judgment and its just sentences—which he declares 
had not yet taken place.
That is a vastly different picture from the eisegetical
8 Antiquities of the Jews, book 18, chap. I, sec. 3.
GRAVITY OF ASCRIBING FALSE TEACHINGS TO CHRIST 259
portrayal of those who build present Eternal Torment for 
the immortally damned on this passage. Such are the regret­
table lengths resorted to in an attempt to find Biblical sup­
port for an alien, pagan philosophy.
II. Literalism Violates Consistency, Vitiates Christ’s Witness, 
Overturns Scripture Testimony
1. 
Scofield 
Makes 
Passage Wholly 
Literal.—Before 
we survey critically the inconsistencies of a literal interpreta­
tion, let us note one representative example of champion­
ship of the literalistic exposition, and its involvements. Dr. 
C. I. Scofield, in his well-known Scofield Reference Bible, in 
his note on Luke 16:23, says that the “hell” of this text—the 
Greek hades, and its Hebrew equivalent she’ol—is the “un­
seen world,” “the place of departed human spirits between 
death and the resurrection.” He then sharply distinguishes 
between hades (1) “before the ascension of Christ,” and (2) 
hades “since the ascension of Christ.” Advocating the liter­
alistic 
interpretation, 
Scofield states 
that 
these 
passages 
“make it clear” that “hades was formerly in two divisions, the 
abodes respectively of the saved and the lost.”
The “former” 
(the “abode of the saved”) was then 
“called ‘paradise,’ and ‘Abraham’s bosom.’ ” Scofield then 
states that “both designations were Talmudic, but adopted 
by Christ in Luke 16:22; 23:43.” And he declares, “the blessed 
dead were with Abraham, they were conscious and were ‘com­
forted.’ ” Then he adds:
‘‘The lost were separated from the saved by a ‘great gulf fixed’ 
(Luke 16:26). The representative man of the lost who are now in hades 
is the rich man of Lk. 16:19-31. He was alive, conscious, in full exercise 
of his faculties, memory, etc., and in torment.” * (Italics supplied.)
4 In his “Hades since the ascension of Christ” section, Scofield says: “So far as the 
unsaved dead are concerned, no change of their place or condition is revealed in Scripture. 
At the judgment of the great white throne, hades will give them up, they will be judged, 
and will pass into the lake of fire (Rev. 20:13, 14).” But henceforth (since the ascension of 
Christ) Paradise has been changed to the “third heaven” (citing 2 Cor. 12:1-4). Now, “during 
the present church-age,” the saved who have died are “absent from the body, at home with 
the Lord” (citing Eph. 4:8-10). And he concludes: 
“The wicked dead in hades, and the 
righteous dead ‘at home with the Lord,’ alike await the resurrection.”
260
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
2. 
Inconsistencies 
Involved 
in 
Literal 
Interpreta­
tion.—This story of Dives and Lazarus is either the narrative 
of a literal, historical episode or it is merely a fictional para­
ble. It cannot be both, or half and half, as some seek to make 
it. If literal, it must be true to fact and consistent in detail. 
If it be a parable, then only the primary moral truth to be 
conveyed need concern us, with the narrative subject to the 
recognized licenses and limitations of an imaginary illustra­
tion.
However, many insist on its literality. But a literal appli­
cation breaks down under the weight of its own absurdities 
and contradictions, as will become apparent under scrutiny, 
and when cited to support the popular concept of the Innate 
Immortality of the soul. For example, contenders for literal­
ism hold Dives and Lazarus to be disembodied spirits; that is, 
destitute of bodies. Here, then, we have two ghosts, or shades, 
devoid of bodies and bodily organs—though there is not the 
remotest reference to the soul or spirit of man. Yet Dives is 
here represented as having “eyes” that see, a “tongue” that 
speaks, and as seeking relief from cooling water by means of 
the “finger” of Lazarus—real bodily parts. That surely must 
be an embarrassing inconsistency to the literalist who treats 
them as historical and literal. But that was all part of the 
Jewish tale.
Further, an unbridgeable, material gulf is incomprehen­
sible on the hypothesis of immaterial spirit beings in the 
nether regions. Disembodied “souls,” or “spirits,” are sup­
posed to penetrate or pass everywhere.
Again, if “Abraham's bosom” is figurative, then “Abra­
ham” cannot logically be literal. It would surely be the height 
of incongruity to have Abraham literal but his bosom figura­
tive! As to Abraham, in Scripture record he died and his sons 
buried him (Gen. 25:8, 9), and there is no account of his 
resurrection, as was the case with Moses (Deut. 34:5; Jude 9; 
Matt. 17:3). According to Hebrews 11:8-19, like all the patri­
archs, Abraham has not yet received the promise, but is await­
GRAVITY OF ASCRIBING FALSE TEACHINGS TO CHRIST 261
ing that “better resurrection” at the second coming of Christ 
(vs. 35, 39, 40).
Among other incongruities, literalism places Heaven and 
Hell within geographical speaking and seeing distance of each 
other—with saints and sinners eternally holding futile con­
verse. (Ponder once more the case of a husband and wife so 
situated, or a parent and child.) Again, Dives lifted up “his 
eyes, being in torments,” and said, “. . . I am tormented in 
this flame” (Luke 16:23, 24), but nothing is said in the para­
ble as to the duration of his torment. But according to clear 
statements of Scripture, any such torment occurs only in con­
nection with the second death, and follows, but never pre­
cedes, the Second Advent (2 Thess. 1:7, 8).
Such a conflicting literalistic contention clearly goes too 
far. The fires of Gehenna do not precede the Second Advent. 
And in this parable, Dives is in Hades, not in Gehenna. But 
when the figurative and fictional character of the parable of 
Dives and Lazarus is recognized, then the plaguing incon­
gruities as to time, place, space, distance, et cetera, all vanish. 
The story, with all its inconsistencies, is simply told to convey 
an important moral or spiritual truth.
3. 
Lit
er
a
l
ism 
Contr
a
dicts 
Ch
r
ist’s 
Ex
pl
icit 
D
ecla
r
a­
t
io
n
s.—But that is not all. To use this parable as proof that 
men receive their rewards at death is squarely to contradict 
Christ Himself, who explicitly states that the righteous and 
the wicked receive their reward “when the Son of man shall 
come in his glory” (Matt. 25:31-44). He definitely placed the 
recompense at the resurrection, the time of harvest, and end 
of the world—when the “wheat” of God’s people are gathered 
unto His garner, and the wicked, like “tares,” are bundled for 
burning (Matt. 13:30, 49; Luke 14:14).
As elsewhere seen, Jesus referred to “hell” (Matt. 10:28), 
“hell fire” 
(Matt. 5:22), the “resurrection of damnation” 
(John 5:29), the “damnation of hell” 
(Matt. 23:33), and 
“eternal damnation” (Mark 3:29). But He always put them as 
future, not present, and as following, not preceding, His sec-
262
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
ond coming (Matt. 25:32, 33, 46). And Jesus declared that 
He was going to prepare a place for us in the “many man­
sions” of His “Father’s house” (John 14:2). But He states 
that He will not “come again” to “receive” us until His second 
advent (v. 3).
4. 
Literalism Contradicts Inspired Revelation's Dic- 
tums.—Furthermore, if the narrative is literal, then the beg­
gar received his reward and the rich man his punishment im­
mediately upon death, in the interim before the judgment 
day and the consequent separation of the good and evil. But 
such a procedure is repugnant to all justice. Paul said that 
God “hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the 
world in righteousness” (Acts 17:31). That was still future in 
apostolic times. And the day of separation will not come until 
“the Son of man shall come in his glory . . . : and before him 
shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one 
from another” (Matt. 25:31, 32).
Christ’s own promise is, “Behold, I come quickly; and my 
reward is with me, to give every man according as his work 
shall be” (Rev. 22:12). That tallies with His promise, “Thou 
shalt be recompensed at the resurrection of the just” (Luke 
14:14). That also was Paul’s personal expectation: “There is 
laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the 
righteous judge, shall give me at that day” (2 Tim. 4:8).
And, as seen again and again, literalism squarely contra­
dicts the uniform testimony of the Old Testament—that the 
dead, both righteous and wicked, without reference to charac­
ter, lie silent and unconscious in the sleep of the first death un­
til the resurrection day. In the Biblical Hades there is no 
speech, sight, or pain. It is not a place of torture. But the 
Pharisees had made God’s Word void, as concerns the condi­
tion of the dead,5 by their “traditions” derived from pagan 
Platonic philosophy, which in turn had been borrowed from 
Egypt, Babylon, and Persia. So it was that Dives is here pic-
“See Ps. 6:5; 31:17; 88:11; 115:17; 146:4; Eccl. 9:6, 10; 12:7; Isa. 38:17-19, et cetera.
GRAVITY OF ASCRIBING FALSE TEACHINGS TO CHRIST 263
tured as in a place of torment, living in insufferable flames. It 
was simply Hebraized Platonism, and was in no way condoned 
or endorsed by Christ.
III. Gravity of Ascribing False Teaching to Christ, 
Embodiment of Truth
1. 
U
se o
f Pa
r
a
ble N
ot Endor
sement of Its T
heol
og
y. 
—The question arises, Did not Jesus’ use of this Jewish belief 
make Him endorse the fictitious plot of the parable? Rather, 
is it not like the Christian story of the man who dreamed that 
he died and went to the gates of Heaven? Saint Peter suppos­
edly met him there, and gave him a long piece of chalk. He 
told him to climb to the top of some marble stairs, and there 
he would find a blackboard on which he was to write down all 
his sins. Making his way slowly up the stairs, he met a friend 
hastening down. In his surprise he asked his friend where he 
was going, and the friend replied, “I’m going down for more 
chalk.” Now, we ask in all seriousness, would the telling of that 
story commit one to believing the literality of the theology of 
the illustration, or rather the point it was designed to convey?
2. 
G
ravity 
of 
Implied 
Charges Against Christ.—The 
seriousness of charging that Christ personally believed, pub­
licly sanctioned, and actually set forth as truth this Greco- 
Jewish parable involving Immortal-Soulism, is to charge Him 
with gross inconsistency, neutralizing His own testimony, 
playing false to truth, and contradicting His own eighteen il­
lustrations, from animate and inanimate life, concerning the 
doom of the wicked. Without exception, He taught the utter, 
ultimate destruction of the wicked. It is likewise to put Christ 
in total conflict with His own seven references to the complete 
destruction and disappearance of being, for the wicked, in His 
definitive descriptions of the relentless fires of Gehenna.
More than that, to attribute belief and endorsement of 
this fable of Dives and Lazarus to Christ is to make Him deny
264
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
His own uniformly consistent and multiple teachings on Hades 
—the term actually used for “hell” in this parable—as a state 
of unconscious sleep for all men, good and bad, between death 
and the resurrection (as in John 11:11, 14), from which there 
must be an awakening before there is any return of conscious­
ness, thought, or activity, and where none of the wicked are 
at present undergoing torment.
It likewise puts Christ in the position of endorsing the 
contention that Hades is eternal, whereas according to the 
Apocalypse, it is at last to be destroyed (Rev. 20:14). And 
even the fires of Gehenna are ultimately to burn out and disap­
pear when they have done their appointed work, and the 
wicked are no more, and all pain and death and torment end 
forever, as the new heavens and new earth supersede the 
present world that is to be destroyed in the coming lake of 
fire (Revelation 21 and 22; 2 Peter 3:10-13).
3. M
akes Chr
ist G
uil
t
y 
o
f Pur
veying Error and Per­
ver
sion.—Such a charge makes Christ guilty of endorsing all 
the multiple inconsistencies of a literalistic interpretation of a 
then-current Jewish fable in which the fictional figures com­
port with notions of retribution during the period of “death” 
clearly adopted from Platonism, which makes death but a con­
tinuation of life in the afterworld. It would thus charge Christ 
with guilt in the purveyance of error and perversion. It would 
put Him into direct conflict with the all-sufficiency of Scripture, 
and of His own timeless admonition: “If they hear not Moses 
and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one 
rose from the dead” (Luke 16:31).
4. 
D
ema
nds 
o
f 
R
esur
r
ection 
Br
ought on 
Cr
isis.—To 
accept the Platonic dogma of Immortal-Soulism is to cast over­
board all that Moses and the prophets have written—God’s 
appointed witness, as well as all that Christ taught. Moreover, 
one did actually rise from the dead a short time later and bore 
his testimony (Lazarus, in John 11). Christ’s carping critics 
there proved the futility of such an appearance. In fact, it was
GRAVITY OF ASCRIBING FALSE TEACHINGS TO CHRIST 265
this very episode—Christ’s last and crowning miracle—that 
brought on the crisis in the rejection of Jesus as the life-giving 
Messiah.
It was this very miracle, demanded by Dives, that spurred 
the priests on to plot and accomplish Christ’s death (John 11: 
47-54). Christ’s words were eternally true—they were neither 
persuaded by Lazarus’ resurrection (John 11) nor by His own, 
which climaxed it all (Matt. 28:1-6). They were not at all 
persuaded (Luke 16:31), much less did they repent (v. 30).
IV. Major Area of Disagreement Between Christ and Pharisees
We must not conclude this survey without stressing the fact 
that the nature and destiny of man was a major area of disagree­
ment between Christ and the Pharisees. He was a Scriptural- 
ist, sustaining the unvarying teaching of Moses and the proph­
ets on the nature and destiny of man. They were Platonists, 
having left the scriptural platform and espoused the Innate- 
Immortality postulate of Platonic deduction and philosophy. 
Christ was a Conditionalist, proclaiming eternal life and im­
mortality as a gift, restricted to those only who should believe 
and receive Him as the Life and the Resurrection. They were 
Immortal-Soulists, holding to the natural, inherent, constitu­
tional immortality of the human soul. To that position they 
were now irrevocably committed.
1. 
D
iffer
en
ces 
as 
O
ppo
sit
e 
as 
Ligh
t 
and D
ar
kness.—
 
As to the destiny of man, Christ taught the ultimate and utter 
destruction of the willful sinner. Man, as a rejector of life, 
truth, and light, is mortal, and hence susceptible to death 
and destruction. But the Pharisees taught that the soul of man 
is innately and indefeasibly immortal and indestructible, and 
that therefore the damned will live on forever in excruciating 
torment. The difference was sharply drawn and mutually ex­
clusive. The contrast was as fundamental as the difference be­
tween light and darkness.
266
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
This matter of the soul and its destiny was an area of 
fundamental disagreement between Christ and the Pharisees. 
On this issue their positions were diametrically opposed and 
irreconcilable. But they were not only totally opposite, they 
were mutually destructive. If Christ was right, they were 
wrong. If Christ’s teachings were true, theirs were erroneous 
—and vice versa. Obviously, if Christ was victorious, they 
were defeated. There was no escape from such a conclusion.
It was over this basic issue that the culminating crisis came 
in their relationships, as they rejected His truth and chose to 
cling to their own error. It was the irreconcilability of the two 
positions, among other things, that finally led them completely 
to reject Christ and His distasteful teachings on the life, death, 
and destiny of man. They would have none of His life program.
On this there could be no compromise, no capitulation. 
That meant that He must be silenced, put out of the way. His 
witness must be crushed—otherwise their own position was 
doomed. It was a question of stark survival, for they saw the 
outcome with crystal clearness. He must go.
2. 
Christ Must Not Be Arrayed Against Christ.—That 
is why it is inconceivable that Christ, in this controverted 
parable based on the fictitious but representative characters of 
Dives and Lazarus, in their fabled converse, cannot logically, 
scripturally, or ethically be made to support the Pharisaic posi­
tion on an error that Christ came to counteract and over­
throw. To do so is to array Christ against Himself (Matt. 12:25; 
Mark 3:24, 25; Luke 14:17, 18), and in this instance the Dives- 
Lazarus narrative against the total emphasis and weight of His 
whole message and mission.
It is to take the unthinkable position of siding with the 
Pharisees against Christ. And it is to place Christ in the in­
conceivable position of adopting the false reasoning of Platonic 
pagan philosophy as against the inspired revelation of the 
Scriptures of truth. It is unquestionably to take the path of de­
viation from the straight and narrow way of truth and life.
RUSSELL HARLAN, ARTIST 
® 1948 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
The Cross Provides the Only Exit to Salvation and Life From Earth’s Dark 
Cavern of Sin, Suffering, and Death. It Is God’s Provision and Humanity’s
Only Hope.
And it involves charging Christ with supporting the gross ab­
surdities inherent in a literalistic, Immortal-Soulist interpre­
tation of the story of Dives and Lazarus. It is virtually to undo 
His entire life’s testimony in a sellout to the Pharisees. That 
cannot be!
But it must here be added that this same issue persists, in 
varying degrees, to this day, propelled by the great medieval 
Latin apostasy, and perpetuated in many Protestant circles. 
Hence the confusion and conflict over this question in these 
modern times.
267
268
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
In the light of these sobering facts and fundamental 
principles, and in the light of Christ’s impeccable truthfulness 
and His own personification and embodiment of truth, we must 
therefore deny and reject the validity of the literalist interpre­
tation of this parable-fable as supporting the Innate Immortal­
ity of the soul and the Eternal Torment of the damned. Christ, 
we maintain, was consistent and truthful, and unwavering to 
the end in His adherence to, and enunciation of, the truth as 
to man and his destiny.
We must not place Christ in the unthinkable position of 
endorsing the Platonic error that was so repugnant to His very 
nature as the Fountainhead of life and truth. He must not be 
betrayed in the house of His Christian friends. He must not be 
crucified upon a cross of Innate-Immortality error.
V. Conclusion: Immortal Soulism Collapses Under Scrutiny
1. 
Four
fol
d 
Case 
Aga
inst 
Po
pul
a
r 
Co
n
t
en
t
io
n.—In 
the light of the full-rounded evidence here surveyed, we reject 
the story of Dives and Lazarus as in any way proving the con­
tinuing consciousness of the dead or as establishing the postu­
late of the Eternal Torment of the wicked. Such a dual conten­
tion is wholly without logical justification, and, as seen, flatly 
contravenes both the testimony of Christ and the consistent 
witness of Scripture. Death is consistently set forth throughout 
the Old Testament as a condition of silence, darkness, and un­
consciousness, not of life and activity, and joy or agony.
In the light of all the facts and factors, we must conse­
quently conclude:
(1) That the characters in this dialogue, with its para­
bolic personifications, were wholly imaginary. The legendary 
episode did not happen literally, and could not happen;
(2) That the timing was likewise fictitious, for it clearly 
antedated the Biblical sequence, and is consequently in con­
flict with Bible truth in this area; and
(3) That, as this is the only place in the New Testament
where Hades is portrayed as a place of torment, in this fable 
form—just as in the Old Testament Isaiah raises dead kings 
in she’ol to utter a taunt upon Babylon (Isa. 14:4-11)—it can­
not and does not nullify the whole galaxy of positive, explicit, 
nonfigurative and inescapable Bible teaching upon which alone 
Christian doctrine is to be built and sustained. Pagan Platonism, 
polluting the Jewish faith, which Jesus cited but did not en­
dorse in this legendary fable-parable, should never be allowed 
to corrupt sound Christian doctrine, which Christ came to es­
tablish and protect.
2. 
Spec
ific 
Counts 
Aga
inst A
ccept
a
nce Are 
Det
er
m
i­
n
a
t
iv
e.—We should therefore reject the contention that the 
sleeping souls of the damned are presently alive in torment, for 
that implies that man’s reward is received at death. But that 
fallacy—
(1) nullifies the judgment by anticipating its appointed
time.
(2) completely contradicts the clear testimony that the 
dead are asleep.
(3) represents 
disembodied 
spirits 
as 
inconsistently 
possessing bodily members.
(4) puts the spirits in full view of each other forever in 
the future world—another example of the infiltration of Per­
sian Dualism into Platonism, and thence into Jewish thinking.
Or, to put it in another way: (1) God’s appointed time of 
grace for man is before death and the resurrection—which is 
the main point and purpose of the parable; (2) retribution 
comes only after the resurrection; and (3) life after death is 
always contingent and consequent upon the resurrection. 
These determinative principles are violated in a literal inter­
pretation. The story of Dives and Lazarus was never designed 
to teach conditions on the other side of death. That is an ex­
traneous contention that has been introduced without war­
rant. It is fallacious as an argument and is unworthy of the 
name of sound exegesis. The literalistic “problem” of the pas­
sage collapses under the weight of its own inconsistencies.
GRAVITY OF ASCRIBING FALSE TEACHINGS TO CHRIST 269
CHAPTER 
FIFTEEN
Christ’s Majestic Answer to the 
Penitent’s Plea
I. Problem Text (Luke 23:43): Penitent Thief—“Today”
—and “Paradise”
We now turn to the second “problem text” in the Gospels 
—the solemn promise made by Christ to the penitent thief on 
the adjacent cross at Calvary. This passage is always brought 
forth by proponents of Innate Immortality as “proof positive” 
of the uninterrupted immortality of the soul—as demonstrat­
ing that both Christ and the repentant thief went that very 
day to “Paradise” (some intermediate place between the grave 
and the resurrection), and thus that their condition must have 
been one of continued consciousness and intelligent fellowship 
after death. However, it is not that simple or conclusive. Let us 
examine the evidence.
1. 
Setting of This Amazing Episode.—The background 
briefly is this: Two malefactors (or “thieves,” Matt. 27:38; 
Mark 15:27) were led, along with Christ, to Calvary, and 
crucified with Him there, one on the right hand and the 
other on the left amid the taunting throng. The trilingual su­
perscription, “This is the King of the Jews,” was placed upon 
Christ’s cross (Luke 23:38). Then one of the anguished male­
factors railed on Christ, saying, “If thou be Christ, save thy­
self and us” (v. 39). But the other rebuked his criminal com­
panion, saying:
“Dost not thou fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation?
270
The Crucified Christ, the Author of Life, fTad Power to Promise Eternal Life 
to the Penitent Thief and to Every Repentant Sinner.
HOWARD SANDEN, ARTIST
® 1 963 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
And we indeed justly; for we receive the due reward of our deeds: but this 
man hath done nothing amiss” (vs. 40, 41).
It was at this point that he turned in agonizing contri­
tion and reverently said to Jesus, “Lord, remember me when 
thou comest into thy kingdom” (v. 42).
Then it was that Jesus replied (as punctuated in most
271
272
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
English versions), “Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou 
be with me in paradise” (v. 43).
2. Acquainted With Christ’s Claims and Offers.—That 
is the scene. The penitent thief had evidently been in the 
crowd that had witnessed Jesus’ miracles. His words attest that 
he must have listened to Christ’s marvelous teaching about His 
coming kingdom. He must have heard His gracious invitations 
to come unto Him and find the longed-for forgiveness and 
peace that he craved. Perhaps he had seen Jesus raise the dead. 
Possibly he had heard Jesus say that He must be crucified, but 
would rise again in triumph.
It is inconceivable that anyone would make such a re­
quest without such a background, for here were a dying thief 
and a dying Christ in paralleling positions on adjoining crosses. 
He might even have been a follower for a time, before he had 
turned under pressure of evil companions to the crimes for 
which he was now paying the bitter penalty. In any event, he 
knew Christ’s claims and offers. And in his -eleventh-hour ex­
tremity he turned in contrition to Christ, recognizing His sin­
lessness and believing in His claims.
But let us probe into the intent of the penitent’s request, 
and especially into the import of Christ’s reply.
3. What, Where, and When Is “Paradise”?—Let us ob­
serve at the very outset that one of the chief deterrents to the 
popular contention is the dual fact (1) that the thief did not 
die that day, and (2) that Christ did not go to Paradise that 
day, irrespective of where it is. But this leads us directly into 
the what, where, and when of Paradise (Paradeisos). The word 
“paradise” occurs but three times in Scripture—twice in addi­
tion to this use in Luke 23:43. Note carefully the first one: 
Paul was caught up, in vision, into the “third heaven” (2 Cor. 
12:2), which in verse 4 is expressly affirmed to be “paradise.” 
Paradise, therefore, is, first of all, clearly in the third heaven.
The second usage is in our Lord’s promise in the Apoca­
lypse, “To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of
CHRIST’S MAJESTIC ANSWER TO THE PENITENT’S PLEA 273
life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God” (Rev. 2:7). 
This establishes the fact that Paradise is likewise where 
the tree of life now is. And in Revelation 21 and 22, in the 
description of the New Jerusalem above, we read of—
“a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the 
throne of God and of the Lamb. In the midst of the street of it [the 
city], and on either side of the river [of life], was there the tree of life, 
which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month” 
(Rev. 22:1, 2).
In the Septuagint, the “garden” of Eden is described as 
the “Paradise in Eden” (Gen. 2:8). So the tree of life grows in 
the midst of the Paradise of God, the Holy City, on the banks 
of the river of life, which proceeds from the throne of God. 
That was the Paradise of the Old Testament, of which the 
prophets of old foretold in glowing terms. That is likewise the 
Paradise of the New Testament—in the third heaven, where 
the tree of life is, and where God maintains His throne. Who­
ever, therefore, goes to Paradise goes into the presence of God.
Paradise is emphatically not Hades, nor any part of Hades, 
as some contend. So if Christ and the thief went to Paradise on 
the day of the crucifixion, they must have gone into the pres­
ence of God the Father. But let us go back to certain basic con­
siderations.
II. Three “Heavens and Earths”—Past, Present, Future
To understand the problem of the thief in Paradise, it is 
necessary first to understand the background of the three heav­
ens and earths. First of all, “In the beginning God created the 
heaven and the earth” (Gen. 1:1). Then Peter tells of two 
heavens and earths: The antediluvian heaven and earth— 
“The heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the 
water and in the water: whereby the world that then was, be­
ing overflowed with water, perished” (2 Peter 3:5, 6). These 
were the first. Those that followed the Flood, Peter calls “the 
heavens and the earth, which are now” (v. 7), the next match­
ing pair.
274
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
1. No Co
n
fl
ict Bet
w
een Pet
er’s and Jo
h
n’s Ver
sions.—
 
John the revelator, however, groups these two—the antedilu­
vian and the postdiluvian—together and simply calls them “the 
first heaven and the first earth” (Rev. 21:1), or the “former” 
heaven and earth (v. 4), in historical perspective, in contra­
distinction to the coming new heaven and new earth. The pres­
ent earth, Peter tells us, is “kept in store, reserved unto fire.” 
Then, at the close of the day of the Lord, “the heavens shall 
pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with 
fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall 
be burned up” (2 Peter 3:10). And “the heavens being on fire 
shall be dissolved” (v. 12). That will mark the passing of the 
present heaven and earth.
That which follows the present heaven and earth Peter 
likewise calls “new heavens and a new earth” (2 Peter 3:13), 
just as John tells of the same as “a new heaven and a new earth” 
(Rev. 21:1). So there is complete harmony between them on 
the new heaven and earth. Even Isaiah of old, in God’s ancient 
prophecy, twice declared, “Behold, I create new heavens and 
a new earth” (Isa. 65:17; cf. 66:22).
Thus we actually have three heavens and earths: (1) “The 
heavens [that] were of old, and the earth,” or the antediluvian 
“world that then was” (2 Peter 3:5, 6); (2) “The heavens and 
the earth, which are now” (v. 7); and finally (3) the “new 
heavens and a new earth” to come (v. 13; Rev. 21:1). Thus 
there is perfect harmony in the Inspired Record. And it may 
truly be said that the course of these three worlds constitutes 
the compacted history of the human race, and framework for 
the outworking of the plan of redemption.
2. Par
adise 
o
f Fir
st Ea
r
t
h R
estor
ed 
in T
hir
d Ea
r
t
h. 
—Paradise, with its tree of life, was in the first heaven and 
earth, but disappeared by the time of the Flood. Hence it is 
totally absent in the second, or present, heaven and earth. But 
it reappears in the third, or new, heaven and earth, with its tree 
of life restored (Rev. 2:7; 22:1, 2, 14).
Paradise is Eden restored—and that is still future, when
Safe in the Eternal City of God, the Redeemed Will Eat of the Tree of Life 
and Drink of the Water of Life in Paradise Restored Forever.
Christ will come into His kingdom. But we repeat, Paradise was 
not entered either by Christ or the thief on that crucifixion day, 
as we shall see. And there is no reference to an intermediate 
state. Rather, Christ’s promise is to what lies beyond—a joyful 
resurrection reunion for the penitent and his being forever 
with Christ in His coming kingdom.
III. Penitent Neither in Kingdom Nor in Paradise That Day
1. D
id N
o
t D
ie 
on Sa
m
e Da
y.—The soldiers broke the 
legs of the penitent thief (John 19:31-33), because he was still 
living as that fateful crucifixion Friday was drawing toward its 
close. This was so that he could not escape. But, because Jesus 
was already dead, His legs were not broken. So the crucifixion 
day ended at sunset with the thief still alive and Jesus already 
dead. Clearly they could not have been in Paradise together on 
that same crucifixion day.
2. 
“T
o
g
et
h
er” T
ha
t D
ay O
nly on Ad
jo
in
in
g Crosses. 
—We would press the point that the penitent’s request to 
Jesus was, “Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy
275
276
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
kingdom” (Luke 23:42). The thief evidently understood that 
Jesus claimed He would return to set up His kingdom. Later, at 
Pentecost, Peter said, “And he [God] shall send Jesus Christ, 
which before was preached unto you: whom the heaven must 
receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God 
hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the 
world began” (Acts 3:20, 21). And as the Saviour has not yet 
returned to restore all things, the prayer of the thief has not 
as yet been realized.
Furthermore, Jesus could not return from Heaven that 
day, for the simple and conclusive reason that He did not go to 
Heaven that day. On the third day after His crucifixion, Christ 
said to Mary, who was about to embrace His feet in accordance 
with the ancient custom of deference or worship, “Touch me 
not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father” (John 20:17) 
in Paradise, and that was on the third day after His crucifixion. 
Forty days thereafter He did ascend to God (Acts 1:3, 9), where 
He has remained till this present time. So, had the thief actu­
ally gone to Heaven that day (Friday)—which he did not—he 
would have had to wait forty-three days before Christ came to 
be with him.
Therefore Christ and the penitent were not together any­
where that day, except on the crosses on Golgotha.
3. 
Jesus Went to the Grave, Not to Paradise, That 
Day.—Let us now note where Christ went that crucifixion day. 
The Scriptures expressly teach that instead of going to Para­
dise that crucifixion day, Christ went into the grave—she’ol, 
hades, gravedom. Referring to the first coming of Christ and 
His atoning death, the psalmist David prophesied, “For thou 
wilt not leave my soul in hell [Heb. she’ol, “the grave”]; neither 
wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption” (Ps. 16:10). 
And Peter, at Pentecost, confirms this: “For David speaketh 
concerning him [Christ] . . . ; thou wilt not leave my soul 
in hell [Gr. hades], neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One 
[Christ] to see corruption” (Acts 2:25-27).
The Scriptures explicitly teach that “there is no work, nor
device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave [she’ol], 
whither thou goest” (Eccl. 9:10). “In that very day [of death] 
his thoughts perish” (Ps. 146:4). On the contrary, the Im- 
mortal-Soulist makes hades (or OT she’ol) a place of life and 
joy; and Paradise some part of hades. But the Biblical hades 
could not have been the Paradise wherein the thief and his 
Saviour were to meet and rejoice.
As noted, the Paradise of God, with its tree of life, is 
clearly not in the grave, but in Heaven—to be entered by the 
door of the resurrection. It would be utterly unscriptural to 
say that Joseph’s new tomb, wherein Jesus was laid, was Para­
dise. But when the full teaching of Scripture is adopted, this 
episode is in perfect harmony with the rest of the Bible on the 
intermediate state.
That is the beauty and majesty of truth.
4. 
N
o
t in H
eaven D
ur
ing “T
hr
ee Days and N
igh
t
s.”—
 
Our Lord Himself was in the grave from the time He died and 
was buried in Joseph’s new tomb until He rose. If anyone con­
tends that Christ’s “spirit”—which at His death He com­
mended into His Father’s hands (Luke 23:46)—was the ac­
tual, the real Christ, that notion is precluded by Christ Him­
self, when He said that just as surely as the prophet Jonah was 
“three days and three nights in the whale’s belly” (Matt. 
12:40), so was the Son of man to be “three days and three nights 
in the heart of the earth”—Hebraism for the earth, the sepul­
cher, or tomb (Matt. 27:60; Mark 15:46; Luke 23:53; John 
19:40-42).
To those who came to the sepulcher on the resurrection 
morn the angel said, “I know that ye seek Jesus, which was 
crucified. He is not here: for he is risen” (Matt. 28:5, 6). He 
was not in the tomb because He had risen. That is clear. But 
He was in the tomb until He left it by rising from the tomb, 
and thus leaving its precincts. And even after His resurrection, 
and before His ascension, it will be recalled, He declared that 
He had not yet ascended to His Father (John 20:17). Jesus 
was not in Heaven during those three days.
CHRIST’S MAJESTIC ANSWER TO THE PENITENT’S PLEA 277
278
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
IV. Meaning Completely Altered by Position of Comma
1. 
Punctuation 
Constitutes 
Exegesis — Right 
or 
Wrong.—But the main problem, technically, is whether the 
adverb “to day” [semeron, “this day,” or “today”] qualifies 
“say,” or “shalt be.” If it qualifies “say,” all is harmonious; 
but if it qualifies “shalt be,” there is sharp discord with the 
rest of Scripture. We would stress the point that there were 
absolutely no punctuation marks in the original. And as punc­
tuation marks were not introduced until many centuries after 
the New Testament was written, it is evident that the punc­
tuation of the Bible is therefore entirely human and variable, 
and not inspired. But that is not all. The meaning of a text 
may be completely changed by the wrong position of a comma. 
Take for example: “But this man, after he had offered one 
sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God” 
(Heb. 10:12).
If the comma is wrongly placed after “sins,” the passage 
says that Jesus “for ever sat down on the right hand of God” 
—and thus will never come again to this world. But when it 
is rightly placed after “for ever,” then the passage says that 
after Christ had offered Himself as the final, once-for-all sacri­
fice, He then “sat down on the right hand of God; . . . till his 
enemies be made his footstool,” when He returns at His sec­
ond advent.
Similarly with Luke 23:43. If the comma be placed after 
“to day,” the text is in harmony with the rest of Scripture, 
and no longer teaches that the thief went to Heaven that day 
to be with Christ—who, be it again noted, did not ascend un­
til some forty-three days after the crucifixion. It is thus ob­
vious that punctuation is a definite factor in exegesis. And in 
this instance (of Luke 23:43) the comma makes the exegesis 
contradictory and controvertive. In fact, it is, instead, an un­
witting case of eisegesis. But one part of God’s Word must 
never be arrayed against another.
2. Placing of Comma Determines Meaning.—We now
CHRIST’S MAJESTIC ANSWER TO THE PENITENT’S PLEA 279
present the problem sentence in three contrasting forms: (1) 
as it appeared originally, that is, without any man-made punc­
tuation; (2) as it appears in the A.V. and most English transla­
tions, and is made to support the Innate-Immortality concept, 
because of the position of the comma, injected by the Im- 
mortal-Soulist translators, between “thee” and “to day”; and
(3) as the sentence is punctuated with the comma following 
“to day.” Thus the text conforms to the general teaching of 
Scripture. In this way, by the simple shifting of the man-made 
comma, harmony, beauty, and truth are re-established. Com­
pare the three:
(1) “Verily I say unto thee to day shalt thou be with me in paradise.”
(2) “Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in para­
dise.”
(3) “Verily I say unto thee to day, Shalt thou be with me in para­
dise.”
We need have no hesitation in shifting the comma from 
the place in which the human transcribers and translators saw 
fit to place it—when it avoids the contradiction of a doctrine 
God has so clearly revealed. And there is no rule of the Greek 
language to prevent the placing of the comma after, instead of 
before, “to day,” when so required to avoid a contradiction. 
And the Scriptures themselves demand just that in order to 
preserve the unity of the Word.
V. Determining Evidences on the Technical Side
This particular text (Luke 23:43) differs from all other 
problem texts in that it presents a technical side, involving 
not merely semantics (or the question of meanings of terms 
and the signification of the inspired words or forms), but also 
(1) the mechanical element of punctuation, which is purely 
man made, and was not in any way a part of the original manu­
scripts; (2) the position of the Greek adverb semeron (“to­
day,” or “this day”). First note the matter of punctuation.
1. Pun
ct
u
a
t
ion Based Ent
ir
el
y 
on H
uma
n A
u
t
h
o
r
it
y.
280
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
—Punctuation, as we have it today, was entirely absent in the 
original New Testament Greek manuscripts. The earliest 
manuscripts (the Rylands Fragment and the Bodmer Papyri) 
have only an occasional dot, or point, on a level with the top 
of the letters, sometimes a space. The text continues without 
any divisions between letters or words until manuscripts of 
the ninth century, when in the Codex Augiensis (in Cam­
bridge) a single point appears separating each word—this dot 
being placed in the middle of the line. Often it was omitted.
Inasmuch as none of our modern marks of punctuation 
appeared until the ninth century, it is therefore evident that 
the punctuation of all modern editions of the Greek Text1 
rests entirely on human authority3 It was the work of tran­
scribers and translators, inserted in accordance with their best 
judgment, but influenced at times by their theological con­
cepts. Punctuation, as we know it, therefore has no rightful 
weight in determining, or even influencing, the interpretation 
of a single passage. (Nor is there authority for capital letters.) 
Consequently no legitimate argument can he made on the 
position of the comma in Luke 23:43. Rather, it is to be placed 
where it comports with the demands of Scripture.
2. 
Punctuation Not Introduced Till Time 
of Ren­
aissance.—And, as stated, there is no rule of the Greek lan­
guage that determines the placing of a comma. It must be 
placed so as to be in harmony with the general tenor of the 
Word, and so as not to produce a conflict in its teachings. One 
part must never be arrayed against another. Modern punctua­
tion, developed after the introduction of printing, was attrib­
uted to Aldus Manutius, learned printer of Venice, of the fif­
teenth century. So these markings are destitute of any deter­
mining authority. Punctuation, we must therefore conclude, has
1 The dating of the leading printed editions of the Greek text are: Erasmus (1516), 
Stephens (1546-1549), Beza (1624), Elzevir (1624), Griesbach (1774-1775), Scholz (1830-1836), 
Lachmann (1831-1850), Tischendorf (1841-1872), Tregelles (1856-1872), Alford (1862-1871), 
Wordsworth (1870), Reviser’s Text (1881), Westcott and Hort (1881-1903), Scrivener (1886), 
Weymouth (1886), Nestle (1904)—Companion Bible, Appendix 94, p. 136.
- George R. Berry, editor of Interlinear Literal Translation of the Greek New Testament, 
says, “There is no authority anywhere for the punctuation.” “We are anxious that our readers 
should remember that [even] paragraphs have no authority” (Introduction, p. ii).
no weight whatever in determining the original intent of a 
single passage.
3. 
R
el
a
t
io
n
sh
ip 
of G
r
eek Adverb “Sem
er
o
n” 
t
o Pr
ob­
l
em.—It should also be borne in mind that the Greek adverb 
semeron (“today”) stands between the verbs lego (“I say”) 
and ese (“you will be”), and might apply to either. It is also 
to be noted that this adverb, semeron (“today,” or better, “on 
this day”), occurs in the Septuagint Old Testament and the 
Greek New Testament 259 times. It is used as an adjective 24 
times, and without a verb to qualify, 14 times. Of the remain­
ing 221 times, it precedes the verb it qualifies 51 times but 
follows it 170 times.
Thus even from the angle of usage the preponderance is 
in favor of placing the comma after “today.” It is also to be 
noted that lego soi (“I say to thee”) is reversed in the Tischen- 
dorf and Tregelles texts to soi lego (“to thee I say”). But 
these are side lights.
In Luke 23:43 the “to day” should be connected with the 
Hebraism, “I say to thee,” to emphasize the solemnity of the 
occasion, not with the “shalt thou be.” Thus, instead of merely 
a remembrance of the penitent when Christ should come into 
His kingdom, Jesus pledges a presence and participation, then, 
in association with Himself. This explains why Jesus seem­
ingly did not answer the penitent’s request merely on its own 
terms. It embraced much more.
The thief was not concerned primarily with when he 
would reach Paradise, but whether he would have a place in 
Christ’s kingdom—not when but whether. Jesus’ answer was 
an assurance that however undeserving he might be, or how­
ever impossible it might appear for the dying Jesus to bring 
His promise to pass, he was assuredly to be there. Indeed, it 
was Christ’s presence and approaching death on the cross that 
assured the fruition of such a hope.
Thus the problem text (Luke 23:43) harmonizes with the 
many texts of the Old Testament, declaring, “I say to you 
this day, . . .”; “I testify to you this day, . . .”; et cetera.
CHRIST’S MAJESTIC ANSWER TO THE PENITENT’S PLEA 281
RUSSELL HARLAN, ARTIST 
© 1957 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
Christ’s Empty Tomb Is Our Assurance of Life. Because Christ Died We Need 
Not Die. Because He Rose We Too Shall Live.
See Deuteronomy 6:6; 7:11; 8:1; 10:13; 11:8, 13, 28; 13:18; 
19:9; 27:4; 31:2, et cetera, where it is to be particularly noted, 
the Septuagint corresponds to the usage in Luke 23:43. Here are 
two examples from the Septuagint:
“I command thee this day, to love the Lord thy God, to walk in 
his ways, and to keep his ordinances” (Deut. 30:16).
"I declare to you this day, that ye shall surely perish” 
(Deut. 
30:18).
Moses did not mean that they should surely perish that 
day, but that they would surely perish if they turned away 
from the Lord.
VI. Most Sublime Episode of Christ’s Redemptive Career
And now, with the evidence all before us, picture the 
scene again. Jesus had for three years been preaching to the 
listening multitudes concerning His coming kingdom of glory. 
A part in that kingdom had been promised to all His fol-
282
lowers. But now the powers of death pressed in around Him. 
Darkness and failure seemed destined to triumph, crushing 
down His lofty promises to the depressing prospects of the 
grave. He who was to have been king in the coming triumph 
was now expiring in agony and reproach. Moreover, His inner­
most disciples had forsaken Him and fled. None stood with 
Him in the crisis hour. Never had the outlook seemed so 
bleak and blasted.
1. 
R
ecognized 
in Jesus 
t
h
e Com
ing 
King.—But it was 
amid that enshrouding darkness that divine illumination 
flashed into the mind of that stricken thief on the adjoining 
cross. Conviction of the truthfulness of Jesus’ claims as the 
Messiah, the Son of God, pierced his heart. He had seen the 
superscription upon Christ’s cross, “The King of the Jews.” 
He recognized in the outcast, anguished Jesus, the King of the 
coming age. He realized that Jesus must first be resurrected, 
as He claimed He would be, if He were to reign as king. 
Nevertheless, vaulting all obstacles, and accepting Christ for 
what He claimed to be, the penitent then and there placed his 
trust and his future into the hands of the dying Jesus.
“Lord,” he petitioned, “remember me” in the day when 
Thou comest into Thy triumph and glory—“when thou 
comest into [possession of] thy kingdom.” It is one of the 
highest acts of faith ever recorded. And then it was that Jesus, 
the suffering Saviour, the cross-nailed Christ, in the hearing 
of that mocking, jeering multitude, majestically declared, 
“Verily, I say unto thee today”—today, in this My hour of dark­
ness and shame and agony, when the cross is seemingly defeating 
all My claims; today, amid all these forlorn prospects and 
blighted hopes, so far as the natural eye can see—“Verily, I say 
unto thee today, Thou shalt be with Me in Paradise,” the 
new-earth home of the saints, with Me—yes, “with” Me— 
when My kingdom shall indeed be established in triumph and 
glory forevermorel
2. Sym
bol of M
ul
t
itudes in Ea
r
t
h’s El
ev
en
th H
ou
r.—
 
Such is the beauty and force of these words of our Lord, uttered
CHRIST’S MAJESTIC ANSWER TO THE PENITENT’S PLEA 283
284
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
toward the close of that crucifixion day. But the scattered dis­
ciples missed their impact, for they had fled, and had heard them 
not. And the taunting multitude paid no heed. Only the peni­
tent thief heard and understood their import. Now, in the light 
of that act of faith, no separating veil of darkness could long be­
cloud Christ’s vision. His agony over the feared forsaking by 
His Father (Matt. 27:46) passed. His prophetic foresight 
penetrated the physical darkness (27:45) and fixed itself upon 
the destined coming victory over death. Lifted up from the 
earth on Calvary’s cross (John 3:14, 15), He had drawn one of 
His companion sufferers unto salvation and life in that climac­
tic hour. He died with His trust in His Father (Luke 23:46).
In this last convert ere He died—symbol of multitudes 
who would yet believe, many of them in the eleventh hour of 
human history (Matt. 20:6-16)—He saw the travail of His 
soul and was satisfied (Isa. 53:11). He was comforted by the 
faith of a penitent thief. And the sharer of the suffering of Gol­
gotha would be with Him in Paradise restored, and that forever. 
Such is the grandeur of that day—the thief and the King side 
by side, and the thief not ashamed of the Crucified One, of 
whom apostles were ashamed; the thief trusting in the One 
whom His closest disciples had temporarily ceased to trust.
3. Pr
obl
em 
R
emoved 
by 
Sh
ift 
of 
Co
m
m
a.—Thus by 
the simple shifting of the man-made comma—misplaced many 
centuries too late by the misguided translators because of their 
Platonic misconceptions—the problem of this text is removed, 
harmony is established with the general tenor of Scripture, 
and the beauty and significance of that majestic utterance stands 
out in its true grandeur in one of the most sublime episodes of 
Christ’s redemptive career on earth. Christ died, conscious of 
the trust of His fellow sufferer on the adjoining cross. And be­
cause He died, the thief will live forevermore in the coming 
kingdom.
4. Bew
a
r
e of Put
t
ing Falsehood 
on Lips 
o
f Ch
r
ist.—
 
Let us beware lest we commit the audacious act of putting
upon the lips of Truth Incarnate, in the solemn hour before 
death, a mocking echo of the lie of Eden, which He came to 
confute and expose. Let us be on our guard lest we place the 
dying Son of God in the unthinkable position of offering a 
mocking hope to the repentant thief—of being together some­
where that day, in some Platonic, Jewish, papal, or Protestant 
paradise—a deception that would not only be totally untrue but 
utterly repugnant to Jesus, the inerrant and impeccable em­
bodiment and exponent of truth.
That would be a sacrilegious, yes, a mendacious act, fear­
ful in its implications, and for which the perpetrator would 
assuredly be held accountable. Never should we forget the 
solemn dictum of Holy Writ, “It was impossible for God to 
lie” (Heb. 6:18), and the paralleling truth that He never de­
ceives. Christ would never reverse the infallible utterance of 
Eden that He came to sustain.
CHRIST’S MAJESTIC ANSWER TO THE PENITENT’S PLEA 285
CHAPTER 
SIXTEEN
Christ Portrays Doom of Wicked 
as Utter Destruction
I. Seventeen Graphic Illustrations of Doom of Wicked
In concluding the witness of Christ, let us examine His 
inerrant testimony on the fate of the wicked. Christ ever 
“taught them as one having authority,” and “not as the scribes” 
(Matt. 7:29; cf. John 7:26). These learned men always de­
ferred and referred to tradition or to what some noted teacher 
had said. But Christ—Creator, Saviour, Priest, Judge, and re­
turning King—is the supreme authority of all time in this 
field. He knows man’s frame and man’s destiny. He cannot err 
and will not mislead. Let us reverently hear and believe His 
witness. Here is what He says:
1. 
Il
lust
r
a
t
ions 
Fr
om 
In
a
n
im
a
t
e 
Life.—Jesus gave 
seventeen graphic illustrations, drawn from both inanimate 
and animate life, to portray comprehensively the doom of the 
wicked. They are strikingly conclusive. (Some are repeated, 
evidently for emphasis.) Christ’s terse allusions were both 
vivid and inescapable. They divide themselves into two all-en­
compassing groups. Here is the initial group, in their English 
rendering. In eight different figures Christ declares the sin­
gle truth.
A house built on sand falls (Matt. 7:26, 27).
Tares are gathered and burned (Matt. 13:30, 40).
Bad fish are cast away (v. 48).
Harmful plants are rooted up (15:13).
Worthless trees are cut down (Luke 13:7).
286
CHRIST PORTRAYS DOOM OF WICKED AS DESTRUCTION 287
Withered branches are burned (John 15:6).
Debtor is held in prison (Matt. 5:26; ISIS'!).1
Offender is cast into outer darkness (8:12; 22:13; 25:30).
In each case (save the last two, given for another purpose) 
the destruction is declared complete, leading to utter and final 
disintegration. The doom of the wicked was never portrayed 
by Christ as an endless life in torment. The “tree which 
bringeth not forth good fruit,” He declares, “is hewn down, 
and cast into the fire” (Matt. 3:10). That signifies its final and 
complete destruction and disappearance.
2. Second G
r
o
u
p Based on H
uma
n Life.—In His second 
group of illustrations, based upon human life—thus obviating 
any misunderstanding or evasion—the Master declares:
The wicked husbandmen are destroyed (Matt. 21:41; Luke 20:16).
The rejector is ground to powder, scattered as dust (Matt. 21:44).
The evil servant is cut asunder (Matt. 24:51).
The wicked will perish like the Galileans (Luke 13:2, 3).
They are slain like those crushed by Siloam’s tower (vs. 4, 5).
They are destroyed like the victims of the Flood (17:27).
They are destroyed by fire like men of Sodom and Gomorrah 
(17:29).
They will die, as in the fate of Lot’s wife (17:32).
The rebellious “citizens” are slain 
(19:14, 27).
These portrayals, individually and collectively, all denote 
capital punishment. They signify sudden, swift, violent death 
—attended with greater or less suffering. They are set forth 
as fit illustrations of the coming second death for the stub­
bornly recalcitrant sinner.
3. A
l
l 
Por
tr
a
y 
T
ot
a
l 
and 
Fina
l 
Ex
t
in
ct
io
n.—Thus 
of the seventeen different illustrations employed by the Sav­
iour to depict the doom of the wicked, all but two portray utter
1 The debtor, cast into prison (Matt. 5:26; 18:34), indicates that the debt is inescapable 
and irrevocable. And the offender cart into outer darkness (Matt. 7:12: 22:13; 25:30) indicates 
that there is weeping and gnashing of teeth—conscious suffering. (Weeping and gnashing of 
teeth is used seven times by Christ—Matt. 8:12; 1,3:42; 13:50; 22:13; 24:51; 25:30; Luke 
13:28.) The “gnashing of teeth” precedes the lapsing into final unconsciousness. But Jesus 
does not say this gnashing and weeping is without end. We repeat: There is nothing to suggest 
endless continuance in either case. The total evidence of Scripture rebuts such an inference. 
All, both animate and inanimate evil things, come to final retribution. The doom of Gehenna, 
for the unrepentant sinner, is final and irrevocable, ending in total destruction.
288
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
and ultimate destruction, or dissolution, under the second 
death, whereas the other two indicate the certainty of that 
doom. Here is a case in point: “When the lord therefore of 
the vineyard cometh, what will he do unto those husbandmen? 
. . . He will miserably destroy [apollumi] those wicked men” 
(Matt. 21:40, 41).
According to the witness of Christ, then, there is eternity 
of result but not of process, of punishmenf but not of punish­
ing of men. Apollumi and apoleia and the cognate Greek 
terms Christ employs all involve complete destruction.
The lesson is obvious: As rivers separated from their 
source, as trees with neither roots nor branches, as dry bundles 
of tares, as corpses eaten by worms, so the incorrigibly wicked 
will go to destruction in Gehenna—the refuse heap, as it were, 
of lost men. Christ asserts, then, without qualifications, the final 
and total extinction of the entire man in fire that cannot be 
quenched, as the fate of the impenitent.
II. Christ’s Meaning of “Eternal” Fire, Punishment, Damnation
Christ thrice speaks of the doom of the wicked as being, or 
involving, something “eternal.” His three important warning 
statements are:
(1) Mark 3:29—“He that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost 
... is in danger of eternal damnation 2 [aioniou kriseos, “eternal judg­
ment”].”
(2) Matt. 25:46—“These shall go away into everlasting punishment 
[kolasin aidnion]: but the righteous into life eternal [zoen aidnion].” (Cf. 
Paul, 2 Thess. 1:9.)
(3) Matt. 25:41—“Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire 
[to pur to aidnion], prepared for the devil and his angels.”
In the first instance there is a distinct and consummating 
act, coupled with endless duration of result—the sentence be­
ing everlasting in its consequences. It is the sin that throughout 
the ages remains unpardoned.3 In the second, the “punishment”
2 Some manuscripts read “eternal sin.”
3 See R. F. Weymouth, New Testament in Modern Speech (3d ed.), Mark 3:29, n. 10.
HARRY ANDERSON, ARTIST
©1950 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD 
T. K. MARTIN, ARTIST
The Conflict of the Ages Has Been Between Satan, the Rebel and Source of Evil,
and Christ, the Creator and Redeemer, Judge and Coming King.
and the suffering are not identical—the punishment is like­
wise eternal in its effects whereas the suffering ends in utter 
abolition, or cessation, of being. And in the third, the fire is 
called “everlasting” because its results are everlasting. It 
is not simply a fire, but “the fire”—the one “prepared for the 
devil and his angels” (Matt. 25:41). It ends in destruction 
and ashes.
1. 
Meaning Determined by Noun to Which Attached. 
—In each of these passages the Greek word for “everlasting,” 
or “eternal,” is the adjective aidnios—derived from the noun 
aidn, an “age” or “era”—the word itself leaving the time limit 
of the age undefined. The late Bishop H. C. G. Moule, of Dur­
ham, in his Outline of Christian Doctrine, soundly declared 
that the term of duration expressed by aidnios must always be 
sought in the noun to which it is attached, not in the modifying
10 
289
290
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
aidnios itself. Therefore, to determine its true meaning we 
must carefully trace its usage in Scripture, and seek out the 
noun it modifies.
God, and things divine, are incontestably endless—thus 
involving the full and unrestricted meaning. But earthly things 
will not last beyond the earth in its present age or form. Thus 
the aidnion Mosaic statutes and the aidnion Aaronic priest­
hood belonged to a passing dispensation—and ceased. The ad­
jective aidnios there obviously stood for a limited time only— 
“age long”—the noun it modified determining the term of 
duration.
On the contrary, “life eternal’’ (zoen aidnion), for the 
righteous, is used more than forty times. That life will be 
unending. But in contrast, the runaway slave, Onesimus (Phi­
lemon 15), who was to serve his master “for ever’’ (likewise 
aidnion), was to serve only as long as he lived. Clearly the 
substantive, or noun, determines the meaning.
2. 
D
ivin
e Actions 
or Act
ivit
ies 
M
ay 
Be T
er
m
in
a
bl
e. 
—Christ clearly taught that divine conditions or Persons abide 
unendingly, whereas divine actions or activities may be ter­
minable, for example, punishment (Matt. 25:46); judgment 
(Heb. 6:2); sin (Mark 3:29); destruction (2 Thess. 1:9); salva­
tion (Heb. 5:9); redemption and fire (Matt. 18:8; 25:41; 
Jude 7). These expressions obviously do not mean endless 
punishing, judging, sinning, destroying, saving, redeeming. 
Endless salvation is not endless saving, but represents a com­
pleted work of grace.
The fire that destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah was not 
endless in its process, but was completely endless in its results. 
The “unquenchable fire” that “burns up” the chaff, will not 
keep that chaff forever burning. Again we see that the noun to 
which the modifying aidnios is attached, automatically deter­
mines the unlimited or the limited meaning—such as “eternal 
inheritance” 
(Heb. 9:15), or “everlasting [eternal] gospel” 
(Rev. 14:6).
Thus in Matthew 25:46 the living state of the righteous is
CHRIST PORTRAYS DOOM OF WICKED AS DESTRUCTION 291
endless, and the death-punishment state, or condition, of the 
wicked, produced by the process of destruction, is a death 
state as endless as the contrasting life state is endless. But the 
process is not eternal, only the result. We must therefore con­
cur with Bishop Moule and other recognized scholars that the 
noun to which aidnios is attached is the determinative factor. 
In one case it is terminable; in another it is interminable.
III. Christ’s Explicit Teachings on “Hell” Examined
In considering the ultimate destiny and doom of the 
wicked, we must likewise note Christ’s definitive teachings on 
Hell. Confusion in understanding was introduced, at the time 
of translation, by the unfortunate rendering into the one Eng­
lish word Hell, the three different Greek words, Gehenna, 
hades, and Tártaros (from tartardo), although each has a 
wholly separate and distinctive meaning. (Christ, however, does 
not Himself deal with Tártaros. That appears only once, and 
then in verbal form, in 2 Peter 2:4, and is considered in 
chapter 20, pp. 383-385.)
Singularly enough, the most striking and forceful language 
in the entire Bible as regards Hell and the punishment of the 
wicked, fell from the lips of Christ Himself. Nevertheless, these 
expressions are entirely compatible with His character as In­
carnate Love. It is only when invested with the theological 
deviations of the centuries that they take on the terror and 
cruelty that is as foreign to Christ’s own heart as they are a 
distortion of the language He used. John 3:16 presents the sim­
ple but comprehensive dual truth of God’s tender love and 
His holy judgment. To “perish” (apollumi) means nothing 
less than the “destruction” unquestionably taught in Scripture. 
It is the terminus of the “wide gate” and the “broad way,” 
against which He warned.
1. 
Two T
er
ms 
U
sed 
by Ch
r
ist.—We now turn to the 
two terms used by Christ.
(1) Gehenna, or the “hell fire” 
(“Gehenna of fire”)
(Matt. 5:22; 18:9), Christ used to describe the place of future, 
final punishment of the wicked. Gehenna, Ge Hinnom, or the 
Valley of Hinnom, was a ravine south of the city of Jerusalem. 
According to tradition, it was a place of fire and destruction 
for refuse. Fires were kept burning constantly, and maggots 
bred freely and fed upon the filthy and putrefying carcasses. 
Such was the familiar figure used by Christ for the coming 
destruction of all the unclean things of the universe. It sym­
bolized the coming “lake of fire” mentioned in Revelation. 
Dr. R. F. Weymouth, in a note on Matthew 5:22, states:
“Gehenna of Fire Or ‘Hell.’ The severest punishment inflicted by the 
Jews upon any criminal. The corpse (after the man had been stoned 
to death) was thrown out into the Valley of Hinnom (Ge Hinnom) and 
was devoured by the worm or the flame.” *
(2) 
Hades (Gr. equivalent of Heb. she’ol) is recorded as 
used by Christ only three times: in His condemnation of Caper­
naum (Matt. 11:23; Luke 10:15); in His reply to Peter’s con­
fession (Matt. 16:18); and in the parable of the rich man and 
Lazarus (Luke 16:23). The parable of the rich man and Laza­
rus has already been treated, and the rest of the New Testa­
ment usages of hades will be noted separately later.
2. 
Chr
ist’s 
Specific 
T
ea
chings 
on 
G
eh
en
n
a.—Christ’s 
allusions to Gehenna occur in seven passages—the only other 
New Testament reference being in James 3:6. We note them 
here:
(1) Matt. 5:22—“shall be in danger of hell fire”
(2) 5:29, 30 (2)—“that thy whole body should be cast into hell”
(3) 10:28—“able to destroy both soul and body in hell”
(4) Luke 12:5—“Fear him, which . . . hath power to cast into hell”
(5) Matt. 18:8, 9—“Cast into everlasting fire”; “cast into hell fire”
(6) Mark 9:43, 45, 47—“go into hell”; “cast into hell”; “cast into 
hell fire”
(7) Matt. 23:15, 33—“twofold more the child of hell”; “How can ye 
escape the damnation of hell?”
(In each case the “hell” is from Gehenna.)
292 
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
*Ibid., Matt. 5:22, n. 12.
CHRIST PORTRAYS DOOM OF WICKED AS DESTRUCTION 293
3. 
Expl
a
na
t
or
y N
otes on t
h
e Seven T
ext
s.—Under No. 
1 (Matt. 5:22), Dean Alford states that there were three de­
grees of guilt: First, those coming under the cognizance of the 
local synagogue council of three; then came those of the su­
preme council or Sanhedrin—meted out by the sword, or ston­
ing, and often followed by the disgrace of the fire of Gehenna. 
And after the first two came the final Gehenna of the fire (ten 
geennan tou puros, “hell of fire”), wherein the corpse of the 
malefactor was cast into the Valley of Hinnom, to be devoured 
by the worm and reduced to ashes by flame—an intensification 
of the horrors of simple death. But the final punishment in 
each case was death.
Under No. 2 (Matt. 5:29, 30) is stressed the preference of 
the perishing of an eye (choicest possession), or hand, to that 
of the whole body when cast into the Gehenna of fire.
In No. 3 (Matt. 10:28) the killing of soul and body is 
man’s complete abolition, or destruction. Apollumi, 
and its 
cognate apoleia, translated into English as “destruction” or 
“perdition,” gives us the key to our Lord’s meaning. And this 
is corroborated by Peter and Paul, each of whom gives self­
interpreting passages in which they use the terms “destroy” and 
“perish.” Christ first cites the terrible fate of the Galileans who 
perished under Pilate. Then He warns, “Except ye repent, ye 
shall all likewise perish [apollumi]” (Luke 13:3). Next He 
adds the episode of those killed by the falling of the tower of 
Siloam. And again He warns, “Except ye repent, ye shall all 
likewise perish [apollumi]” (vs. 4, 5).
Such is the doom for the impenitent—swift, tragic, fatal, 
complete. Be it noted, however, that there is not a syllable 
about being kept alive forever in endless conscious torment. 
Peter subsequently said to Simon Magnus—when he offered 
money in an endeavor to purchase the power of the Holy 
Spirit for his own use—“Thy money perish [apollumi] with 
thee” (Acts 8:20). The doom of both Simon and his money 
was destruction.
No. 5 (Matt. 18:8, 9) stresses the preference for entering
294
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
into the resurrection life, or life eternal, rather than being 
cast into “everlasting fire” (v. 8), or “hell fire” (v. 9)—the 
Gehenna of fire.
In No. 6 (Mark 9:43-48) Christ four times speaks of those 
who “go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched” 
(v. 43). This is repeated in verses 45 and 46 as the fire that 
shall never be quenched. It is the same expression used by 
John the Baptist, who spoke of the Coming One as gathering 
the “wheat into the garner; but he will burn up [katakaid] 
the chaff with unquenchable fire [puri asbesto]” 
(Matt. 
3:12). The rendering “unquenchable fire” is unfortunately 
translated. It is fire that “shall not be quenched.”
The inspired New Testament interpretation of pur aidn- 
ios is given by Jude, who describes the judgments that over­
took Sodom and Gomorrah, as “set forth for an example,” of 
“suffering the vengeance of eternal fire” (Jude 7). Jude joins 
the experience of Sodom and Gomorrah with that of the Israel­
ites who died in the wilderness, and of Korah and his compan­
ions who were swallowed up by an earthquake. These all sig­
nified total destruction.
4. 
Inspir
ed Key 
t
o Expr
ession 
“Et
er
n
a
l Fir
e.”—Then 
to these Peter parallels the words: God, “turning the cities of 
Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an 
overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after 
should live ungodly” (2 Peter 2:6). Then he adds, “The Lord 
knoweth how ... to reserve the unjust unto the day of judg­
ment to be punished” (v. 9). So the “eternal fire” (pur aidnios) 
is not still feeding on its victims, for the waters of the Dead Sea 
mark the site of the cities whose inhabitants perished in the 
dreadful flames. Thus the “eternal” of Jude is not an endless 
process but a result. This is the inspired key to the tremendous 
phrase “eternal fire.”
The “unquenchable fire” of Matthew 3:12 will “burn up” 
(katakaid) entirely the chaff. And nothing is more swiftly con­
sumed than chaff. It creates a blaze that nothing can extinguish 
until its work is done. Then, the chaff burned up, the fire ceases
CHRIST PORTRAYS DOOM OF WICKED AS DESTRUCTION 295
for lack of material to feed on. Consequently, the example 
of Sodom and Gomorrah signifies the total destruction and dis­
appearance of the thing consumed. The pur aidnios and as­
bestos, which do the obliterating work, are the Master’s defini­
tive description of the fires of Gehenna.
And the undying worm and the quenchless flame feed 
upon their victims until the whole is consumed. Thus again 
the work of the “worm” and the “fire” are eternal in results, 
but not in process or duration. Hence we must distinguish 
sharply between Hell as Gehenna, the place of final doom and 
the second death, in contrast with Hades, the place of the 
dead (gravedom) between death and the resurrection.
5. 
N
ot M
isery but “Dist
r
u
c
t
io
n” Is Et
er
n
a
l.—As to the 
punishment of the wicked, be it noted that it is neither the sin­
fulness nor the misery of which the eternity is predicted (Matt. 
25:41, 46). It is the punishment—“kolasis” (v. 46)—the end­
less result, not the transitory penal process. It is the eternal 
effect of the divine act of cutting off from life. It is the penal 
deprivation of what otherwise might be enjoyed, the forfei­
ture of its joys and privileges. This is specifically the death 
penalty for sin, everywhere set forth in God’s Word from 
Genesis to Revelation—the wicked shall be punished with 
“everlasting destruction” (2 Thess. 1:9). That is the punish­
ment of Matthew 25:46.
Here, then, is the contrast—not the incidence of happiness 
or misery but the life that is awarded to the righteous, in 
contradistinction to the deprivation of that life, the cutting 
off, the extinction, the capital punishment by death of the 
other. And both are here declared to be equally final and 
irreversible. “Everlasting punishment” is clearly not the same 
as being everlastingly punished. It is eternal loss of being.
Such is the testimony of Christ, the Supreme Witness of all 
time, and the Infallible Authority in the realm of the nature 
and destiny of man. Whoso controverts His inerrant dictums 
must settle it with his Lord.
REVIEW PICTURES
MICHAEL MUNKACSY, ARTIST
REVIEW PICTURES
A. Cl SERI, ARTIST
JESS SCHLAIKJER, N.A., ARTIST
© 1957 BY THE REVIEW ANO HERALD
CHRIST PORTRAYS DOOM OF WICKED AS DESTRUCTION 297
IV. “Hades”—True Understanding Based on NT Usage,
Not Pagan-Romanist
1. Pagan Origin and Influence of “Hades.”—While the 
Hebrew word she’dl6 (gravedom) comes to us largely from 
Old Testament Scripture, the Greek equivalent, hades, is of 
pagan origin, and came down to New Testament times tinc­
tured with centuries of pagan tradition. It is essential that this 
fact be borne in mind.
More than that, the term hades reached the modern Chris­
tian church tinctured with the ideas of a divergent Judaism 
and Romanism. That is the second significant fact. The New 
Testament meaning of hades must be drawn neither from the 
human imaginations of the heathen nor from the later tradi­
tions of the Jews and Romanists. Instead, the true meaning 
must be derived from the actual usage of hades, as it appears 
in the New Testament, compared and checked with the Old 
Testament usage of she’dl.
2. English Translations Molded 
by Romanist Back­
grounds.—In the original pagan sense, hades was used by 
Homer to designate the god of the unseen, in the nether world. 
Later it came to mean the abode of departed spirits. The 
Vulgate renders hades by infernum (the lower regions).
Ever since the rise of Romanism Hell has been popularly 
considered as the place for punishing departed spirits. But 
according to Scripture, hades and gehenna are not identical. 
There is no confusion in the original tongue. The confusion 
came through the English rendering of both words as “hell.” 
Here again traditional backgrounds have exerted their mold­
ing influence upon translation.
5 She’dl occurs 65 times—rendered as “grave” (35), as “hell” (27), and as “pit” (3). 
See Part I, pp. 160-165. Therein lies the key.
Despised and Rejected by Those He Came to Save, Christ 
Went to Calvary. His Death Changed Our Death Into a 
Sleep and His Resurrection Brought Immortality to Light 
and Reality.
298
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
As noted elsewhere, gehenna occurs twelve times in the 
New Testament," and is uniformly rendered “hell” in the A.V., 
R.V., and A.R.V. In the Vulgate it is transliterated Gehenna. 
And Gehenna exactly fits the modern concept of Hell—a place 
of burning, especially for the punishment of the wicked— 
except that Gehenna is not presently active, but is simply 
the coming lake of fire.
3. Hades Connected With Death, Never With Life. 
—Hades occurs 11 times in the New Testament,7 and is ren­
dered “hell” in every case save one (1 Cor. 15:55, where 
margin is “hell.” The Koine and the Syriac give hades here.). 
Hades is invariably connected with death, never with life; al­
ways with dead persons, never with the living. Hades is also 
the place of “corruption” 
(Acts 2:31; cf. 13:34-37), from 
which resurrection is the only exit.
4. Hades Clearly the Grave, or Gravedom.—The He­
brew she’ol of the Old Testament is the equivalent of the 
Greek hades of the New Testament and both are identical or 
synonymous with the grave, or gravedom, the state of death. 
That is the inescapable witness of Scripture. And only with 
such an understanding can we deal safely with any particular 
single passage of Scripture, for the meaning of death does not 
vary in the two great divisions of the Word. And, equally im­
portant, the general sense must govern the interpretation of 
any individual disputed passage.
The New Testament expressly states that in death the 
individual, the person, rests in the grave. Thus “devout men 
carried Stephen to his burial, and made great lamentation 
over him” (Acts 8:2). Stephen was in the grave, not in Heaven. 
Peter, likewise speaking under inspiration, said of the eminent 
Old Testament believer David, “David is not ascended into 
the heavens” (Acts 2:34). But the supreme example is Christ.
«Matt. 5:22, 29, 30; 10:28; 18:9; 23:15, 33; Mark 9:43, 45, 47; Luke 12:5: James 3:6. 
T The eleven occurrences of hades in the New Testament are: Matt. 11:23; 16:18; 
Luke 10:15; 16:23; Acts 2:27, 31; 1 Cor. 15:55; Rev. 1:18; 6:8; 20:13, 14. The R.V. always 
transliterates it “hades,” except in 1 Corinthians 15:15, where it is rendered “death.”
Be it remembered that the death of Christ was identical with 
the death of His people, whether before His resurrection or 
since.
Christ tasted death for us all (Heb. 2:9). And Scripture 
speaks of His death and that of His people as one and the 
same in kind. Apart from the atoning aspect, only in one re­
spect did they differ—and that does not concern the nature 
of the state in death. That difference was the duration of the 
death state. Christ’s death was for so short a time that His 
“flesh” did not “see corruption” (Acts 2:27, 31). And even 
this distinction was noted in prophecy (Ps. 16:10; cf. Acts 2). 
But Christ’s death was itself the same as that of all of His fol­
lowers. And in that death Christ went into hades (the grave, 
gravedom, or realm of death), and remained there until His 
resurrection.
And, we repeat, as with Him so with us.
5. 
A
l
l 
Souls 
R
em
a
in 
in 
G
r
avedom 
U
n
t
il 
R
esur
r
ec­
t
io
n.—The very nature of the resurrection attests, beyond 
doubt, that each one of Christ’s people is in hades (gravedom, 
realm of death) until the resurrection. That was affirmed by 
Peter at Pentecost. And the apostle Paul succinctly declares 
that the resurrection of Christ was like that of His believing peo­
ple (Rom. 6:5; 1 Cor. 15:20-23). It therefore follows that 
upon resurrection, Christ’s people come out of hades, or grave­
dom, just as Christ came out of hades (gravedom) upon His 
resurrection.
It is explicitly affirmed by Paul, in his description of the 
resurrection of believers (in 1 Cor. 15), that hades continues 
to retain its power over those entering its domain, until the 
Second Advent and its attendant resurrection. In fact, in 
Paul’s exclamation in 1 Corinthians 15:55 (“O death, where is 
thy sting? O grave [hades], where is thy victory?”), he was 
but paraphrasing from Hosea, who wrote, “O death, I will be 
thy plagues; O grave [she’ol], I will be thy destruction” (Ho­
sea 13:14)—with only such change as would comport with 
the New Testament diction.
CHRIST PORTRAYS DOOM OF WICKED AS DESTRUCTION 299
300
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
6. 
G
r
a
v
ed
om: 
Pla
ce 
o
f 
R
epose 
T
hr
o
ugh
out 
Dea
t
h- 
Sl
eep.—Paul’s teaching in 1 Corinthians 15 is reiterated by 
our Lord in the Apocalypse:
“Fear not; I am the first and the last: I am he that liveth, and 
was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys 
of hell [hades] and of death” (Rev. 1:17, 18).
This teaching is unequivocal. Christ died, and He was 
placed in the grave {hades). Then follows the resurrection, 
when He left hades (gravedom). He then comforts the be­
lievers with the assurance, “I have the keys of hades and of 
death.” That is, “I will open hades [gravedom] for My peo­
ple, even as I opened it for Myself.” So hades is clearly the 
state of death, identical with gravedom. It should also be 
noted that in the Apocalypse death and hades are thrice 
thrown together:
“I looked, and behold a pale horse: and his name that sat on him 
was Death, and Hell [hades] followed with him” (Rev. 6:8).
“And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and 
hell [hades, margin, “the grave”] delivered up the dead which were in 
them” (chap. 20:13).
“And death and hell [hades] were cast into the lake of fire” (v. 14).'
Hades is not a dwelling place of departed living souls. 
According to Holy Writ it is the place of repose for the dead 
during their death sleep. This is uniform and conclusive.
V. Problem Text (Mark 9:43-48): “Their Worm Dieth Not”
Much stress is placed by some upon the triple use by 
Christ Himself, in six short verses (Mark 9:43-48), of the ex­
pression “their worm dieth not.” But “their worm” is not a 
soul, only a maggot (skolex), feeding upon a dead body—and 
not inhabiting a living one. Here is pictured the revolting end 
of a corpse flung out on the refuse heap. It is an awesome 
warning to all beholders—standing for dissolution, disintegra­
tion, with final disappearance. But it is not the process or 
duration but the result that is here emphasized.
CHRIST PORTRAYS DOOM OF WICKED AS DESTRUCTION 301
The “worm” that “dieth not” is, like the “unquenchable 
fire,” a symbol of death. So long as the corpse or carcass (cf. 
Isa. 66:24), which is completely insensible, is gnawed by the 
worm, it cannot live again. If the worm never dies, there will 
be no possibility of life revitalizing the corpse. It thus excludes 
all hope of restoration. There is nothing here about the 
“sting of an accusing conscience,” as often claimed. There are 
no “perpetual torments” or “endless sufferings” here, or else­
where in the Sacred Text—any more than there are “immor­
tal souls.”
The worm causes no suffering to the carcass, which is in­
sensible. It simply hastens the disappearance of what has 
ceased to live, and partially “replaces the gravedigger,” as 
someone has phrased it. And the cremation in the fire that 
follows pulverizes the bones gnawed by the worm. The worm 
is essentially a gnawer, a carrion-eating destroyer. So the worm 
and the fire together actually indicate the utter impossibility 
of an eternal life in torment. The symbolism may be said to 
portray the eternal continuance of a state of death and utter 
extinction for the wicked. Beyond question, these agents of 
destruction are a figure of the utter impossibility of a return to 
life after death. In the passage there is not a scintilla of sup­
port for the contention of “eternal torment of the damned.”
VI. Sin’s Punishment Does Not Continue Through All Eternity
The second death, as portrayed in Revelation 20 and 21, 
involves the termination of all sinful and estranged life. The 
punishment of the wicked ends in ultimate dissolution and 
obliteration, as “fire came down from God out of heaven, 
and devoured [katesthid, “to eat down,” denoting utter ex­
cision] them” (Rev. 20:9).8 And when the “new heaven” and
8 “The use in the N.T. of such words as ‘death,’ ‘destruction,’ ‘fire,’ ‘perish,’ to describe 
future retribution, point to the likelihood of fearful anguish, followed by extinction of being, 
as the doom that awaits those who by persistent rejection of the Saviour prove themselves 
utterly, and therefore irremediably, bad.”—Weymouth, The New Testament in Modern Speech, 
Heb. 10:27, n. 1 (ed.).
302
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
the “new earth” are established, the Divine Voice from the 
throne of Omnipotence declares:
“There shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor cry­
ing, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things 
are passed away” (Rev. 21:4).
This agrees with Paul’s declaration, “The last enemy that 
shall be destroyed is death” (1 Cor. 15:26). Therefore the 
furiously raging lake of fire will not burn on endlessly, with 
the wicked eternally alive in torment. Christ did not condone 
the contention of an eternal dualism. Death itself, along with 
hades (“gravedom”), is cast into the lake of fire, denoting the 
utter end. The death principle itself is abrogated, abolished, 
and rendered completely and permanently inoperative. It will 
wholly cease to be. Thus will God ring down the final curtain 
on sin and death forever. That is Christ’s inerrant testimony.
CHAPTER 
SEVENTEEN
Theologian Paul on Life, Death, 
and Immortality
I. “Christ Our Life” Is Post-Pentecostal Theme
It was not until after the Holy Spirit was poured out with 
power upon the apostles and the early disciples of our Lord 
that their minds were fully opened to perceive the larger 
scope of the sublime truth of Life Only in Christ. But when 
they did perceive and receive it fully, and when they knew 
and experienced the “power of his resurrection” (Phil. 3:10), 
they were lifted completely out of their former mediocrity 
and filled with a compulsive power and a zeal that nothing 
could withstand.
1. 
Proclaimed First to Jews, Then to Gentiles.—The 
doctrine of life through Christ was the “unspeakable gift” 
that they were impelled to make known to all men. This was 
what the angel first charged Peter and the other apostles to 
preach when he was released from prison at Jerusalem. Here 
was his impressive commission, given just after the Jews had 
killed the Prince of life (Acts 3:15): “Go, stand and speak in 
the temple to the people all the words of this life” (Acts 5:20) 
—life in Christ, stubbornly rejected by the Pharisees, life 
through the resurrection, bitterly opposed by the Sadducees. 
Jesus’ name and the power of His life must be made known to 
all men. This mandate they gladly obeyed.
And this is precisely what Paul and Barnabas preached 
first to the Jews at Antioch. And when the chosen people re-
303
R. M. ELDRIDGE, ARTIST
Paul, Pre-eminent Exponent of the Resurrection, Preaching at Athens While 
Men Mocked and Rejected the Sole Hope of Life to Come. But His Message 
Lived On, Redeeming and Saving Men Today.
fused to accept Jesus as the promised giver of “this life,” the 
apostles solemnly said:
“It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken 
to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy 
[by unbelief] of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles” 
(Acts 
13:46).
304
Turning to the Gentiles, they boldly proclaimed:
“For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be 
a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends 
of the earth. And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glori­
fied the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal 
life believed” (vs. 47, 48).
2. Paul Preaches With Futility 
to Platonic Athe­
nians.—Paul, the great accession to the apostles’ roster, sought 
to preach this same doctrine to the Athenians. He spoke to 
them of God as the one who “giveth to all life, and breath, and 
all things” (Acts 17:25). But the minds of the Athenians were 
so filled with the fanciful notions of the Greek poets and 
philosophers concerning the spirit world and the Innate Im­
mortality of all souls that they scouted the idea of Immortality 
solely by a resurrection from the dead through Jesus Christ.
Had he preached to them the Platonic doctrine of a spirit 
life, an immortal soul, or eternal blessedness or misery for all 
men forever, they would not have called him “a setter forth of 
strange gods” (v. 18), and a proclaimer of “new doctrine” 
(v. 19). That would have been what their own Platonic phi­
losophy had taught them. But the doctrines of the day of judg­
ment and the incredible resurrection of Jesus “from the dead” 
(v. 31), and of the coming resurrection of all the dead, and of 
immortality only through Christ were no more agreeable to 
them than they were to the Jews.
3. Romans: 
Immortality 
a 
Gift Through 
Christ.— 
This majestic truth runs all through Paul’s epistles. It was the 
mighty cable, as it were, upon which all the other doctrines of 
the gospel were suspended. Thus to the Romans, Paul 
preached that all, whether Jews or Gentiles, were under one 
common sentence of death; for all had “sinned, and come short 
of the glory of God” (Rom. 3:23). Those who had “sinned 
without law,” must “perish without law” (Rom. 2:12), while 
those who had sinned under the law must be judged by the 
law. Death had “reigned” over all the children of Adam (Rom. 
5:14).
THEOLOGIAN PAUL ON LIFE, DEATH, AND IMMORTALITY 305
306
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
But by the grace of God there was hope. The gospel, 
which he was sent to preach, was “the power of God unto salva­
tion to every one that believeth” 
(chap. 1:16) in Christ, 
the Life-giver. Specifically—“to them who by patient continu­
ance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality 
[aphtharsian, “incorruption“], eternal life” (Rom. 2:7).
To believers he says:
“What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now 
ashamed? for the end of those things is death. But now being made free 
from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, 
and the end everlasting life. For the wages of sin is death [the sec­
ond death]; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ 
our Lord” 
(Rom. 6:21-23).
Thus the proclamation of eternal life was central. There 
is no such thing as either spontaneous generation or spontane­
ous regeneration. The children of God are “begotten” by God 
Himself, as verily as the children of Adam are begotten by 
their natural progenitors. This new life concerns itself not 
with carnal and perishable things, but with spiritual and eter­
nal things. Those who experience it are “led by the Spirit of 
God” (Rom. 8:14), and such are destined to be “glorified” 
(v. 17) through the “resurrection,” with its “redemption of 
our body” (v. 23). They will not come into the “condemna­
tion” of the second death (v. 1; chap. 5:16; cf. Rev. 2:11). 
Nothing will be able to “separate” them “from the love of 
God, which is in Jesus Christ” (Rom. 8:39), by whom and to 
whom they henceforth live as “heirs” of eternal life.
4. 
1 Corinthians: Immortality Must Be “Put On.”— 
The same emphasis on eternal life is equally marked in both 
of Paul’s epistles to the Corinthians. In the first epistle he shows 
how impossible it is for human reason alone to attain any true 
knowledge of the gospel. How foolish the truth of eternal life 
through a crucified Saviour seems to natural man—“But the 
natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for 
they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, be­
cause they are spiritually discerned” (1 Cor. 2:14). But Paul
THEOLOGIAN PAUL ON LIFE, DEATH, AND IMMORTALITY 307
was “determined” to know nothing among them but “Jesus 
Christ, and him crucified” (v. 2), and that through His death 
and resurrection we might have eternal life.
Finally, coming to the climax of the great and glorious doc­
trine of the resurrection, Paul dwells upon it at length, and 
shows how it is assured to us by the death and resurrection of 
Christ Himself. If this assurance of resurrection through Christ 
were taken away, we would be of all men the “most miser­
able” (1 Cor. 15:19), for we would then have no hope of any 
life beyond the grave. All who have fallen asleep in Jesus 
would have “perished” (v. 18), become extinct—not in a state 
of endless sin and misery. Not a word to that effect.
Paul attempts to tell the nature of the spiritual bodies we 
shall take on at the resurrection, to show how glorious and how 
incorruptible they will be, and how entirely different from our 
gross fleshly bodies (v. 37), which are fitted only for earthly 
natures, and could not possibly enter the coming kingdom of 
God.
“So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; 
it is raised in incorruption: it is sown in dishonour; it is raised in 
glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power: it is sown a natural 
[psuchikon] body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, 
and there is a spiritual [pneumatikon] body” 1 (1 Cor. 15:42-44).
Then Paul shows how, simultaneously with the resurrec­
tion of the righteous dead, those who are alive at Christ’s sec­
ond coming will be changed:
“In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for 
the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible 
[aphthartoi, “immortal”], and we shall be changed. For this corruptible 
must put on incorruption, and this mortal [thnéton, “subject to death”]3 
must put on immortality [athanasian]. 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 swal­
lowed up in victory. O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy 
victory?” (vs. 52-55).
1 In this life man has “flesh and blood”—a natural body. At death the body reverts 
to dust, and the spirit returns to God, who gave it (Ps. 31:5; Eccl. 12:7; Luke 23:46: Acts 
7:59). In the resurrection “God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him” (1 Cor. 15:38). 
Thereafter man no longer has a “natural” body but a “spiritual” body (1 Cor. 15:44).
* Thnitos—Rom. 6:12; 8:11; 1 Cor. 15:53, 54; 2 Cor. 4:11; 5:4.
Mark the form of 
the expression, “This 
corruptible must put 
on incorruption, and 
this mortal must put 
on 
immortality” 
(v. 
53). Surely if incorrup­
tion, if 
immortality, 
must be “put on” 
(endud, “to put on,” 
as a garment), it could 
not have 
been 
pos­
sessed before.
5. 
2 Corinthians: 
Cent
r
a
l T
h
e
m
e, 
Christ 
Our 
Life.— 
Paul’s second Corin­
thian epistle is equally 
filled with Christ and 
Him crucified, as the 
source of eternal hope 
to all His people. The 
great apostle is deter­
mined to know noth­
ing else among them, 
waiting 
eagerly 
for 
the 
time when 
this 
mortality 
“might 
be 
swallowed 
up 
[kata-
PETER PAUL RUBENS, ARTIST
Christ Paid the Full Penalty 
for Our Sin, Dying in Our 
Stead That We Might Re­
ceive Back the Life We For­
feited by Transgression.
MX
|Vl»v'AV'l
308
B. PLOCKHORST, ARTIST
The Tremendous Truth of the Resurrection of Christ Becomes the Pledge of 
the Resurrection of the Saints of the Ages and the Bestowal of Immortality at 
Christ's Second Advent.
pino, “drink down,” “swallow”] of life” 
(2 Cor. 
5:4).
6. 
“Eternal Life” Theme Runs Through Remaining 
Epistles.—And so with all his other epistles, eternal life is 
the central theme. Note it:
309
310
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
“Reap life everlasting” (Gal. 6:8).
"Your life is hid with Christ in God. When Christ, who is our life, 
shall appear, then shall ye also appear with him in glory” (Col. 3:3, 4).
“Believe on him to life everlasting’ (1 Tim. 1:16).
“Lay hold on eternal life” (1 Tim. 6:12).
“Our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath 
brought life and immortality [aphtharsian] to light through the gospel” 
(2 Tim. 1:10).
“In hope of eternal life, which God . . . promised before the world 
began” (Titus 1:2).
"Heirs according to the hope of eternal life” (chap. 3:7).
7. 
Peter, James, and Jude Give Same Emphasis.—And 
it should be added that Peter, James, and Jude follow on, of­
fering salvation with the same “life” line—exhorting all to 
fight the good fight of faith and lay hold on eternal life.
"He shall receive the crown 
of life, which the Lord hath promised
to 
them that love him” (James 1:12).
“Looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life” 
(Jude 21).
It is life, life, life! But let us examine Paul, and his theol­
ogy on life and death, more closely.
II. Heart of Pauline Theology—Gift of Life 
Instead of Destruction
The apostle Paul was unquestionably the most powerful 
human personality in the history of the Christian church— 
truly a spiritual and intellectual giant. He was chosen to write 
a sizable portion of the New Testament. In his writings he 
gave a more fully developed theology than any other apostle.
He probes the deepest depths and rises to the highest
heights of the mighty plan of redemption. He sweeps in all of 
God’s majestic provisions of grace and redemption. He pre­
sents the light of salvation for the believer and the darkness of 
doom for the rejectors of God’s grace. One can feel the pulsat­
ing heartthrobs throughout his mighty epistles.
1. 
Redemption of Man Brings Life and Immortality. 
—Paul did not have the privilege of the three years enjoyed by
the other disciples in the school of Christ, the master teacher 
of life and immortality. Saul the persecutor became Paul the 
apostle when he encountered Christ in a vision on the road to 
Damascus (Acts 9). He spent a period of study and readjust­
ment in Arabia (Gal. 1:17). But his teaching is identical with 
theirs—and that of Jesus—on the nature and destiny of man. 
In fact, he surpasses other disciples in the fullness, clarity, and 
depth of his presentations. Paul was clearly God’s unique 
apostle not only to the Gentiles but to the Diaspora as well.
With Paul, Christ was not only the center but the cir­
cumference of his preaching and teaching, as well as of his 
personal faith and life. The essence of his message was humanity 
redeemed, justified by grace through faith in Jesus Christ alone, 
who by His life, death, and resurrection opened the way and 
provided the means for man’s restoration and his reception of 
eternal life and Immortality in Christ, bestowed at the res­
urrection or at translation, at the Second Advent.
2. Tremendous Scope of Salvation.—The three foun­
dational facts of the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ, 
in their relation to sin and redemption for man, clearly con­
stitute the sum and substance of the teaching and preaching of 
the great apostle. In his writings there is clarity and certainty in 
the provision of Life Only in Christ. That is unquestionably 
the essence of Paul’s gospel. Here the highest, broadest, and 
deepest lessons in the school of grace are set forth. Here is the 
culmination of revealed apostolic truth. Here is the powerful 
portrayal of the divine philosophy of salvation in contrast 
with all human foibles and sophisms.
3. Opening 
Message Is 
on 
Eschatology.—Paul wrote 
the Thessalonian epistles about a.d. 52. These epistles and the 
Corinthians, written some six years later, are replete with the 
message of life, death, and Immortality. This was the earliest 
Pauline emphasis. And Paul was the most explicit and exten­
sive of all the New Testament writers in holding steadfastly to 
the original Biblical position that man is not naturally immor-
THEOLOGIAN PAUL ON LIFE, DEATH, AND IMMORTALITY 311
© 1949 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
HARRY ANDERSON, ARTIST
He Who Ascended to Heaven Will Come Again to Gather His Saints, to Destroy 
Sin and Sinners, and to Bring the Author of Sin and Death to an Utter End.
tal. He maintains that man can become so only by a new in­
fusion of life. He is not so by nature; he becomes so by faith and 
transforming grace.
Paul had little success in Athens, the city of Socrates and 
Plato. He would doubtless have secured a hearing if he had
312
proclaimed the immortality of the soul and its corollaries. 
Moreover, he demonstrated here the futility of meeting reason 
with reason, logic with logic, and philosophy with philosophy. 
Thenceforth he was a preacher of Jesus Christ, and Him cruci­
fied (1 Cor. 2:2), risen, ascended, mediating, judging, and 
coming again to raise the dead, translate the living, reward the 
righteous, and punish the wicked with everlasting destruction.
4. 
Punishment 
of 
Wicked 
Is 
Total 
Destruction.— 
Twenty times the apostle Paul declares that the wages of sin is 
death—absolute death, cessation of life. Twenty times he tells 
us that death is the punishment for sin—and also in a dozen 
places that life and immortality are special privileges, as in 
Romans 6:23 and 8:11. Twenty-five times Paul spells out the 
fate of the wicked, and constantly uses terms connoting total 
destruction such as:
“In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God . . . : 
who shall be punished with everlasting destruction [olethron aidnion, 
“eternal ruin, death”] from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of 
his power; when he shall come to be glorified in his saints” (2 Thess. 
1:8-10).
Paul speaks once of the resurrection of the wicked, or “un­
just” (Acts 24:15). But their survival will be of such short dura­
tion that he usually passes it over in silence. In his Epistle 
to the Hebrews 3 it is stated:
“We are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that 
believe to the saving of the soul.” "For our God is a consuming fire" 
“which shall devour the adversaries” (Heb. 10:39; 12:29; 10:27).
That which God consumes He does not allow still to exist. 
After the execution of the judgment, death will have no more 
victories, but will itself be abolished (Rev. 20:14). Immortal­
ity, Paul asserts, cannot begin before “this corruptible shall 
have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on 
immortality” (1 Cor. 15:54; cf. 1 Tim. 6:16), which change 
takes place when Christ comes the second time. Here is Paul’s 
key declaration in his earliest epistle:
THEOLOGIAN PAUL ON LIFE, DEATH, AND IMMORTALITY 313
3 The present writer accepts the arguments in favor of Pauline authorship as more 
weighty than those for all other candidates put together.
314
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
“The Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the 
voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in 
Christ shall rise first: then we which are alive and remain shall be 
caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: 
and so shall we ever be with the Lord” (1 Thess. 4:16, 17).
That is a bird’s-eye view of the Pauline witness. Now let 
us examine Paul’s testimony from the eschatological side.
III. Places All Messages in Graphic Eschatological Setting
Paul is careful even in his very first epistles to place his 
message in a graphic, well-defined eschatological setting. The 
Thessalonian epistles set forth the transcendent scenes of the 
Second Advent, with its glorification of the saints at the resur­
rection and subsequent destruction of all sinners. This is 
presented as the climax of the divine plan of the ages—the 
end events being the culmination of a sweeping outline that 
takes in the centuries and leads up to the devastating scenes of 
the day of the Lord. That is therefore the initial New Testa­
ment emphasis.
1. Second Advent Involves Resurrection 
and Trans­
lation.—Paul leads into the Second Advent that closes the 
age. He depicts the Lord Jesus descending from Heaven and 
calling forth from their graves the sleeping saints, and catching 
up and translating the saints then living, to meet Him and 
thenceforth be together forever with their Lord. Such is Paul’s 
earliest depiction.
2. “Day of the Lord” Brings “Sudden Destruction” to 
Sinners.—Paul then immediately refers to the “day of the 
Lord,” as coming unexpectedly to many, like “a thief in the 
night.” It brings “sudden destruction” (1 Thess. 5:2, 3) to the 
wicked. But he assures the spiritually alert that that day will 
not overtake them as a thief (v. 4).
3. Attendant Circumstances 
of Advent Portrayed.— 
In his Second Epistle to the Thessalonians Paul picks up the
HARRY ANDERSON, ARTIST 
O 1957 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
Christ, Our Creator and Redeemer, Who Died as Our Atoning Sacrifice, and 
Now Ministers as Mediating Priest, Will Soon Return as Conquering King to 
Gather Home His Ransomed Ones.
portrayal at the same point, the Second Advent, adding details 
as to the manner of that coming, but this time he stresses the 
terror and destruction visited upon the living wicked when 
Christ appears, in contrast with the glorification and rejoicing 
of the saints:
“The Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty 
angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and 
that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: who shall be pun­
ished with everlasting destruction \olethron aidnion, "eternal ruin, 
death”] from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power; 
when he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all 
them that believe” (2 Thess. 1:7-10).
4. 
Coming Apostasy Paul’s Grave Concern.—In Second 
Thessalonians 2, Paul continues his subject of the “day of the 
Lord.” He warns against the illusion that this tremendous 
“day” is just at hand. First, he says, there will be a dread
315
“falling away” (apostasia, foretold by Christ in Matthew 24 and 
Daniel 7) and the appearing, historically, of the “man of sin,” 
or “son of perdition” (2 Thess. 2:3), the “Antichrist,” whose 
activities he describes in these words:
“Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, 
or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, 
shewing himself that he is God” (v. 4).
Paul reminds the Thessalonians that he had forewarned 
them orally of the great apostasy to come into the Christian 
church, which would be held back only by the iron might of a 
unified pagan Rome (vs. 5, 6). But that would pass and the 
apostasy would appear. He declares that the seeds of spiritual 
departure were already germinating in his own day:
“For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now 
letteth [katecho, “to restrain,” “to hold back”] will let 
[restrain], 
until he be taken out of the way. And then shall that Wicked be revealed, 
whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall de­
stroy with the brightness of his coming’ (vs. 7, 8).
This power would be characterized by signs and wonders 
and deceit, becoming an overpowering “strong delusion” 
(vs. 9-11). Appealing to the church to hold to the “truth” they 
had been taught, he solemnly warns that those who believe and 
receive this “lie” will be “damned” (vs. 11, 12). That is Paul’s 
teaching on the “last things,” in the setting of the antecedent 
great apostasy that would be established before the Second 
Advent, and would cease only with the second coming of 
Christ at the end of the age.
5. 
Differentiates Between Resurrection of Righteous 
and Wicked.—The first Corinthian epistle likewise opens with 
a reference to “the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Cor. 
1:7). Then man’s usurping judgment will give way to God’s 
just and sovereign judgment.
Chapter 15 of 1 Corinthians is the great Second Ad­
vent and resurrection-translation classic. Paul first lays down 
this basic principle concerning the resurrection: “For as in 
Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive” (v. 22).
The resurrection is universal. But the dead are raised in
316 
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
THEOLOGIAN PAUL ON LIFE, DEATH, AND IMMORTALITY 317
two groups. Paul explains that “they that are Christ’s” come 
forth at His second coming (v. 23). But not all are Christ’s. John 
the revelator says that the wicked will not come forth until 
the second resurrection (Rev. 20:5, 6). That is the resurrec­
tion of the “unjust” (Acts 24:15), or the resurrection unto 
“damnation” (John 5:29), as Christ expressly denominated it.
Then, when the “end comes,” all rule and authority and 
power is subjected to Christ (1 Cor. 15:24-28). And this in­
cludes the “last enemy” of mankind, which is “death” (v. 26). 
Thus the fearsome reign of death will cease at the Advent and 
resurrection. As to these bodies of ours:
“It [the body of the saint] is sown in corruption; it is raised in 
incorruption [aphtharsia, immortality]: it is sown in dishonour; it is 
raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power: it is 
sown a natural body [soma psuchikon]-, it is raised a spiritual body [soma 
pneumatikon]” (vs. 42-44).
Then we shall again bear the “image of the heavenly” 
(v. 49). And this is brought about through Christ, the “quick­
ening spirit” (v. 45). And now comes the tremendous passage 
concerning those who sleep in Jesus, together with those who 
are then living, who will be translated:
“Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep [koimad, here, 
the sleep of death], but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the 
twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and 
the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this 
corruptible [phtharton, “perishable”] 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 swal­
lowed up in victory’’ (1 Cor. 15:51-54).
The whole picture is there: (1) The “last trump,” (2) the 
resurrection of the sleeping saints, (3) the changing, or trans­
lation, of the living saints, (4) and for both, the “corruptible” 
putting on “incorruption” and the “mortal” putting on “im­
mortality.” The transformation and the victory are all through 
Jesus Christ our Lord.
6. 
Our Vile Bodies Changed at Advent.—In Philippians 
Paul declares:
318
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
“Who [Christ] shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned 
like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able 
even to subdue all things unto himself” (Phil. 3:21).
In 1 Timothy 1:16, 17 our believing in Christ unto “life 
everlasting” is coupled with the reminder that God alone is the 
“King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God.” Only 
the Godhead has absolute, original, underived immortality. 
Man’s immortality is derived and contingent, and is not received 
until the Second Advent.
7. Seducing Spirits Impinge on God’s Unapproachable 
Immortality.—Then Paul turns to the characteristic devel­
opments of the “latter times,” when “some shall depart from 
the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of 
devils” (chap. 4:1). This is reminiscent of the seductive lie 
and liar in Eden that beguiled the mother of the human race. 
There will be a revival in the “latter times,” characterized by 
the power and persuasiveness of that first fatal deception. But 
Paul admonishes us to “lay hold on eternal life,” and to see 
that we are kept “without spot . . . until the appearing of our 
Lord Jesus Christ” (chap. 6:12, 14).
He goes out of his way to declare again that the “King of 
kings, and Lord of lords” is the one “who only hath immortal­
ity, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto” 
(v. 16). And his parting admonition to Timothy is to “lay 
hold on eternal life” (v. 19). It was not his inherently.
8. 
Immortality Brought 
Into 
Focus 
Through 
Gos­
pel.—In 2 Timothy, Paul again mentions the second “appear­
ing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, 
and hath brought life and immortality to light through the 
gospel” (2 Tim. 1:10).
It is thus clear that immortality has not been the in­
alienable possession of the human family since the Fall. It is a 
provision brought to light through the gospel. And the apostle 
speaks of his own persuasion that Christ is “able to keep that 
which I have committed unto him against that day” (2 Tim.
1:12). And once more he adverts to the “last days” and tabu­
lates a list of some nineteen telltale specifications that will 
characterize them (chap. 3:2-5). He avows that the Lord Jesus 
Christ will “judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and 
his kingdom” (chap. 4:1). Again he forewarns that—
"the time will come [in the “latter days”] when they will not endure 
sound doctrine . . . ; they shall turn away their ears from the truth, 
and shall be turned unto fables” (vs. 3, 4).
Then he stresses his own personal belief, and confession, 
that—
“there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the 
righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but 
unto all them also that love his appearing” (v. 8).
All rewards will be given together at the Second Advent. 
And in closing his letter to Titus, Paul twice refers to the 
“hope of eternal life” (Titus 1:2; 3:7), promised, he declares, 
“before the world began” (chap. 1:2). That is Paul’s compre­
hensive testimony in its vital eschatological setting and frame­
work. In this he faithfully follows the pattern of Christ. And 
this is designed to be the pattern for every teacher of truth con­
cerning the nature and destiny of man.
IV. Pauline Portrayal and Usage of “Immortal” 
and “Immortality”
The term “immortality” is used but five times in Scrip­
ture, and “immortal” but once. All are in the New Testament, 
and all are Pauline.
1. 
Absolute Immortality Is Attribute of God Alone. 
—Absolute immortality is an attribute belonging solely to 
God, along with His omnipotence, omniscience, and omni­
presence. These are exclusively His. “The blessed and only 
Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; who only 
hath immortality [athanasian, “incorruption”]” (1 Tim. 6: 
15, 16; cf. 1 Cor. 15:53, 54). The inescapable inference there-
THEOLOGIAN PAUL ON LIFE, DEATH, AND IMMORTALITY 319
320
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
fore follows that man does not possess the attribute of immor­
tality by nature. It is not a natural characteristic of man. It is 
ever to be sought for (Rom. 2:7), and is always and only to 
be received as a gift (Rom. 6:23). In various passages the 
adjective “mortal” (thnetos) is applied to man (see Rom. 
6:12; 8:11; 1 Cor. 15:53, 54; 2 Cor. 4:11; 5:4), while “immor­
tal” is applied only to God. And with this agrees the solitary 
use of “immortal.”
“Now unto the King eternal, immortal [aphtharto, “not liable to 
corruption”], invisible, the only wise God” (1 Tim. 1:17).
There is thus perfect agreement in the Pauline testimony 
and fundamental harmony with the testimony of Christ, the 
other apostles, and the prophets.
2. Christ the Revealer of Immortality to Man.—The 
second basic truth essential for our understanding is Christ’s 
relationship to it all. “By the appearing of our Saviour Jesus 
Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and 
immortality to light through the gospel” (2 Tim. 1:10). The 
eternal Son of God, then, has brought within the knowledge 
and grasp of man that everlastingness of perfect being, which 
is now the possession of God alone. Man is to share this at 
God’s appointed time.
3. Immortality Not Present Possession of Humanity. 
—Immortality is someday erelong to be received by those 
who seek for it in God’s way and upon whom He will bestow 
it as a gift. “To them who by patient continuance in well doing 
seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life” (Rom. 
2:7).
4. Man, Now Mortal, to Put On Immortality.—That 
day of bestowal is drawing near: “For this corruptible must 
put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality” 
(1 Cor. 15:53). Obviously one does not put on what he already 
has inherently. But when will this bestowal take place?
5. Resurrection Is Time of Putting On Immortality.—
FRANKLIN BOOTH, ARTIST 
© 1944 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
Christ’s Second Advent in Time’s Last Hour Will Bring Death and Destruction 
to the Wicked, Who Have Spurned His Overtures of Grace and Life.
The resurrection day is not far away, with its glorious, eternal 
victory, and its transformation for man.
“So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this
PAINTING BY HARRY ANDERSON 
© 1965 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD 
^
 
^21
Eve Was Beguiled by the Dazzling Tempter Into Believ­
ing She Could Attain Innate Immortality Through Dis­
obedience.
322
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the 
saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory” (1 Cor. 15:54).
It cannot be overstated that God is the sole present pos­
sessor of immortality. He is the source from which man, at 
present mortal, must obtain immortality. Christ is the revealer 
and channel of eternal life and immortality. He has brought 
to light the possibility and provision of attaining immortal life 
—it is provided in Him as the channel through which it may 
flow to us. Man is to seek for it, and the seeker will be re­
warded. Man will put on immortality at the resurrection of 
the just. But it will always be derived, contingent immortality 
—not independent immortality. That is ever and only God’s.
And now let us look at the opposite side of the picture, 
through Paul’s eyes.
6. 
Those Not Receiving Immortality Are Doomed.— 
Paul consistently refers to immortality as a goal, an objective, 
which lies before the righteous, who live in quest of immor­
tality. On the contrary, the “wrath” (orgé) of God inevitably 
awaits the unrighteous. And Paul faithfully depicts the awful 
doom of sin’s retribution. Thus he contrasts the eternal life, 
which is the “gift of God” to man, with the final death, which 
is the “wages of sin” (Rom. 6:23).
“Who [God] will render to every man according to his deeds: to 
them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and hon­
our and immortality, eternal life: but unto them that are contentious, 
and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and 
wrath [orgé], tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that 
doeth evil” (Rom. 2:6-9).
The Greek word aphtharsia, here translated “immortal­
ity,” is rendered “incorruption” in the Revised Version. Aph­
tharsia (literally “imperishability”) and aphthartos (translated 
“incorruptible,” “immortal”) and their cognate opposites 
phthora and phthartos 
(translated “corruption,” “dissolu­
tion,” and “perishable”) throw no small light on both the na­
ture and the destiny of mortal man. All four words are related 
to the verb phtheiró, translated “to destroy” in 1 Corinthians
3:17: “If any man defile the temple [body] of God, him shall 
God destroy [phtheiró].” That is the other, the somber, the 
tragic, reverse side of the picture of Life Only in Christ.
7. 
Immortality Predicated Only of God.—It is never 
to be forgotten that absolute, underived immortality is pred­
icated only of God. With Paul this word “immortal” (aph- 
thartos), meaning not liable to corruption, as elsewhere re­
marked, is never joined with the Greek words for “soul” or 
“spirit,” although pneuma (spirit) occurs 385 times in the 
New Testament, and psuché (soul) 105 times, a total of 490 
times. Furthermore, in the Old Testament immortality is 
never once predicated of ruach, for spirit (occurring 400 
times), or nephesh, for soul (used 752 times), a combined 
grand total of 1,642 times! It is predicated of one Being only— 
God. This is basic theology. It is the revealed message of God. 
(Cf. Rom. 1:23; 1 Cor. 9:25; 15:22; 1 Peter 1:23; 3:4. Also 
2 Tim. 1:10.)
And athanasia (“immortality”) is expressly declared to 
be possessed by God alone (1 Tim. 6:16). It is not “put on” 
by man until the resurrection, when mortality shall be “swal­
lowed up in victory” (1 Cor. 15:53, 54). Such is the beautiful 
unity, the inexorable logic, and sublime consistency of the 
theology of Paul, the master theologian of the centuries.
“For this corruptible [phtharton] must put on incorruption [aph- 
tharsian], and this mortal [thnéton] must put on immortality [athana- 
sian]. So when this corruptible [phtharton] shall have put on incorrup­
tion [aphtharsian], and this mortal shall have put on immortality 
[athanasian], then shall be brought to pass the saying . . . , Death [thanatos] 
is swallowed up in victory” (1 Cor. 15:53, 54).
THEOLOGIAN PAUL ON LIFE, DEATH, AND IMMORTALITY 323
CHAPTER 
EIGHTEEN
Paul’s Leading Problem Passage 
(2 Cor. 5:1-9)
I. “Absent From the Body”; “Present With the Lord”
1. Peril of Invoking the Isolated Verse.—It is both 
illogical and unsafe to build any major doctrine on isolated 
passages, apart from the general tenor of Scripture. It is to be 
remembered that enormous errors have been built upon iso­
lated verses. Thus the tender solicitude, “Compel them to 
come in” (Luke 14:23), was made the pretext for the cruel 
horrors of the Inquisition. And the symbolic expression con­
cerning the Lord’s Supper, “This is my body,” was made the 
basis of the dogma of transubstantiation by the Roman Church.
Luther, progressing part way, saw in it consubstantiation, 
and refused the hand of Zwingle, who held the bread to be but 
an emblem and could not admit of Luther’s strained explana­
tion. Yet on a paralleling page, as it were, Jesus committed His 
mother unto John, saying to her, “Behold thy son!” (John 19: 
26), in other words, he would be to her a son. And all under­
stood the use. Paul wisely admonished Timothy as a young 
minister to rightly divide the word of truth (2 Tim. 2:15).
2. Contention: Death Only a “Transition.”—In the 
passage we are about to survey (2 Cor. 5:1-9), the expression 
“absent from the body, . . . present with the Lord” (v. 8) is one 
of the Pauline statements most commonly drafted upon to 
prove that death is only a change of life for the believer—sim­
ply a transition, with the soul of the saint passing out of the 
body and going straight into the Lord’s presence. This is be-
324
PAUL'S LEADING PROBLEM PASSAGE
325
cause the accepted view of the Immortal-Soulist is that the 
“dead” in Christ are not dead at all. Rather, they are alleged 
to be radiantly alive in Heaven in a state of conscious bliss, 
with instantaneous transference at death to the immediate 
presence of Christ. The poet has aptly summarized the con­
tention as, “There is no death; what seems so is transition.”
One of the tragic results of the popular view is that the 
language and intent of Scripture have been largely forsaken. 
But according to Scripture, only in the future, after the Second 
Advent, will the time come when “there shall be no more 
death” (Rev. 21:4). Some have gone so far as actually to sub­
stitute “ascended” and “translated” for the term “death,” in 
certain sermons, obituaries, and epitaphs.
3. 
Contention: Soul Now Enjoying Celestial Life of 
Bliss.—This passage is not the easiest to understand. Peter 
refers to a few such difficult Pauline expressions “hard to be 
understood,” which some wrest to their own ruin (2 Peter 
3:16). So these verses are often taken as indicating that dur­
ing the intermediate period, preceding the resurrection of the 
body, the soul is separated from the body and experiences a 
celestial life of disembodied bliss. Dr. A. T. Robertson, in com­
menting on the term “naked” (gumnoi), in 2 Corinthians 
5:3, says, “That is, disembodied spirits, ‘like the souls in Sheol, 
without form and void of all power of activity’ (Plummer).” 1 
But there is not a word about the soul in the whole account.
Paul’s words, however, must be understood in the light of 
his own uniform and repeated teaching on the nature of man, 
not on a concept never held either by Paul or by any of the 
other apostles, much less by any group in the Christian church 
for nearly two centuries thereafter. This mortal body does not 
enclose an immortal principle or entity, which is released by 
the stroke of death, and then flies away in glad release. That is 
simply thinly disguised Platonism.
This passage is considered so important to proponents of
1 Archibald T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament, vol. 4, p. 228.
326
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Immortal-Soulism, and such reliance is placed upon its words 
and phrasings, that we shall examine it with special care to see 
whether the dependence is justified. So we will approach it 
from a number of angles, diagraming its major phrases, so 
as to show their related intent, and even presenting a defini­
tive glossary of terms as an aid. We shall look at it historically, 
contextually, linquistically, and exegetically. The question of 
semantics is definitely involved; hence a precise definition of 
terms and a study of usages are called for. Truth, it should be 
added, will always welcome searching scrutiny.
4. 
Unknown in Christian Church Until Nearly a.d. 
200.—Be it particularly noted that when Paul wrote his vari­
ous epistles, the Platonic philosophy of a persisting immortal 
soul, such as had already devastated the Jewish church, had 
not yet penetrated the infant Christian church. Such an innova­
tion did not intrude until nearly a.d. 200. None of the apostles 
so held. Therefore Paul did not, in a.d. 58, teach such a theory 
nor would any of his early Christian readers so construe his 
words.
That, we earnestly aver, was a deviation that developed 
in the third and fourth centuries, in time becoming the identi­
fying dogma of the great Roman Church of the medieval cen­
turies, and regrettably retained by many of the Protestant Ref­
ormation churches that revolted from the Catholic commun­
ion but nevertheless retained various of the Roman depar­
tures. (See Part IV for foil documentation.)
II. Setting and Intent of Paul’s Unusual Portrayal
First, let us get the setting. When the apostle Paul first 
went to Corinth he sought out and lived with Aquila and 
Priscilla, who were tentmakers. Then “because he [Paul] was 
of the same craft, he abode with them, and wrought: for by 
their occupation they were tentmakers” (Acts 18:3).
It was but natural, then, that Paul, in this Epistle to the 
Corinthians, should introduce a figure of speech in which he
PAUL’S LEADING PROBLEM PASSAGE
327
likens his body to a “tabernacle-tent”—later changing the 
figure to “clothing.” He compares the human body to a transi­
tory tent, or tabernacle, and stresses the fact that he does not 
want to be houseless, but wishes to exchange his present, 
transient tent-house for a new and glorious “eternal house,” a 
“building of God”—the new and glorified body that he would 
receive at the coming of the Lord.
Or, changing the figure, he does not wish to be divested 
of his “clothing,” and be “naked” (used as a figure for death),3 
but rather, to be “clothed upon” (by resurrection or transla­
tion) by his “house which is from heaven.” This is in complete 
conformity with his message to the Philippians, where he 
speaks of “heaven”:
“Whence also we wait for a Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ: who 
shall fashion anew the body of our humiliation, that it may be con­
formed to the body of his glory” (Phil. 3:20, 21, R.V.).
1. 
Two Lives 
for 
Believers—
Present 
and 
Future.— 
Paul knew of no other life for the believer than (1) “the life 
that now is” and (2) “that which is to come” (1 Tim. 4:8)— 
just the two. The first is, of course, our present temporary mor­
tal life, now possessed; the other is the future immortal life, 
of which we are heirs and for which we hope (Matt. 19:29; 
Titus 1:2). The present life is spent in a “natural” body; the 
future eternal life will be lived in a “spiritual” body (1 Cor. 
15:44). Neither Paul nor any other New Testament writer 
knew, or wrote, of any disembodied soul life. Such a con­
cept was then held only by one wing of the Jews, and had 
been introduced from Platonism in the last two centuries 
before Christ by certain Apocryphal and pseudepigraphal writ­
ers. (See Part III, chaps. 36-38, pp. 632-680.)
Paul declared that we could not enter the Lord’s pres­
ence in the natural body of our humiliation. On the road to 
Damascus he had had an overpowering glimpse of Christ’s 
glory, and the sight had blinded him and struck him down to 
earth (Acts 9:1-9). John, too, who had reclined on the bosom
2 See Job 1:21 (“naked shall I return thither”); cf. Eccl. 5:15.
RUSSELL HARLAN, ARTIST 
© 1952 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
The Death of Christ Vindicated the Law and Government of God and Provided 
Life and Immortality for Man. The Cross Is God’s Great Remedy for Sin.
of Jesus when His glory was veiled during His incarnation, fell 
down at His feet as one dead when that same Jesus unveiled 
His glory to him in vision on the Isle of Patmos (Rev. 1:17). 
But John had confidence that he would yet look upon his glori­
fied Lord without fear. And the reason was that “when he shall 
appear [at the Second Advent], we shall be like him” (1 John 
3:2).
PAUL’S LEADING PROBLEM PASSAGE
329
That would not be in the clothing of this present mortal 
flesh, but in a new and glorified body, for, as there is a “nat­
ural body,” there is also to be a “spiritual body” to follow 
(1 Cor. 15:42-44).
There must therefore be a change. And that change will 
take place on the glorious resurrection-translation day when 
this mortal puts on immortality (v. 53). Not death, then, but 
victory over death, was the apostle Paul’s fond hope (v. 54). 
He knew that if the Lord delayed His return, mortality would 
be swallowed up in death for him. He longed not to be “un­
clothed” by death, but to be “clothed upon” by translation 
at the Advent, that “mortality might be swallowed up of life” 
(2 Cor. 5:4).
If the Lord’s return should find Paul “unclothed,” or 
“naked,” in the state of death, then his hope was in the resur­
rection, when death would be swallowed up in victory (1 Cor. 
15:54). But his ardent longing was for the other swallowing 
up—the swallowing up of this mortal life by a glorious im­
mortality through translation, without dying at all (2 Cor. 
5:4). He longed to join the elect company of Enoch and Eli­
jah.
2. 
Earthen Vessels Must Be Replaced.—2 Corinthians 
5 should not be separated from chapter 4. In the latter Paul 
had just spoken of his mortal body, and the sufferings it had 
endured. This is his portrayal:
“But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency 
of the power may be of God, and not of us. We are troubled on every 
side, yet not distressed; we are perplexed, but not in despair; perse­
cuted, but not forsaken; cast down, but not destroyed; always bearing 
about in the body the dying of the Lord Jesus, that the life also of Jesus 
might be made manifest in our body [mortal flesh]” (2 Cor. 4:7-10).
His was a battered body—having suffered stonings, 
scourgings, and other terrible experiences detailed in 2 Co­
rinthians 11:24-28. All those had left their marks on the fragile 
“earthen vessel.” And there was also his “thorn in the flesh” 
(2 Cor. 12:7)—a bodily infirmity, the exact nature of which
330
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
is not revealed—to buffet him, and keep him humble. But he 
testified: “I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are 
not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall he re­
vealed in us” (Rom. 8:18).
However, the earthen vessel could not bear the fullness of 
that glory any more than new wine could be contained in old 
bottles (Matt. 9:17; Mark 2:22; Luke 5:37, 38). So Paul 
longed to exchange the old body for the new one in which he 
would be forever free from “weariness and painfulness,” “hun­
ger and thirst,” “cold and nakedness” (2 Cor. 11:27). Such was 
the constraining power that made even his life in this mortal 
flesh triumphant.
But while he was “at home” in this mortal body he was 
“absent” from his Lord, and confined to this present evil 
world. He longed to get rid of the old, and to receive the new 
and glorified body, and dwell in Christ’s presence forever.
Now let us examine the full text, with technical defini­
tions interspersed to illuminate the key words and phrases.
III. Full Text of Problem Passage With Definitions
Here is the entire text of 2 Corinthians 5:1-9, with key 
words defined to bring out the fuller meaning:
"For we know that if our earthly [epigeios] house of this tabernacle 
[skenous, “tent”] were dissolved [kataluo, “to tear down,” as of a tent, 
“to demolish”], we have a building of God, an house not made with 
hands, eternal in the heavens. For in this [earthly house] we groan, 
earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from 
heaven: if so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked.
“For we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened: not 
for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might 
be swallowed up of life. Now he that hath wrought us for the selfsame 
thing is God, who also hath given unto us the earnest [arrabona, 
“a down payment,” "pledge”] of the Spirit.
“Therefore we are always confident, knowing that, whilst we are at 
home in the body, we are absent from the Lord: (for we walk by faith, 
not by sight:) we are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent 
from the body, and to be present with the Lord. Wherefore we labour, 
that, whether present or absent, we may be accepted of him.”
PAUL’S LEADING PROBLEM PASSAGE
331
IV. Five Basic Considerations Involved
1. T
hree Consecutive States Impressively Portrayed. 
—Paul here impressively describes three different consecu­
tive states, or conditions, of man: (1) The present earthly life; 
(2) the period of death, or intermediate state; and (3) the 
eternal future state, when he shall have put on Immortality. 
(See the illustrative diagram on the three states, on page 341.) 
These states he sets forth under the figure of a temporary 
“tent,” in contrast with an “abiding house”—which he later 
changed to the simile of “clothing,” or covering. This transi­
tory present life was wasting away under the incessant suffer­
ings he had endured. It is a life in which he groans and is bur­
dened. This body, however, was soon to be “dissolved,” like a 
worn-out tent that is laid aside.
But Paul’s mind leaps forward from the present, transi­
tory existence to the eternal heavenly status of things to come. 
He sees a glorious change—the blessed hope of exchanging 
his frail earthly “tent” for a new and eternal “house,” a “man­
sion which is of heaven”—by which he refers to his glorious 
resurrection body to come, in likeness to that of his Lord’s. 
And he is satisfied.
2. Shrinks 
From 
Being 
Unclothed 
in 
Dea
th.—When 
he thinks of the time when his present “tent” must be taken 
down, or dissolved, he shrinks from the thought of being with­
out tent, or covering—for here he changes the figure to that of 
“clothing.” What was before a “tent” is now “being clothed.” 
And he distinctly states that he does not desire to be “un­
clothed,” or “naked.” He would much rather be “overdraped” 
with the coming immortality than to be denuded of the mortal 
body. “Not for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, 
that mortality might be swallowed up of life” (2 Cor. 5:4).
The “unclothed” state is manifestly that of death (1 Cor. 
15:37)—the “bare [gumnon, “naked”] grain,” planted in 
the ground, in gravedom, with a view to resurrection. And
Christ Will Call, and We 
Will Come Forth From Dusty 
Grave on the Resurrection 
Morn Clad in Glorious, Fade­
less, Endless Immortality.
the “clothed upon” condition is obviously the resurrection or 
translation life, in which we shall have “put on” Immortality.
3. Longs for Eternal State.—In writing to the Corin­
thians, Paul does not linger over the “death,” or “unclothed,” 
state. He passes on without pause to the blessed condition of 
being “clothed upon.” That is the important thing, the glori­
ous prospect, when at the sound of the trumpet we will awake 
to “put on” incorruption and Immortality. That is the whole 
point and purpose and consummation of the gospel. And the 
pledge thereof is the gift of the Holy Spirit.
4. Intermediate State the Basic Question.—In verse 1 of 
2 Corinthians 5, Paul had depicted death as the dissolving of 
our “earthly house.” He is speaking not merely of the body 
but of our entire being. Death is the dissolution of our entire 
being. It is also to be emphasized that Paul is not speaking of
332
PAUL'S LEADING PROBLEM PASSAGE
333
the consequences of death to a special part of our being, but of 
the state of death in contrast with the future state of eternal 
life, for which he earnestly longs. And this future life is in 
contrast with the condition called, from its transitoriness, a 
“tabernacle,” in contrast with the “house not made with 
hands, eternal in the heavens” (v. 1).
5. Death N
ot 
a Point 
of T
im
e, 
but 
a 
Period.—The 
clue to this entire passage clearly lies in what is meant by, and 
involved in, that interim state of death which the apostle calls 
the dissolution of “our earthly house.” Popular theology pre­
supposes “death” to be a momentary act—the departure of the 
soul from the body, with instant entrance into the presence of 
Jesus. Such a view assumes the act of dying to be both the be­
ginning and the end of death. But in inspired Scripture the 
act of dying is only the entrance into the state of death, which 
lasts from the moment one closes his eyes in the death-sleep 
to the moment he awakens in the resurrection. It is there­
fore not a point of time but a period—the entire period 
during which the person is enfolded in the embrace of grave- 
dom. This is Paul’s teaching in 1 Corinthians 15:54, 55.
The reign of death remains unbroken during this entire 
period of death. It is undeniably the period during which “our 
earthly house of this tabernacle” is dissolved. This cannot be 
overemphasized. We repeat: So far from contemplating merely 
the moment a person dies, Paul is speaking of the entire time 
one is dead. The act of dying, therefore, so far from being the 
termination of death, is only the entrance under the dominion 
of death. This, then, is established: At death our “earthly 
house of this tabernacle” is “dissolved,” and continues in its 
state of dissolution until the Lord wakes us up from the death- 
sleep for the restoration of life and the bestowal of Immor­
tality at His second advent.
6. 
Inter
im 
Death 
State 
vs. 
Eternal 
R
esurrection 
Sta
te.—With this point established we are freed from a num­
ber of perplexities in this passage. Paul is not here contrasting
334
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
any state of the soul with that of the body. He is not contrast­
ing the act of dying with that of the person in some other state 
or condition. The whole intermediate state is embraced in the 
idea of the “dissolution” of the “earthly house.” No, Paul is 
here contrasting the temporary interim death state with the 
eternal resurrection state.
He is contrasting the present life, verging toward disso­
lution—and after a few years of dissolution and remaining in 
this state of dissolution until the resurrection—with the glori­
ous, endless life which will begin when Christ raises His peo­
ple, and which life will continue without end forever. This is 
the “building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal 
in the heavens” (2 Cor. 5:1).
On no theory could the intermediate death state be said 
to be “eternal in the heavens.” The soul of the believer does 
not go to Heaven at death—an idea that was regarded as a 
heresy by the primitive church, as attested by Justin Martyr 
and Irenaeus.8
7. 
Significance 
of T
erm “N
ot Made W
ith H
ands.”— 
The expression, “not made with hands” (acheiropoietos), is 
not a cursory or merely routine phrase. It is fraught with 
meaning, and is historic in intent. This is by no means Paul’s 
first use of the term. He had already used it three or four years 
prior in his oration on Mars’ Hill, at Athens, in which he de­
clared: “God that made the world and all things therein, see­
ing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in tem­
ples made with hands” (Acts 17:24).
And again in his Epistle to the Hebrews (c. a.d. 53) Paul 
is even more explicit:
“For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, 
which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear 
in the presence of God for us” (Heb. 9:24).
However, the expression is more than Pauline. In his great 
apology, in answering the accusation of blasphemy, Stephen
* Justin Martyr, Dialogue With Tryfsho, chap. 80; Irenaeus, Heresies, chap. 31. Not 
until about a.d. 180 did the concept of an innately immortal soul make entrance, under such 
a term, through Athenagoras. (See Part IV for full portrayal with documentation.)
PAUL’S LEADING PROBLEM PASSAGE
335
likewise used the expression in “the most High dwelleth not 
in temples made with hands” (Acts 7:48). It clearly has to do 
with God and heavenly things. Yet even that is not the origin. 
It stems back to Christ Himself.
At the very outset of His public ministry, when Christ had 
purged the Temple from its desecraters, and had driven out 
the money-changers and merchandisers in the only recorded 
show of force in His life on earth, the Jews immediately chal­
lenged His authority for such an unprecedented act, and de­
manded a “sign” of His right and power to meddle in Temple 
affairs. Then He answered cryptically, and said, “Destroy 
this temple, and in three days I will raise it up” (John 2:19). 
But they countered by asserting that the Herodian temple 
was forty-six years in building, and asked scornfully: “Wilt 
thou rear it up in three days? But he spake of the temple of 
his body” (vs. 20, 21).
That was the real meaning. His resurrection would be the 
ultimate proof of His claims and the “sign” of His deity. But 
the significance of this utterance was, at the time, lost upon all 
—including the disciples. However, after Christ’s resurrec­
tion from the dead, the disciples remembered it vividly—and 
then understood its meaning (v. 22). And after the Temple 
episode the Jews again demanded a “sign” from Christ (Matt. 
12:38). But He upbraided them, and said:
"An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there 
shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas: 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” (Matt. 
12:39, 40.
His meaning then began to unfold to those who would 
understand.
8. 
Exemplified in Christ’s Natural and Resurrection 
Body.—This differentiation between “made with hands” and 
“made without hands” is further emphasized in the experience
* Reference to the “third day” appears in Matt. 16:21; 17:23; 20:19; Mark 9:31; 
10:34; Luke 9:22; 18:33; 24:7, 21, 46.
336
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
of Christ at His trial in the palace of the high priest. Then it 
was that the Pharisees’ witnesses said:
“We heard him say, I will destroy this temple that is made with 
hands, and within three days I will build another made without hands 
[acheiropoietos]" (Mark 14:58).
That is highly significant. They spoke more wisely than 
they knew. Finally, at Calvary, when Christ hung in anguish 
on the cross—
“they that passed by railed on him [“reviled”—Matt. 27:39], wagging 
their heads, and saying, Ah, thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest 
it in three days, save thyself, and come down from the cross” (Mark 
15:29, 30; see Matt. 27:40).
But He was fulfilling a predetermined plan. He died 
that we, too, might have resurrection bodies “not made with 
hands.” He would, and did, appear in His glorified resurrec­
tion body on the third day, according to prediction. Christ’s 
body was placed in the tomb as a “natural body.” It came forth 
on the specified third day as a “spiritual body.” And in similar 
fashion we, too, shall “bear the image of the heavenly” (1 Cor. 
15:49), the image of the “second man,” the “Lord from 
heaven” (v. 47; cf. Rom. 8:29). Our earthly bodies will then 
be “fashioned like unto his glorious body” (Phil. 3:21)— 
“made without hands.” Or as John says, “We know that, 
when he shall appear, we shall be like him” (1 John 3:2).
That is what Paul meant. Or, as he phrased it to the Colos- 
sians: “When Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall 
ye also appear with him in glory” (Col. 3:4).
That is the glorified body we are destined to receive, 
“made without hands,” formed by the creative power of God, 
in contrast with these earthly, corruptible, inglorious bodies, 
“made with hands,” through human generation.
9. 
Earthly Tabernacle Temporary; 
Heavenly Tem­
ple Eternal.—In discussing what happens to the body, Paul 
illustrates it by this figure of the temporary wilderness taber- 
nacle-tent of old, when God commanded Moses to build for 
Israel a “tent for the congregation,” made after the pattern
The Grand Reunion, When All the Sleeping Saints of All Ages and Climes Are 
Caught Up Together to Meet Their Lord as He Calls Them Forth on the
Resurrection Morn.
of the original temple, eternal in the heavens, shown to Moses 
in the mount (Ex. 25:40). This was so important that it is 
thrice referred to in the New Testament.
That was because there was a vital relation between the 
transient tabernacle in the wilderness and the resplendent 
temple of God in Heaven—the earthly being but a fragile, lim­
ited likeness of the heavenly. Paul applies the parallelism to 
the body, likening this present mortal body to the tabernacle- 
tent on earth, that is to give place to the glorified, eternal 
body “not made with hands.” This earthly tabernacle of clay 
is to come to nought, be “dissolved” (2 Cor. 5:1). But it is 
to be replaced by a glorious and immortalized body, in God’s 
due time and provision.
For the vast majority of the saints there will be a lapse of 
time between the moment of death and the time when Christ,
337
338
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
having returned with His retinue of holy angels, shall make 
our mortal bodies like unto His own glorious body, by His 
own omnipotent, creative power. The actual lapse of time is 
not equally long for all—the longest being for the patriarchs 
before the Flood, the shortest for those dying just before the 
Second Advent.
But when the believer lies down in death, Paradise is just 
one act away—at the resurrection at the Advent. Between 
death and the resurrection would seem a briefer time than 
for an angel to wing his way from earth to Heaven. And the 
change will seem to take but a moment—a twinkling of an eye.
And some will not die. Their mortal bodies will be 
“changed” without experiencing death, through translation 
into glorified body form (1 Cor. 15; 1 Thess. 4). This tre­
mendous, final, supernatural act is what Paul calls being 
“clothed upon,” after having been “unclothed” in the death 
state. This is the main point of the passage.
10. 
Simultaneous Reunion and Reward at Christ’s Re­
turn.—The whole passage treats on, and is written in, the 
spirit of the resurrection, with which it actually begins: “Know­
ing that he which raised up the Lord Jesus shall raise up us also 
by Jesus” (2 Cor. 4:14).
The comfort Paul offered the bereaved Christians at 
Thessalonica was not that their loved ones who had died in 
Christ would be immediately with Him in conscious joy. He 
does not offer happiness in a disembodied state. Rather, they 
would be caught up together with them to meet our Lord 
upon His return. That would be the moment of glad reunion 
(1 Thess. 4:13-18). Paul’s eye was always upon Christ’s future 
coming, as the day of (1) reward and (2) reunion. Thus he 
writes: “What is our hope, or joy, or crown of rejoicing? Are 
not even ye in the presence of our Lord Jesus Christ at his 
coming?” (1 Thess. 2:19).
It will be conceded that if man had never sinned he would 
have reached the eternal state or condition without passing 
through the experience of death. Then the notion of an inner,
PAUL’S LEADING PROBLEM PASSAGE
339
immortal soul would never have come into being. That was 
the aftermath of the temptation and the Fall. It was, in fact, 
the second falsehood invented by the archdeceiver to sustain 
the first lie—“Ye shall not surely die” (Gen. 3:4). When man 
should fall in death, the original lie would be inconcealably 
apparent, unless he could be persuaded that there is some in­
visible medium or entity (soul or spirit) through which he 
continues to live. Hence, such a theory was imperative, and was 
introduced into and through paganism, and became widely 
believed.
V. Glossary of Key Words and Phrases by Verses
As an aid to clear understanding, here are the English 
equivalents of the key words and phrases of 2 Corinthians 
5:1-9.
Verse 
Term 
Amplified Meaning
(1) "Earthly house”—this earthly body, in our present temporal condi­
tion
"Tabernacle”—temporary dwelling, earthly body 
"Dissolved”—disintegrate, go back to earthly elements 
“Building of God”—durable edifice, house from Heaven 
"House ... in the heavens”—glorified body provided by the Lord 
‘‘Not made with hands”—of heavenly origin
(2) “Groan”—sigh in distress, earnestly desiring redemption of body 
“Clothed upon”—to put on the “house” from Heaven 
“House . . . from heaven”—glorified resurrection body
(3) “Clothed”—mortal life in the flesh, here and now 
“Naked”—unclad, in state of death, dissolution
(4) “Unclothed”—stripped, without either mortal or immortal body 
“Mortality”—corruptible, subject to decay and death 
“Swallowed up of life”—invested with immortality
(5) “Earnest”—assurance of their full inheritance in the hereafter,
token, sure pledge
(6) “At home in the body”—living in this present life, absent from Lord 
“Absent from the Lord”—not yet in His presence, not yet clothed
upon
(8) “Absent from the body”—resting, asleep in Jesus, relieved of suf­
fering
“Present with 
the Lord"—having arrived, because 
“raised” 
or 
“changed,” united with Christ
340
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
VI. Expositional Survey of Passage by Verses
1. 
Verse 
1—Earthly 
House 
Dissolved; 
Heavenly 
House Eternal.—Let us now traverse the passage verse by 
verse, in logical sequence, in the light of all factors, as dia­
gramed or visualized by a chart. Paul speaks of our earthly 
“tent-house.” And tent and body are similar in several respects 
—the materials of both are made of earthly elements, they are 
transient dwelling places, and may be taken down and moved 
at any time.
It will also be recalled that Christ tented, or tab­
ernacled, for some thirty-three years among us (John 1:14), 
when He assumed a human body at His incarnation, before 
returning to Heaven. Peter similarly compares the human body 
to a tent, or tabernacle, that is put off at death (2 Peter 1:13, 
14). The figure is therefore apt.
Again, our present life state is followed by the death state, 
or state of dissolution. And this in turn is to be succeeded, 
through resurrection or translation, by the eternal life state. 
Our glorified life begins when, and only when, Christ returns. 
Then we receive our “house not made with hands, eternal in 
the heavens” (2 Cor. 5:1).
Paul casts his mind’s eye across the gloomy stretch of 
death and dissolution and fixes it yearningly upon the eternal 
state, which begins when, and only when, the intermediate 
state ends. His faith overleaps the chasm of gravedom, antici­
pating the “unseen” but “eternal” state of blessedness for 
which he hoped (2 Cor. 4:18).
“Clothed,” “unclothed,” and “clothed upon” are thus the 
key words. While living on earth we are “clothed” with our 
mortal body. At death we are “unclothed” while in gravedom, 
this earthly body being laid aside and “dissolved.” That will 
be the lot of the vast majority of believers. Only those living 
when Christ returns will escape dissolution, for they will be 
translated. But we shall all become “clothed upon” when 
we exchange the mortal for the glorious immortal bodies.
PAUL’S LEADING PROBLEM PASSAGE
341
This Life
The Life to Come
2 Cor. 5:2, 4 In this (body) tab- 
Desiring to be clothed upon with 
ernacle we groan 
our house from Heaven
That mortality be swallowed up 
of life
Rom. 8:22, 23 The whole creation 
Waiting for the redemption of our
groaneth
body
Paul’s Three Consecutive States, or Conditions, of Man, Outlined
Two Houses—Temporary Earthly and Eternal Heavenly; With Interven­
ing Death Between (2 Corinthians 5:1-9)
(1) “Clothed” 
(2) “Unclothed”
(.Present State—Mortality) 
(Death State)
(3) “Clothed Upon”
{Future State—Immortal­
ity)
Transitory 
(temporal) 
Intermediate (gravedom) 
Eternal (from Heaven)
Brief earthly tabernacle- Tabernacle-tent dissolved 
Eternal house from Heaven 
tent
(made with hands) 
Not made with hands
Clothed 
Unclothed (naked) 
Clothed Upon
Groaning under burdens 
(Released from suffering) 
(Glorified spiritual body)
Mortality 
Walking by faith 
Having earnest of Spirit
(Interim cessation of life) 
Swallowed up of eternal
life
(Sleeping in Jesus)
Living by sight in God’s 
presence
(No perception of time) 
Resurrected by power of
Spirit
At home in body 
Absent from the Lord 
At home with the Lord
Absent 
From the 
Lord 
{Resting in the Lord) 
Present With the Lord
SECOND 
Resurrection 
ADVENT 
or translation
342
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
2. Verse 2—Groaning for Immortality Beyond Resur­
rection.—Verse 2 presents Paul’s great desire as he contem­
plates the glorious eternal state. He longs, not for death (to 
free him from the hatreds of men and the infirmities of the 
flesh), but for the resurrection state. He passes over, as it were, 
the entire intermediate state. There is nothing to cause him to 
pause there with desire. His longing gaze is fixed upon the 
state that begins when the intermediate state has vanished like 
a dream.
We “groan,” or sigh in distress, because we earnestly de­
sire our Lord’s return, and for the “change” of our bodies of 
humiliation into the likeness of His glorious body. Observe, 
in passing, Paul’s parallelism in 2 Corinthians 5:2 and 4, and 
Romans 8:22, 23.
Yes, the “house . . . from heaven” (2 Cor. 5:2), the im­
mortal body, the state of immortality, awaits the redeemed 
beyond the resurrection, or translation, day.
3. Verse 3—Clothed 
Again 
After 
Naked 
State 
of 
Dea
th.—There is often confusion over the term “naked,” in 
verse 3. But the nakedness Paul mentions is the dissolution 
state of the earthly house of verse 1, and in verse 4 it is de­
nominated “unclothed.” Paul longs for the heavenly home, for 
when thus “clothed upon” we shall be no longer in the “naked” 
state to which death leads all men. And it is only of the inter­
mediate state that Paul says this—not of this life, and surely 
not of the glorified future life.
In the glorified state we shall assuredly have our “eternal 
house” and home. The grave (hades—bereft of light and joy 
and consciousness) is not our home. It is indeed a state of 
uninviting nakedness. But Paul looks beyond this nakedness 
of death to the land of life. He thus rules out any possibility of 
a state between death and the resurrection in which, as dis­
embodied spirits, men go to be present with the Lord. That 
cannot be the intent of “naked,” or “unclothed.”
The nature of the intervening state of death is that of 
sleep, without consciousness, and with no perception of time.
PAUL’S LEADING PROBLEM PASSAGE
343
A thousand years will seem no longer than an instant. The 
dead in Christ are “fallen asleep” (1 Cor. 15:18). If that sleep 
were unbroken by the call of the Life-giver, it would be tanta­
mount to utter extinction—an eternal sleep. But all who sleep 
are destined to an inevitable awakening, either unto “life” or 
to “damnation.” So beyond the state of death looms the glorious 
state of immortality—with eternal life, joy, and light.
4. 
Verse 4—
M
ortality to Be Swallowed Up by Im­
m
ortality.—In verse 4 (2 Cor. 5), Paul repeats the point that 
in “this tabernacle” we “groan, being burdened.” The world, 
Satan, sin, and temptation had made his life a burden. Yet all 
this cannot produce a desire to be “unclothed”—in the un­
clothed intermediate state that he disparages. Death is not the 
time of redemption, nor is the grave our home. It is only a 
temporary tarrying place until our Lord returns. Paul’s burden 
is for the future “clothed upon” state of the heavenly house, 
eternal in duration. The grave signifies the triumph of death. 
But death, or mortality, is to be “swallowed up of life,” a life 
that shall never end. And death itself is to be obliterated 
(Rev. 20:14).
This mortal must put on, or be invested with, immortal­
ity. This corruptible must become incorruptible by immortal­
izing transformation. Only then can it inherit the kingdom of 
God, with its endless life. Until and unless there is this tre­
mendous creative “change,” there can be no immortal life for 
any of the human family. But when that is accomplished, then 
“mortality” is swallowed up of immortality, and we will be 
“clothed upon” with our eternal house from Heaven. As noted, 
this is not at death but at the last trump, when the Lord Jesus 
appears in glory, and the dead are “raised,” and the righteous 
living are “changed” in the twinkling of an eye. That is the 
great apostle’s unequivocal declaration.
And Paul categorically states that men are not clothed 
with immortality individually and separately at death, but si­
multaneously and “together,” at the resurrection-translation
FRANKLIN BOOTH, ARTIST
© 1944 BY THE SOUTHERN PUBLISHING ASSN.
The Host of the Redeemed—a Multitude No Man Can Number—Stand Before 
God Clothed in Fadeless Immortality, Sealed for Eternity.
of the just (1 Cor. 15:51-54; 1 Thess. 4:15-17). And it is to be 
observed, further, that in translation the mortal body of the liv­
344
PAUL’S LEADING PROBLEM PASSAGE
345
ing is “changed” without a prior “dissolution.” This is defi­
nitely included in the phrases, “clothed upon,” and “mortality 
swallowed up of life”—Paul’s ardent hope. Paul’s mind is fully 
made up. He does not want to be “unclothed,” to die, to dis­
integrate. He would rather live on, and continue in the 
“clothed” state, with all its burdens and sufferings, than to 
die. But when the third possibility is considered, it at once 
takes first place in his heart.
Paul wishes above all things to be “clothed upon” with 
his promised “house . . . from heaven”—when the Lord would 
come and fashion anew the body of his humiliation. At the 
Second Advent, when Christ shall appear, we shall appear with 
Him in glory, being “clothed upon” with our heavenly house.
5. 
Indwelling Spirit Is Pledge of Our Resurrection. 
—The Holy Spirit dwelling in our hearts is the “earnest” 
(down payment, assurance, pledge, token) that we shall finally 
receive the desire of our heart, and be “clothed upon” with 
immortality. The indwelling of the Spirit is the sure pledge 
that the Spirit that raised up Jesus will also raise us up (Rom. 
8:11). Compare this trio of texts:
PRESENT PLEDGE OF 
FUTURE REDEMPTION
HOLY SPIRIT 
OF BODY
2 Cor. 5:5—“Hath given unto us 
the earnest of the Spirit”
Eph. 1:13, 14—“Sealed with that 
holy 
Spirit” — “the 
earnest of 
our inheritance”
Rom. 8:11—“The Spirit of him 
that raised up Jesus”—dwelling 
in you
That mortality might be swallowed 
up of life
Until the redemption of the pur­
chased possession
He that raised up Jesus shall also 
quicken your mortal bodies
All taking place at the Second Ad­
vent and the resurrection-transla- 
tion (1 Cor. 15:51-55).
346
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
6. Verse 6—At H
ome in Body; Absent From the Lord. 
—To be in our “earthly” tabernacle-house is to be “at home 
in the body.” The chief characteristic of this temporary house 
is that it is mortal and may be dissolved. That is our present 
situation. To be “absent from the Lord” is to be living here on 
earth, or resting in the grave—not yet in His presence. To be 
“present” with Him is effected by being either “raised” or 
“changed”—these being the sole gateways to the glory land.
7. Verse 8—Interval of Death Separates From Pres­
ence W
ith Lord.—There is nothing in verse 8 or in the con­
text to justify the contention that being “present with the 
Lord” occurs immediately upon being “absent from the body.” 
The passage does not indicate when these experiences take 
place. We do not, immediately upon dying, take possession. 
From Paul’s other writings, and Scripture in general, it is estab­
lished that the interval of the death state is the period that 
separates the two. We await the coming of the Lord.
Paul does not here deny his previous witness to the Co­
rinthians—that this “corruptible must put on incorruption, and 
this mortal must put on immortality” (1 Cor. 15:53)—and 
that at the Second Advent, which is still future. Paul is uni­
formly consistent and very positive that “if the dead rise not, 
then is not Christ raised: and if Christ be not raised, your faith 
is vain. . . . Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are 
perished” (1 Cor. 15:16, 18). His only hope, like the worthies 
of Hebrews 11, is in the resurrection of the dead. Thus he 
declares that there is no advantage in the martyrs fighting the 
beasts at Ephesus, “if the dead rise not” (1 Cor. 15:32). Ob­
viously, they were not already in Heaven.
“Absent from the body” (2 Cor. 5:8) consequently denotes, 
not happiness in a disembodied state, but a period of relief from 
a suffering and dying body—of resting and sleeping in Jesus.
“The things which are seen are temporal; but the things 
which are not seen are eternal” (2 Cor. 4:18). Thus the pres­
ent world is contrasted with the future. The present earth and
PAUL’S LEADING PROBLEM PASSAGE
347
its inhabitants are to continue but for a limited time; the 
world to come, with the redeemed children of God, is eternal. 
The portrayal is that of a tent versus a permanent home at the 
end of life’s journey.
8. 
Recapitulation: 
Three States 
for 
Man.—So this 
problem passage, written under inspiration, presents three 
states, or conditions, each in sharp contrast with the other two. 
These are: (1) This present mortal life; (2) the intermediate 
state of death; and (3) the future immortal life of the re­
deemed.
The first is spoken of as “we that are in this [bodily] 
tabernacle do groan” (v. 4). The second is described by, “If 
our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved,” we are 
“naked,” “unclothed” (vs. 1, 4). The third is alternately de­
scribed as “a building of God” “eternal in the heavens,” 
“clothed upon with our house which is from heaven,” “mor­
tality . . . swallowed up of life,” and “present with the Lord” 
(vs. 1, 2, 4, 8).
The second of these conditions—the state of death—is not 
one to be desired. But the third is so glorious that Paul groans 
for it. It is therefore clear that being “present with the Lord” 
cannot possibly mean his condition while this earthly house is 
“dissolved” in death. This second state Paul disparages, but the 
third he praises. These are definitely not descriptions of one 
and the same period and condition. Paul expected to be pres­
ent with the Lord after the intermediate state and the resur­
rection—or through translation, without passing through 
death. Thus there is harmony and consistency in this impres­
sive passage of the great theologian-apostle. The conditionalist 
position reconciles all factors.
CHAPTER 
NINETEEN
Paul’s Other Problem Passages
I. (2 Cor. 12:2-4): Paul’s Vision—“In ... or Out of the Body”
In 2 Corinthians 12:1-4, Paul speaks of being caught up 
into the third heaven, where he heard unspeakable words. It is 
frequently alleged that this passage or episode furnishes an 
example of a human soul, or spirit, actually existing or travel­
ing in a conscious, perceptive condition outside of the body, 
seeing transcendent sights and hearing unspeakable words, thus 
gathering heavenly information, and then returning to resume 
its abode in the temporarily deserted body. But Paul plainly 
declares that this was a “vision,” or “revelation” (v. 1). Surely 
the vision of a prophet does not prove consciousness in death.
1. 
Exact Specifications 
of Passage.—Here is the pas­
sage in full:
“It is not expedient for me doubtless to glory. I will come to visions 
and revelations of the Lord. I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years 
ago,1 (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, 
I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third 
heaven. And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the 
body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) how that he was caught up into 
paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful [ouk exon, 
"possible,” or “proper”] for a man to utter"
It will be observed that there is not a word in the passage 
about the soul of Paul leaving the body to visit Paradise. Paul
1 Fourteen years prior was about the time Barnabas brought Paul to Antioch (Acts 
11:25, 26), possibly from Tarsus.
348
PAUL’S OTHER PROBLEM PASSAGES
349
was still very much alive. So the text proves nothing pro or con 
as to the soul’s separate existence after death, for he had not 
died. Paul says he knew a “man” in Christ, not a spirit, how 
“he” was “caught up.” But Paul himself was obviously the 
“man” that he knew. It was a personal experience in his own 
life. However, it was a man, not the soul of a man.
Paradise is here equated with the third heaven, where the 
tree of life is (Rev. 2:7; 22:2). So Paul was carried away, in 
vision, to Paradise, just as John was later, while imprisoned on 
the Isle of Patmos. Paul plainly denominates it a “vision.”
2. 
Visions Produced by Agency of H
oly Spir
it.—Visions 
are produced through the agency of the Holy Spirit, while men 
are living. Thus of Ezekiel the Scripture record is:
“And the spirit lifted me up between the earth and the heaven, 
and brought me in the visions of God to Jerusalem, to the door of the 
inner gate that looketh toward the north” (Eze. 8:3).
"Afterwards the spirit took me up, and brought me in a vision by the 
Spirit of God into Chaldea, to them of the captivity” (chap. 11:24).
The question unavoidably arises, Could not the Spirit 
have similarly conveyed Paul, as well as Ezekiel? Then there 
was John, just mentioned, on the Isle of Patmos, who wrote: 
“So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness: and 
I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast” (Rev. 17:3).
These experiences took place while these men were alive 
in the earthly service of God, and were seen through the ec­
stasy of vision, with the mind under the supernatural control 
of the Holy Spirit. They therefore prove nothing about the 
condition of the dead, and have nothing to do with death. 
There is therefore not a scintilla of proof from this passage for 
consciousness of the soul between death and the resurrection. 
It is to be remembered that Paul frequently recorded per­
sonal communications from God through visions (Acts 9:4-6; 
16:9; 18:9; 22:17, 18; 23:11; 27:23, 24; Gal. 2:2). This was no 
exception.
As to the expression, “in the body,” or “out,” there was 
complete absence of sensibility to earthly surroundings. The
HOME
IMEDO
PERSI*
Babylon
T. K. MARTIN, ARTIST
©1941 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
In the Divine Pageant of History the March of Nations Is Nearing the End of 
the Age, When the Last Things Will Occur, Toward Which All Humanity Moves.
third, or highest, Heaven, or Paradise (2 Cor. 12:4), where God 
is, has frequently been seen in vision by various prophets. And, 
as generally recognized, the first heaven is the atmosphere; the 
second that of the starry heavens; the third the abode of God 
and heavenly beings. But let us look more closely into the mat­
ter of the visions of the prophets.
3. 
“Visions” Inseparable Part 
of Prophetic Role.— 
Through Moses, the Lord said of the prophet, “I the Lord will 
make myself known unto him in a vision” (Num. 12:6). And 
Job said that “in a dream, in a vision of the night, when deep 
sleep falleth upon men, . . . then he openeth the ears of men, 
and sealeth their instruction” (Job 33:15, 16). The prophets 
of old had visions as an inseparable part of the prophetic role 
—Abraham, Moses, Joshua, Samuel, Iddo, Isaiah, Jeremiah, 
Ezekiel, Daniel, Amos, Obadiah, Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zech-
350
PAUL’S OTHER PROBLEM PASSAGES
351
ariah. The same is true in the New Testament, such as with 
Stephen, Paul, Peter, and John. Going back, take the prophet 
Daniel for example:
Dan. 2:19—“Then was the secret revealed unto Daniel in a night 
vision.”
7:2, 3—“I saw in my vision by night, and, behold, . . . four great 
beasts.”
8:2—“I saw in a vision, and I was by the river of Ulai.”
10:7—“I Daniel alone saw the vision: for the men that were with 
me saw not the vision.”
And in the New Testament we read:
Luke 1:22—"They perceived that he [Zacharias] had seen a vision 
in the temple.”
Acts 7:55—Stephen “saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on 
the right hand of God.”
9:10—“To him [Ananias] said the Lord in a vision.”
10:11—Peter “saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descend­
ing.”
16:9—“A vision appeared to Paul in the night.”
18:9—“Then spake the Lord to Paul in the night by a vision.”
But note particularly John the revelator. Practically the 
entire Apocalypse was presented to John in vision. Just ob­
serve: In Revelation 9:17 John said, “I saw the horses in the vi­
sion, and them that sat on them.” And in a series of unparal­
leled views John saw Christ amid the golden candlesticks, the 
twenty-four elders, the seven lamps, the sea of glass, the four 
living creatures, the sealed book, the seven seals, the sealing, 
the seven trumpets, the temple, the two witnesses, the beasts, 
the woman, the dragon, the flying angels, Babylon’s fall, the 
seven vials, the Second Advent, the harvest, the two resurrec­
tions, the binding of Satan and his loosing, the lake of fire, the 
destruction of death and hades, the New Jerusalem, and the 
new heaven and the new earth, with the river and tree of life 
in the Paradise of God—constituting a matchless over all pano­
rama of the plan of salvation and its triumph. That is the 
scope of the “visions” of God to the seer of Patmos.
4. 
Paul’s Vision of H
eaven Matched by Isaiah, Daniel, 
John.—Specifically, Isaiah “saw also the Lord sitting upon a
352
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple” 
(Isa. 6:1). Daniel also saw the throne of the Most High in 
Heaven and the coming judgment scenes:
“I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days 
did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like 
the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as 
burning fire. A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him: 
thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten 
thousand stood before him: the judgment was set, and the books were 
opened” (Dan. 7:9, 10).
“I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man 
came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and 
they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, 
and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should 
serve him” (vs. 13, 14).
John the revelator likewise specifically saw the “throne” of 
God in Heaven, with the tree of life overspreading the river of 
life in the New Jerusalem (Rev. 22:1, 2). The question, then, is 
inescapable and unanswerable: If Isaiah, Daniel, and John all 
saw the throne of God in Heaven, and heard words spoken 
there in vision, why could not Paul, likewise in vision, see 
and hear, without involving the extraneous claim of his soul’s 
actually leaving his body? Isaiah, Daniel, and John were living 
men, albeit prophets, and continued to live and work on after 
their visions. Why then was not Paul the prophet functioning 
in the same way, according to the specified method and pattern 
of visions?
5. 
Absurdity 
of 
“Soul’s 
Separ
ation” 
T
heory.—This 
Pauline passage expressly concerns “visions” and “revelations” 
received from the Lord. This particular “vision” was evidently 
the most remarkable Paul ever experienced. He was given a 
view of “paradise,” in the “third heaven.” It was so real, so 
alive and vivid, that he could not tell whether he had been 
transported bodily to Paradise or whether it was in reality 
merely a vision, presented before his mind by the Holy Spirit.
Two possibilities only are brought to view by the text— 
either actual transportation to Paradise or the viewing of Heaven 
in vision. But notice the involvements either way: (1) If Paul
PAUL’S OTHER PROBLEM PASSAGES
353
was taken to Paradise alive, then he was not dead, and the epi­
sode would have no bearing on the question of consciousness in 
death. (2) And if it were, instead, a “vision,” common to 
prophets throughout Old Testament times, neither would that 
prove consciousness in death, for Paul was alive at the time. 
In either case, it does not support the Immortal-Soulist theory.
6. 
Preposterous Conclusions Involved.—The question 
at issue is reduced to one point: What is the meaning of the 
expression, “out of the body”? As stated, modern Immortal- 
Soulists assert that it is the immortal soul, or spirit, going out 
from the body—soul travel—and its existence for a time in a 
separate, conscious, perceptive condition, independent of, and 
apart from, the body. But note what such an allegation in­
volves.
According to the view of such proponents, the separation 
of the soul from the body takes place at death—the customary 
definition of death. In fact, in their view there can be no 
separation of soul from body, without death resulting.
But would anyone contend that Paul did not know whether 
he had died, and had had a resurrection? Yet that would have 
had to happen if the words “out of the body” meant a trans­
aerial flight of Paul’s soul to Paradise and back. It would mean 
that his soul went off to the “third heaven” while his body lay 
in Tarsus (or wherever it was)—a corpse upon the earth. And 
when Paul’s “soul” returned, he must have undergone a resto­
ration from the dead. Such a presumption is, of course, unten­
able. Therefore, “out of the body” obviously does not mean 
entrance of the separated body into a temporary state of 
death.
The expression simply means that Paul had a “vision”—a 
condition in which to his mind, controlled by the Spirit during 
the time of the vision, were presented scenes so realistic that 
he seemed to be there in person, viewing the actual spectacle it­
self and hearing the graphic words spoken.
It is to be remembered that vivid, realistic, natural dreams 
crudely illustrate how this could be. The case of John the Be-
12
GIB CROCKETT, ARTIST
© 1963 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
The Grasp for Power, Which Has Marked the Centuries, Is to Characterize the 
Last Days of Human History as the Age Draws to Its Close.
loved in Revelation 17 is a striking example. He seemed to be 
present, viewing events wholly future, and which could not 
have been contemporaneous—for they were restricted to the 
“last days” of time. Meantime, John was all the while alive 
bodily on Patmos. Similarly with Paul.
But such are the lengths to which some go, and the absurd­
ities in which they involve themselves, in seeking to sustain a 
preconceived Platonic theory brought over from Paganism 
into Jewry, and then into Christianity. The passage affords no 
proof that there is an immortal soul in man, that can live on 
in a conscious, sensate state, while the mortal body becomes 
lifeless or insensate, or crumbles back to dust.
II. (Phil. 1:20-24): “To Depart, and to Be With Christ”
1. 
Basic Principles of Sound Interpretation.—To un­
derstand with certainty the revealed message of God on any 
given topic or passage of Scripture, one needs to have before
354
PAUL’S OTHER PROBLEM PASSAGES
355
him all the pertinent statements and principles of the Word 
bearing on the subject. And the true conclusion will always be 
one that fits every important statement and underlying prin­
ciple without forcing the language, or the thought—just as a key 
will be recognized as the right one when it penetrates and turns 
a given lock without forcing any of its various wards. So with 
God’s Word. When a key is found that harmoniously explains 
every expression of a given passage, without forcing the lan­
guage or twisting the meaning, one may know that he has found 
the true interpretative key.
The tragedy is that some, instead of following Scripture, 
seek to compel Scripture to follow them, putting the figurative 
for the literal or the literal for the figurative—or construing an 
isolated text in opposition to the fundamental teaching of 
Scripture in general, and to Paul in particular in the instance 
we are about to examine.
Surely every truth lover will agree that it is far more im­
portant to maintain the harmony of the Sacred Writings than 
to defend a dogma at all costs, even to involving the Scriptures 
in fatal contradiction. We must always interpret the uncertain 
by the certain, and not vice versa. And always in accordance 
with the Word. “To the law and to the testimony,” if they are 
made to speak out of accord with this Word, it is because there 
is no true light in the exposition (Isa. 8:20).
2. 
Passage 
Regarded 
as 
Bulwark 
of 
Immortal-Soul- 
ism.—Philippians 1:20-24 is, by many Immortal-Soulists, con­
sidered to be the strongest text in the Bible in favor of natural 
immortality—primarily the expression, “To depart, and to be 
with Christ” (v. 23). Such proponents contend that Paul ex­
pected, immediately upon death, to go at once into the 
presence of Christ—on the premise that the soul lives on end­
lessly, and separately, in a conscious state after the death of the 
physical organism. Thus the real Paul would “depart.”
Paul does not, however, indicate that it is his “soul” or 
“spirit” that would depart. The “I” of his desire and the “my” 
of his departure indicate the whole person. He here makes no
separation of body and soul. It is to be conceded that if this 
expression stood alone, it might give that impression. But it 
does not stand alone. It must be understood in the light of 
Paul’s teaching elsewhere that death is a “sleep,” and that re­
union with Christ takes place at, and only at, the Second Ad­
vent and its attendant resurrection, or translation—and not 
before.
Paul’s desire “to depart, and to be with Christ” must 
receive its interpretation from Paul’s own fuller terms of 
specification elsewhere recorded. When rightly understood the 
testimony of Scripture will be harmonious, and never self­
contradictory. But the Immortal-Soulist claim is that a person, 
by his immortal spirit, goes immediately at death to be with 
the Lord. That, however, is contrary to Paul’s own explicit 
explanation in 1 Thessalonians 4, which stipulates an en­
tirely different manner of entry into Christ’s presence, by an 
altogether different and wholly contrary means.
3. T
he Problem Passage in Its Entir
ety.—Here is the 
text of this famous “depart, and be with Christ” passage in 
Philippians:
“According to my earnest expectation and my hope, that in nothing 
I shall be ashamed, but that with all boldness, as always, so now also 
Christ shall be magnified in my body, whether it be by life, or by 
death. For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain. But if I live in the 
flesh, this is the fruit of my labour: yet what I shall choose I wot 
[gnorizo, “declare”] not. For I am in a strait [sunechomai, “being 
pressed”] betwixt [the] two [living and dying], having a desire to depart 
[analusai, “return”], and to be with Christ; which is far better: nevertheless 
to abide in the flesh is more needful for you” (Phil. 1:20-24).
But first, let us get the historical setting and circumstances 
for this unique epistle and this particular passage.
4. 
H
istorical 
Background 
for 
Philippia
n 
Epistle.— 
The background for Paul’s famous Philippian problem pas­
sage is this: Some ten years had passed since Paul had preached 
the gospel at Philippi. During his third missionary journey 
Paul was beaten by a mob at Jerusalem and brought before 
the Sanhedrin (Acts 22:30). Paul there skillfully divided the
356 
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
CLYDE PROVONSHA, ARTIST 
C 1959 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
The Second Coming of Christ in Delivering Glory Is the Blessed Hope of the 
Ages, the Desire of All Saints Who Await the Coming King. He Will Then Be­
stow Our Immortality.
opposing Pharisees and Sadducees by referring to the doctrine 
of the resurrection. He was then sent, under duress, to Felix the 
governor. But his trial was deferred for two years, being resumed 
under Festus in a.d. 59. Paul then appealed to Caesar, and Festus 
ordered him sent to Rome for trial.
On the voyage Paul suffered shipwreck, and wintered at 
Malta (Acts 27). Upon reaching Rome, he was kept in custody, 
during which time he wrote the “captivity epistles” (Ephe­
sians, Philippians, Colossians). This was toward the end of his 
imprisonment, as his trial drew near, probably in a.d. 62. As 
the time approached when his case would be heard before the 
high tribunal, more rigid conditions of confinement were im-
357
358
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
posed. Nevertheless, a tone of joy and rejoicing runs like a 
golden thread throughout the Philippian epistle, just as grace 
does in Ephesians. Paul was, however, acquitted. The epistles 
to Timothy, with their remarkable immortality statement, 
were written later. Such is the historical setting. Now let us 
analyze the passage.
5. T
he 
T
w
in 
Gateways 
to 
Glory.—Paul determined 
that under all circumstances Christ should be magnified in his 
“body,” whether by his life or by his death. Life and death are 
here tied in, by Paul, with his body, not primarily his soul, or 
spirit. There is not a word in the entire recital about a separate 
soul or discarnate spirit. If Paul meant that his real, inner self 
was a conscious immortal soul, which would leave the body at 
death to go to be with the Lord, then, we ask, why did he not 
once say so some place in the one hundred chapters of his 
various epistles—comprising more than a third of the entire 
New Testament. But let us pause a moment for two texts.
Paul expressly declared, “I kept back nothing that was 
profitable unto you” (Acts 20:20). He did keep back, how­
ever, everything concerning any disembodied immortal soul 
or spirit. Such a Platonic concept he evidently did not con­
sider “profitable” for the church. Again, he said, “I have not 
shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God” (Acts 
20:27). But he never uttered a single syllable about an immor­
tal soul or a deathless spirit in man.
Consequently, such a notion cannot be considered as any 
part of the “counsel of God.” And Paul must be permitted to 
be in harmony with himself. This pre-eminent apostle would 
never stoop to being double in his language or deceitful in his 
witness. He placed his entire hope on resurrection or transla­
tion as the sole, conjoined gateway to glory.
6. 
Paul’s “So” 
Precludes 
Every 
Other 
Means.—To 
the Thessalonians he wrote of this in its inseparable relation 
to the Second Advent:
“For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with
PAUL’S OTHER PROBLEM PASSAGES
359
the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in 
Christ shall rise first: then we which are alive and remain [at the Ad­
vent] shall be caught up together with them [the resurrected saints] in 
the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with 
the Lord” 
(1 Thess. 4:16, 17).
The “so” (houtos), which is emphatic in the original, 
emphasizes the fact that not by our dying but by our Lord’s 
descending from Heaven, at His second advent, shall both the 
living saints and the sleeping saints enter the Lord’s presence 
together in the grand home going. “So” means “in this way,” 
“in this manner,” “by this means.” That is how we shall ever 
“be with the Lord.” Therefore, when Paul in 1 Thessalonians 
4:16, 17 describes the sole way and precise method by which 
we are to go to be with the Lord, he thereby precludes every 
other means. There is no other way save by (1) resurrection, 
or (2) translation. If there is, then Paul’s language is mislead­
ing and untrue.
If we go to be with the Lord by means of our immortal 
spirit when we die, then we do not go by means of, and at, His 
visible coming and the miraculous resurrection of the dead 
and the translation change of the living. In such an event Paul 
is made to falsify and deceive. There is no way to avoid such a 
conclusion. It must be clear that the descent of the Lord from 
Heaven, the mighty shout, the voice of the archangel, the 
sound of the trump of God—and the resurrection of the dead, 
or the change of the living—do not take place at death.
III. Paul’s Baffling Dilemma—“Life” or “Death”
1. 
Christ 
“Magnified” 
by 
Either 
Life 
or 
Dea
th.— 
Paul was “in a strait” (sunechomai, “being pressed”) “be­
twixt” the two alternatives of “to live,” or “to die” “For me 
to live is Christ, and to die is gain,” he wrote. In the context 
Paul had just said that Christ would be “magnified in my body, 
whether it be by life, or by death” So, if Paul lived, Christ 
would be “magnified” (Phil. 1:20), and the church profited
360
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
(v. 24). If he died, Christ would still be “magnified” (v. 20), 
and it would still be “gain” to Christ.
Paul had been beaten eight times and stoned once. He 
had been in perils of waters, robbers, the Jews, false Chris­
tians, the heathen, perils in the city, the wilderness, and on the 
sea, and had been times innumerable in weariness, pain, sick­
ness, hunger, thirst, cold, and nakedness (2 Cor. 11:23-27). He 
had a desire to end this mortal pilgrimage. He could well say 
that to die is “gain,” for he would then be at rest. But the cause 
of God and his sympathetic heart drew him to remain here in 
labor if acquitted.
On the other hand, his own weariness and sufferings were 
an urge for rest in the sleep of death. He was in a quandary. 
These strong pulls were just about balanced, though he did 
think it more needful for him to remain to give the benefit of 
his counsel and labors to the church. Thus “gain” to the cause 
of Christ would come by martyrdom, and there would be gain 
to himself as a martyr through the resurrection, for in his 
affliction any form of death would be a release. Thus he rea­
soned.
2. 
Involvements and Advantages 
of Death.—To Paul 
death was a state of unconsciousness for the sleeper, as he so 
often and clearly taught, with no conscious lapse of time be­
tween death and the resurrection. He knew that, after he had 
lost consciousness in death, the next moment of awareness 
would be the hearing of the voice of the returning Christ, call­
ing him to arise and be with his Lord forever. The first face he 
would look upon would be that of his beloved Life-giver. Thus 
he could say, “For me ... to die is gain” (Phil. 1:21). But 
how could death be “gain” if it reduced him to a state of un­
consciousness? Just as it would be to Job, who entreated, “O 
that thou wouldest hide me in the grave” (Job 14:13).
The intervening period between death and the return of 
the Lord would, for the sleeper, be annihilated, and the glories 
of the eternal world, through the resurrection, would open in­
stantly, as it were, upon his view. The waiting period, however
PAUL'S OTHER PROBLEM PASSAGES
361
long, is an utter blank—seemingly but a moment of time, like 
the twinkling of an eye. The very moment he would regain 
consciousness, upon the call of the Life-giver, he would be in 
the presence of Christ. So he need not actually wait a single 
conscious moment, for, we repeat, those who are sound asleep 
have no awareness of the passing of time.
3. Christ Will Call Forth From Dusty Beds.—The 
Lord Jesus Christ Himself went down into death. But it was 
not the prospect of death that filled Him with joy—except as 
He was fulfilling His Father’s will and providing salvation for 
man. His joy was over the fact that God would not leave His 
soul in she’ol (the grave) nor suffer His “Holy One to see cor­
ruption” (Ps. 16:9, 10).
Christ “passed into the heavens” (Heb. 4:14), and now 
ministers for us in the presence of the Father (Rom. 7:23-27). 
But that was through the designated resurrection and ascen­
sion provision. On the contrary, the worthies of old passed into 
the earth, the grave, and are dependent upon the living Son 
of God to come forth from the heavens to call them from their 
graves (John 5:28, 29). Until then they have no share in “any 
thing that is done under the sun” (Eccl. 9:6), for “the dead 
know not any thing” (v. 5), and there is no “knowledge, nor 
wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest” (v. 10). That was 
the Scripture dictum of Paul’s day—the Old Testament.
4. Only Two Designated Ways to Glory.—The inter­
mediate state has been arbitrarily injected into this passage, 
whereas the text is totally silent on the condition of the dead. 
That is not the point. Surely, if all the prophets and apostles, 
and saints and martyrs were already in Heaven, death would 
indeed be more desirable—if that were the pathway to Heaven.
It is commonly assumed by the Immortal-Soulist that one 
goes into the presence of Christ immediately upon death. But 
the text states nothing of the kind. And a whole battery of other 
texts affirm the contrary fact that we gain immortality and go 
into His presence only at the Second Advent and the concur­
rent resurrection.
362
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Entrance into Christ’s presence is therefore a future 
event, to be experienced simultaneously by all saints alike— 
except for those privileged few who have a prior special resur­
rection (like Moses), or special translation (like Elijah), both 
of whom appeared with Christ on the Mount of Transfigura­
tion. But in either case, it is still only by resurrection or trans­
lation. Clearly, then, it is by resurrection or translation, there 
being no other way of going to be “with Christ” (John 5:21- 
29; 1 Thess. 4:17). Paul does not deny or contradict his own 
testimony.
5. 
Paul’s Multiple Testimony 
as 
to “When.”—The 
notion that during the state of death believers are “with 
Christ” in a state of life in Heaven, involves an inescapable de­
nial of one of the cardinal doctrines of Scripture—the sleep of 
all the dead, in gravedom. Further, if the deceased saints were 
already with Christ in glory, and were able to see Him “as he is,” 
they would already have been changed into the “likeness” of 
Christ (1 John 3:2). But here is the timing for that change 
according to Scripture: “But we know that, when he [Christ] 
shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as 
he is” (v. 2).
It would follow that, on the premise of the Immortal-Soul- 
ist, the saints would already possess the fullest transformation 
that they could ever look for and obtain, and thus long antici­
pate Christ’s actual personal advent. But such a view brings a 
denial of an antecedent resurrection uniformly taught by Paul. 
Either that, or it implies that the resurrection occurs at death, 
and is already past (2 Tim. 2:18), which Paul likewise con­
demned as a heresy.
Paul repeatedly went on record as to when the Christian 
goes to be with his Lord. Here is the Pauline testimony. It is 
an eight-strand cable of evidence—so strong that it cannot be 
broken:
Rom. 8:23—At the redemption of the body.
1 Cor. 5:5—In the day of the Lord Jesus.
1 Cor. 15:51-55—At the last trump.
O. STEMLER, ARTIST
COURTESY OF STANDARD PUBLISHING COMPANY
The Apostle Paul, Greatest 
Theologian of the Ages, Had 
Transcendent Visions of Par­
adise and the Plan of Re­
demption.
2 Cor. 5:2—When we are clothed upon with our house from Heaven. 
Col. 3:4—When Christ our life shall appear.
1 Thess. 4:16, 17—When the Lord descends from Heaven with a 
shout and the dead are raised, and the living translated.
2 Thess. 2:1—At the coming of the Lord.
2 Tim. 4:7, 8—At “that day,” by which term he designated the day 
of Christ’s appearing.
6. Resurrection, Not Death, Ushers Into Presence of
363
364
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Christ.—We are told there will be “fulness of joy’’ in Christ’s 
presence (Ps. 16:11). But those who are fallen asleep are 
not yet enjoying that presence. If they were, the resurrection 
would be unnecessary. And as stated, Paul makes all life be­
yond the grave depend on resurrection. Thus the saints of old 
were “tortured, not accepting deliverance; that they might ob­
tain a better resurrection” (Heb. 11:35). Again, “if there be 
no resurrection of the dead,” “then they also which are fallen 
asleep in Christ are perished” (1 Cor. 15:13, 18). They are con­
sequently not in Heaven. And once more, the sleeping saints 
of the ages do not go to Jesus before the saints living at the time 
of the Advent (1 Thess. 4:14-17).
Therefore it is not at death but at the resurrection of the 
dead that the saints will be ushered into the presence of Christ. 
And for this Christ must first return from Heaven. It is only 
when He comes again that He will receive us unto Himself 
(John 14:3). Again, “when Christ, who is our life, shall appear, 
then shall ye also appear with him in glory” (Col. 3:4). Paul 
told the Romans that he, with them, awaited “the redemption 
of our body” (Rom. 8:23). This is the glorious “change” about 
which Paul wrote to the Philippians, when he said: “A Saviour, 
the Lord Jesus Christ: who shall fashion anew the body of our 
humiliation, that it may be conformed to the body of his glory” 
(Phil. 3:20, 21, A.R.V.).
That occurs only at the Second Advent (1 Cor. 15:51-
54).
IV. Paul’s Great Third Choice—Translation
1. 
Translation Far Better Than Living or Dying.— 
We should now note carefully Paul’s comparison when he 
speaks of “departing” to be with Christ as “far better.” It was 
not that to die was better than to live, and that he therefore de­
sired to die. The desire of his heart was to be “with Christ,” or 
“with the Lord,” which is vastly different.
To the two alternatives (to “live” or to “die”), upon 
which he could not make up his mind, Paul now adds a third
PAUL’S OTHER PROBLEM PASSAGES
365
choice, which was his deep desire—and that was to “depart” 
and “to be with Christ,” which is “very far better” (Phil. 1:23, 
R.V., A.R.V.). That would be to be caught up with Christ, 
through translation, to meet the Lord in the air when Christ 
comes to be “glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all 
them that believe ... in that day” (2 Thess. 1:10). This sound 
solution has been set forth by various reputable scholars back 
through the years, with no theory on the nature of men to sus­
tain.
This was “very jar [polio mallon, “much more”; “far, 
far”—Weymouth] better”—a double comparative. “Better” 
than what? Clearly, than either of the two he had just men­
tioned (living or dying). Therefore it cannot mean death, but 
some event or means by which alone Paul could be with Christ 
—by being “caught up” alive 
(1 Thess. 4:16, 17) through 
translation, either at the Advent, or a special translation, as 
with Enoch and Elijah. Paul had been in a strait between the 
first two, having difficulty in choosing between them. But the 
third alternative ended all indecision.
Paul’s “desire to depart” was mentioned in the midst of 
his discussion of the alternatives of life amid many perils, and 
dying and being at rest. He at first did not know which he 
should choose. But there appears this third consideration, 
which was “far, far better”—to “depart,” or go to be with 
Christ through translation, and thus be personally with Christ 
without dying. That was his heart’s deepest desire.
2. 
Desired to Be Loosed, Set Free From Earth.—The 
deep feelings, yes, the fervent desire, of the great apostle in 
his lonely confinement, as he contemplated this blessed hope of 
being with Christ, was to “depart” (analuo),* as of a ship from 
port, or a prisoner from confinement. Paul’s wish was not to be­
come a discarnate ghost-spirit, as some have interpreted, but 
to realize the Christian’s hope. It was one of the two designated
2 Analuo—to loosen, as of a ship from her moorings, so as to depart and return. Thus 
with the classical Greek. And this is the invariable meaning in the Septuagint, and in the 
Apocrypha as well. On the_latter see Tobit ii:9; Judith xiii:l; 1 Esdras iii:3; Wisdom it: 1; etc. 
Also Josephus, Antiquities vi, 4, 1.
366
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
means of being with Christ—there being no other way. There 
is thus no conflict or inconsistency here.
Paul wished to be loosed, or set free, from earth. He 
earnestly longed not to live longer on the earth, nor to die and 
be buried in the earth, but to be caught up from the earth, to 
meet the Lord in the air, and to be “for ever with the Lord.” 
He did not, however, live to see the fulfillment of his heart’s 
desire, as he suffered a martyr’s death. But he “died in faith,” 
awaiting the “crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the 
righteous judge, shall give” him “at that day: and not to” him 
“only, but unto all them also that love his appearing” (2 Tim. 
4:8).
So, if Paul “departed” to be with Christ, then he would be 
translated, and thus be personally with Christ without dying. 
This third consideration was assuredly “very far better.”
And why did Paul have a desire to “depart”?
Because he knew the suffering, toil, and trial here would 
then be over. He would be released from his almost-unbear- 
able burdens.
3. 
Relation of Problem Passages to Whole of Scrip­
ture.—In summation: To a whole army, as it were, of ex­
plicit witnesses, has been opposed a rear-guard action of a few 
seemingly dubious passages, which are by some invested with a 
meaning wholly foreign to the general tenor not only of the 
specific book of which they are a part but, more than that, of 
the New Testament as a whole—and even beyond that, of the 
Old Testament testimony as well. Yet some would, by such 
debatable passages, seek not only to counterbalance but even to 
outweigh hundreds of other explicit texts.
It is as if to contend that, on the scales, a pound outweighs 
a ton. The inconclusiveness of the contention is self-evident. 
But in reality, these texts do not contradict the rest. Under 
scrutiny they fail to give support to such a thesis, as our scru­
tiny of Philippians 1:20-24 attests.
So, to understand debatable passages we must first begin 
with passages whose meanings are incontrovertibly clear. Then,
PAUL’S OTHER PROBLEM PASSAGES
367
once the key is discovered, it will be possible to unlock other­
wise baffling passages. If the key is found that unlocks every 
passage to which it is applied—without any forcing—making all 
harmonious, the conclusion becomes irresistible that we have 
found the true and divine key. The principle of Conditionalism 
is that key.
CHAPTER 
TWENTY
Unique Witness of Epistles of 
Peter and John
I. Peter’s Portrayal of Cataclysmic End Events
The apostle Peter—man of action, ever ardent and im­
pulsive—was one of the earliest of the original “twelve” to be 
called as an apostle. He followed Christ through all His travels 
and teachings and witnessed His miracles. He was the first to 
confess Christ to be the Son of God. He sought to walk on the 
water. He became one of the chosen three to witness the trans­
figuration, and heard Christ’s great sermon on the end of the 
world, or age (in Matthew 24).
Peter thrice denied Christ, but repented, was soundly con­
verted, and became a strengthener of his brethren (Luke 22: 
32). He was the chosen preacher at Pentecost, and wrought mir­
acles, even restoring the dead. His vision at Joppa opened the 
door to the Gentiles (Acts 10:11-34; 15:14). And finally, ac­
cording to Christ’s prediction, he died a martyr’s death, cruci­
fied head down.
Peter heard Christ’s constant teachings on eternal life. 
And when the disciples were turning away from Christ—dur­
ing the crisis with the Jews over Christ’s claim to be the “Life” 
and the “Resurrection,” and the “Living Bread from Heaven” 
—and Christ asked the disciples if they, too, would go away, it 
was Peter who answered, “To whom shall we go? thou hast the 
words of eternal life” (John 6:68). And into his two short 
epistles, written to the Christian Jews of the dispersion, much 
vital truth on the destiny of man is packed.
368
The Ardent Apostle Peter 
Bears 
Confirmatory 
Testi­
mony to the Truth of Con- 
ditionalism as Borne by All 
the Other Apostles, and Be­
fore Them by the Prophets 
of Old.
ROBERT BERRAN, ARTIST 
© I 963 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
1. 
Imposing Outline in Sweeping Strokes.—With bold, 
sweeping strokes Peter sketches in the outline of the “last 
things,” leading up to “an inheritance incorruptible, and un­
defiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for 
you” (1 Peter 1:4). He deals particularly with the “last time” 
(v. 5), and the final phase of the salvation “ready to be re­
vealed.” This includes the climactic second “appearing [apoca- 
lupsei, “unveiling,” “revelation,” “manifestation”] of Jesus 
Christ” (v. 7), or “revelation” 
(v. 13), prophesied by the 
prophets, with the “glory that should follow” (v. 11).
Peter goes back to the first advent, when our Lord made all 
this possible, as He paid our redemption price (“the precious 
blood of Christ”), who was slain and raised up (vs. 18-21). 
Then he touches on our imperative new birth (v. 23). And 
he stresses Christ as the “living stone,” and “chief corner 
stone,” but becoming the “rock of offence” to many (chap. 2:
369
4-8). Peter presents Him as our great sinless Substitute (vs. 
22-24), the “just [dying] for the unjust, . . . being put to death 
in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit” (chap. 3:18) at the 
“resurrection,” but “who is [now] gone into heaven, and is on 
the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers 1 be­
ing made subject unto him” (vs. 21, 22).
Peter then presents Christ, our present mediator, as ere­
long “ready to judge the quick and the dead” (chap. 4:5), and 
declares that “the end of all things is at hand [eggiken, 
“approaching,” “drawing near”]” (v. 7). He tells of the joy 
of the saints “when his [Christ’s] glory shall be revealed” (v. 13). 
But he warns of “judgment,” beginning at the “house of God” 
(v. 17), and of the fateful end “of them that obey not the gospel 
of God,” our “faithful Creator” (vs. 17, 19). And he again 
stresses the day when “the chief Shepherd shall appear,” and we 
“receive a crown of glory” (chap. 5:4).
2. 
Characteristics 
of 
Centuries 
That 
Precede.—In 
his second epistle, after mentioning the precious promises of 
God that enable us to escape the world’s “corruption” (2 Peter 
1:4), Peter again leads up to “the everlasting kingdom of our 
Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ” (v. 11). He then refers to the 
Spirit-inspired prophecies that light up the darksome pathway 
of the centuries, until the “day star” shall appear (vs. 19-21). 
He touches on the “damnable heresies” (chap. 2:1) that mark 
and mar the centuries, and pervert the faith of some. And he 
touches on the “angels that sinned,” confined in the darkness 
of Tartarus, “reserved unto judgment” 
(v. 4)—and how 
the “unjust” among men are likewise reserved “unto the day 
of judgment to be punished” (v. 9). They will then “receive 
the reward of unrighteousness” (v. 13).
Next Peter comes to the last-day scoffers 
(empaiktai, 
“mockers”), openly doubting the promise of Christ’s coming 
(chap. 3:3), contending for the now familiar “uniformity” of all 
things from the beginning, and willfully denying the evidence
370 
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
i Eph. 1:21; 3:10; 6:12; Col. 2:10, 15; Titus 3:1.
UNIQUE WITNESS OF PETER AND JOHN
371
of the cataclysm of the Noachian deluge “whereby the world 
that then was, being overflowed with water, perished” (v. 6).
3. 
Coming Deluge of Fire in “Day of the Lord.”— 
Then comes Peter’s tremendous eschatological 
prophecy, 
blending in with Christ’s great last-day prophecy of Matthew 
24, and anticipating John’s fourfold description (Rev. 20:10, 
14, 15; 21:8) of the coming lake of fire. Here is Peter’s por­
trayal. He had just referred to the prediluvian world.
“The world [kosmos, abode of mankind] that then was [“of old” 
—v. 5], being overflowed with water, perished: but the heavens and the 
earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto 
fire against the day of judgment and perdition [apoleias, “utter and final 
ruin”] of ungodly men.” “The Lord ... is longsuffering to us-ward, not 
willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance” 
(2 Peter 3:6, 7, 9).
Thus Peter comes to the tremendous “day of the Lord” 
or “day of God,” with his vivid portrayal of coming destruc­
tion; when, in the overwhelming fierceness of the fires of Ge­
henna, the earth actually melts:
“But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the 
which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements 
shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are 
therein shall be burned up [katakaesetai, “to ashes”]. Seeing then that 
all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to 
be in all holy conversation and godliness, looking for and hasting unto 
[speudontas, “hastening”] the coming of the day of God, wherein the 
heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt 
with fervent heat?2 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for 
new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness” (2 Peter 
3:10-13).
2 This corresponds to such frequent Old Testament predictions of earth’s final destruc­
tion as:
"They [the earth and the heavens, v. 251 shall perish . . . shall wax old like a 
garment; as a vesture shalt thou change them” (rs. 102:26).
"The earth is utterly broken down . . . clean dissolved . . . moved exceedingly. . . . 
The earth shall reel to and fro ... be removed like a cottage . . . shall fall, and not rise 
again” (Isa. 24:19, 20).
‘Lift up your eyes to the heavens, and look upon the earth beneath: for the heavens 
shall vanish away like smoke, and the earth shall wax old like a garment, and they that dwell 
therein shall die in like manner” (Isa. 51:6).
“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” (Mai. 4:1).
So Old Testament and New 
Testament predictions are in harmony on the coming
destruction.
372
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Peter thus presents the histories and destinies of the 
three worlds:
(1) “The world that then was” (2 Peter 3:5, 6), that is, 
before the Flood.
(2) “The heavens and the earth, which are now” (v. 7) 
needs no explanation.
(3) The “new heavens and a new earth” to come 
(v. 13), that will continue on through all eternity as the home 
of the redeemed.
Thus the awful judgment of an earlier age through death 
and destruction by water is to be surpassed by the more awful 
day of eventual judgment to come of death and destruction by 
fire in the “day of the Lord” and the destruction of the un­
godly. Then Peter closes with a warning against so wresting 
(strehlousin, “straining,” “turning,” “twisting”) the Scrip­
tures as to result in the destruction of the distorter (v. 16).
Thus, in a lesser way, Peter traverses the same general 
eschatological pathway later given in greater fullness and de­
tail by John, the seer of Patmos, as well as by Paul. There is 
complete agreement.
So Peter declares that fires now hidden in the heart of the 
earth will burst forth in the final flames of the judgment day 
and do their appointed work. Then sin and sinners will 
pass away forever.
II. Problem Text (1 Peter 3:19)—Preaching to 
“Spirits in Prison”
1. 
Doubtful Texts Invoked to Support Doubtful Po­
sitions.—Certain texts are quoted from Peter to sustain the 
Innate-Immortality postulate. Actually, they are thus placed in 
outright conflict with the general tenor of the teaching of Scrip­
ture. And concepts that are at variance with the prevailing 
witness of Scripture are supported only by an unwarranted 
construction of a few texts that are admittedly difficult of 
interpretation, or are susceptible of two renderings. One of
HERBERT RUDEEN, ARTIST
RUSSELL HARLAN, ARTIST
© 1958 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
© 1957 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
Peter, Powerful Preacher at Pentecost, Was 
Peter’s Message of Restoration and Life Was
Equally Emphatic on Life Only in Christ, 
Ever Centered in Christ as the Source of Life
Bestowed at the Resurrection. 
Eternal for Sinners Transformed Into Saints.
these is 1 Peter 3:19—the “spirits in prison.” This is the full 
statement in context:
“For Christ also hath once suffered [apethanen, “died”] for sins, 
the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death 
in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: by which [the Spirit] also 
he went and preached [ekeruxen, “to herald,” “announce,” “proclaim 
publicly”] unto the spirits in prison; which sometime were disobedient, 
when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while 
the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls [persons] were 
saved by water” (1 Peter 3:18-20).
Some Immortal-Soulists hold that the souls of the right­
eous dead were liberated by our Lord when He descended 
into Hades at His death, and then ascended with Him to 
Heaven; and that all who have died since that time, if puri­
fied from all sin, go directly to Heaven. They usually hold,
373
374
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
however, that these souls will come back for their bodies at 
the time of the general resurrection. And part of this theory 
is the contention that Christ’s “spirit” preached the gospel, 
during the interval between His death and resurrection, to the 
“spirits” of antediluvian times, confined to this Hadean prison.
Peter speaks frankly of “some things” in Paul’s writings 
that are “hard to be understood” (2 Peter 3:16), which some 
“wrest . . . unto their own destruction.” Paul might have re­
sponded in kind concerning Peter’s writings. And this passage 
is one of them. Let us consider it in some detail. But we must 
beware lest one text be allowed, by reading Platonic Immor- 
tal-Soulism into it, to check the whole central current of con­
sistent Scripture teaching.
2. 
Profound Implications 
of Papal Position.—From 
the foregoing verses (1 Peter 3:18-20), the contention is made 
that the soul, or spirit, is immortal, and continues to live on in 
uninterrupted consciousness after death. And, during the in­
terval between Christ’s death and resurrection, it is held that 
Christ’s conscious spirit, His real being (while His body lay in 
the grave), descended into hades, the abode of the allegedly 
living dead, to preach to the disembodied conscious “spirits” 
of the antediluvians imprisoned there, with a view to giving 
them a second chance, and thus to escape from torment.
That is the basic contention. The question must perti­
nently be asked at this point, even on such a premise, Why 
did Christ go down to “hell” {hades, “the grave”) to preach to 
the damned spirits there, some twenty-four hundred years 
after the Flood, since their probation passed at death, ac­
cording to uniform Bible testimony?
The implications of such a position are profound and 
revolutionary. Some, we are confident, have never thought 
them through. If the dead are consciously alive—and can be 
preached to, and can be benefited by such preaching, and can 
repent and be saved out of torment—then the Roman Catho­
lic doctrine of Purgatory, or its equivalent, is validated, and 
the modern contention of probation after death is substan-
tiated. Those are the momentous implications. Such a proposi­
tion is obviously of sufficient importance as to merit careful 
examination. First, note some basic facts.
3. Christ Went Nowhere in Death; Preached to No 
One.—As to Christ’s condition in death, Christ’s body was put 
into the grave, or sepulcher {hades, or gravedom—Ps. 16:10; 
Acts 2:31), while He commended His “spirit” to God (Luke 
23:46; cf. Ps. 31:5). According to the apostle Peter, who had 
talked with Jesus after the resurrection (John 21:7-22), and 
who was the preacher at Pentecost 
(Acts 2:14ff.), Jesus’ 
soul (Greek psuche equivalent here to Hebrew nephesh, Jesus 
Himself) was in the grave from death until the resurrection. 
Quoting David (Ps. 16:10), Peter said of Christ:
“Thou wilt not leave my soul in hell [hades, “the grave”], neither 
wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.” “He would raise up 
Christ to sit on his throne” (Acts 2:27, 50).
Note that “my soul” in the first clause is paralleled by 
“thine Holy One” in the second clause. It was Jesus Himself 
that slept in the tomb.
Christ went nowhere and performed no action between 
His death and His “quickening,” or resurrection, for He was 
asleep in death.
4. Christ Was Made Alive; Did Not Continue Alive 
During Interim.—The word “quicken” (zoopoied), here em­
phasized in 1 Peter 3:18, is the same used in Romans 8:11:
“But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell 
in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken 
[zoopoiesei] your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.”
According to this, God brought again our Lord from the 
dead by the Holy Spirit—the same Spirit by whom His follow­
ers are to be raised at the last day. The “quickening” here 
means “to impart life, to make alive.” He was put to death in 
the flesh and made alive by the Spirit. To contend that He 
continued alive would be to nullify, or invalidate, the declara­
tion that He was made alive, or brought back to life, and for a
UNIQUE WITNESS OF PETER AND JOHN 
575
376
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
time had been dead—from the cross until His resurrection 
“from the dead” (Rom. 1:4).
He says of Himself, in Revelation 1:18, “I am he that liv- 
eth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore
Incontestably Christ was put to death. He was quickened 
by the Spirit. He went and preached to spirits in prison. But 
His preaching was not between His death and resurrection. 
Thus the contention collapses that this occurred between the 
time when Christ laid down His life for our sins “and was 
raised again for our justification” (Rom. 4:25). Any other 
affirmation on the part of man is pure assumption, in conflict 
with Holy Scripture.
5. 
When 
and 
to Whom Did Christ Preach?—If, as 
stated in the text (1 Peter 3:18), Christ was “quickened [raised 
to life] by the Spirit,” it is equally clear that it was by the Spirit 
that He did the preaching mentioned here. The text reads 
“quickened by the Spirit: by which also he went and preached.” 
Since the text says that the preaching was done “when once 
the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah,” it must 
be Noah’s generation that heard the preaching of Christ 
through the Spirit.
In the account of the condition of the earth before the 
Flood, the Bible records, “The Lord said, My spirit shall not 
always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days 
shall be an hundred and twenty years” (Gen. 6:3). Since ac­
cording to Peter, Noah was a “preacher of righteousness” (2 
Peter 2:5), it follows that the Spirit preached through Noah 
just as He has preached to every generation to whom God sent 
His human messengers. And it is Christ through the Spirit 
who is said to have done this. Here is no conflict, for Christ is 
the mediator of all communication to earth from Heaven.
But how can these antediluvians be called “spirits”? We 
will let Dr. Adam Clarke, well-known commentator, answer this 
question. After remarking that the phrase, “he went and 
preached,” should be understood to mean, “by the ministry of 
Noah,” he goes on to explain:
UNIQUE WITNESS OF PETER AND JOHN
377
“The word pneumasi, spirits, is supposed to render this view of the 
subject improbable, because this must mean disembodied spirits; but 
this certainly does not follow, for the spirits of just men made perfect, 
Heb. xii, 23, certainly means righteous men, and men still in the Church 
militant; and the Father of spirits, Heb. xii, 9, means men still in the 
body; and the God of the spirits of all flesh, Num. xvi, 22, and xvii, 16, 
means men not in a disembodied state.” 3
III. Christ Truly “Died” According to Prediction, 
Fulfillment, Attestation
It is essential to establish the fact that Christ died on 
Calvary—truly died. And no inner or real self, or being, as a 
separate, continuing entity, lived on during the period between 
His giving up of the “ghost,” or “expiring,” and His resurrec­
tion on the “third day.” Observe the conclusive Biblical evi­
dence. Note the italicized words.
1. Explicit OT Prophecies of Forthcoming Death.— 
Here are six explicit Old Testament predictions:
Isa. 53:7—“He is brought as a lamb to the slaughter.”
Isa. 53:8—“He was cut off out of the land of the living.”
Isa. 53:10—“Thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin.”
Isa. 53:12—“He hath poured out his soul unto death.”
Dan. 9:26—“Shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself.”
Zech. 13:7—"Smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered.”
2. Jesus’ Own Unequivocal Predictions of His Death. 
—Now follow about a score of Christ’s own personal New 
Testament predictions of His approaching death and His desig­
nated period in the grave. Again follow the italicized words.
(Those in small capitals indicate the time element.)
Matt. 12:40—“So shall the Son of man be three days and three nights 
in the heart of the earth.”
Matt. 16:21—“Be killed, and be raised again the third day.”
Matt. 17:23—“They shall kill him, and the third day he shall be 
raised again.”
Matt. 20:28—“The Son of man came ... to give his life a ransom for 
many.”
Matt. 21:39—“And they caught him . . . and slew him.”
8 Adam Clarke, Commentary, on 1 Peter 3:19. (Italics his.)
378
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Matt. 26:2—“The Son of man is betrayed to be crucified.”
Matt. 26:28—“My 
blood . . . which is shed for many.”
Matt. 26:38—“My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death.”
Mark 8:31—“Rejected . . . and be killed, and after three days rise 
again.”
Mark 9:31—“Shall kill him; and after that he is killed, he shall rise
the THIRD DAY.”
Mark 10:34—“Shall kill him: and the third day he shall rise again.” 
Luke 9:22—“And be slain, and be raised the third day.”
Luke 22:15—“Before I suffer.”
Luke 24:46—“It behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead
the THIRD DAY.”
John 10:11—"The good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.”
John 10:15—"I lay down my life for the sheep.”
John 10:17—“I lay down my life, that I might take it again.” 
John 11:51—“Prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation.” 
John 12:7—“Against the day of my burying.”
John 12:32—“Lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.” 
John 
12:32, 33—“Lifted up from the earth” “signifying what 
death he should die.”
John 15:13—“That a man lay down his life for his friends.”
3. 
Inspiration’s Record of Christ’s Death.—And here 
follows the unimpeachable evidence of competent eyewitnesses 
as to His death:
Matt. 27:50—“Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, 
yielded up the ghost [apheken to pneuma, “yielded up the spirit”].” 
Matt. 27:57, 58—“Joseph . . . went to Pilate, and begged the body 
of Jesus. Then Pilate commanded the 
body to be delivered.”
Mark 15:37—“And Jesus cried with a loud voice, and gave up the
ghost [exepneusen, "expired”].”
Mark 15:39—“And when the centurion, 
which stood over against
him, saw that he so cried out [“with a loud voice”], and gave up the
ghost [exepneusen, “to breathe out, expire, die”], he said, Truly this man 
was the Son of God.”
Mark 15:43—"Joseph . . . craved the body of Jesus.”
Mark 15:44, 45—“Pilate . . . calling unto him the centurion, he asked 
him whether he had been any while dead. And when he knew it of the 
centurion, he gave the body to Joseph.”
Luke 23:46—“And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, 
Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit [pneuma]: and having said 
thus, he gave up the ghost [exepneusen, “expired, died”]” * (cl. Ps. 31:5).
* Dr. Adam Clarke, commenting on the frequently used Biblical term, “gave up the 
ghost,” says that it “signifies to pant for breath, to expire, to cease from breathing, or to 
breathe one’s last.”—Commentary, on Gen. 25:8.
HARRY ANDERSON, ARTIST 
® 1955 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
The Joys of the Redeemed in the Glorious New Heavens and New Earth Will 
Surpass All Human Imagination and Will Abide Forever.
Luke 23:52, 53—“This man [Joseph] went unto Pilate, and begged the 
body of Jesus. And he took it down . . . and laid it in a sepulchre.”
John 19:30—“Jesus . . . said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, 
and gave up the ghost.”
John 19:33—“But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was 
dead already.”
According to the unvarying testimony of Scripture, Christ, 
as the voluntary substitute in death for sinners, was without 
any thought or activity while in the embrace of death, await­
ing the summons of the life-giving Spirit—the Third Person 
of the Godhead—at His resurrection on the "third day.”
4. 
Apostolic Witness to Christ’s Death.—And here is 
the galaxy of supporting apostolic witnesses to Christ’s death:
Acts 3:18—“That Christ should suffer, he hath so fulfilled.”
Acts 17:3—“Christ must needs have suffered, and risen again from 
the dead.”
379
380
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Acts 20:28—“He hath purchased [the church of God] with his own 
blood.”
Acts 26:23—"That Christ should suffer, and . . . should rise from 
the dead.”
Rom. 5:6—“Christ died for the ungodly.”
Rom. 5:8—“While we were yet sinners, 
Christ died for us.”
Rom. 5:10—“Reconciled ... by the death of his Son, . . . saved
by his life.”
Rom. 6:5—“Planted together in the likeness of his death.”
Rom. 6:10—“In that he died, he died unto sin once.”
Rom. 14:9—“To this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived
[lived again].”
1 
Cor. 1:23—“We preach Christ crucified”
1 
Cor. 2:2—“Jesus Christ, and him crucified.”
1 Cor. 5:7—“Christ our passover is sacrificed for us.”
1 
Cor. 15:3—“Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures.”
1 
Cor. 15:4—"That he was buried, and that he rose again 
the
third day according to the scriptures.”
2 Cor. 5:14—“One died for all.”
2 Cor. 5:15—“He died for all.”
Gal. 3:13—"Being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is 
every one that hangeth on a tree.”
Eph. 1:7—“We have redemption through his blood.”
Eph. 2:16—“Reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross.” 
Eph. 5:2—“Hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice 
to God.”
Phil. 2:8—“Became obedient unto death, even the death of the 
cross.”
Col. 1:20—“Having made peace through the blood of his cross.”
Col. 1:22—“In the body of his flesh through death.”
1 Thess. 4:14—“Jesus died and rose again.”
1 Thess. 5:9, 10—“Jesus Christ, who died for us.”
Heb. 2:9—“Jesus . . . made a little lower than the angels for the 
suffering of death.”
Heb. 2:14—“That through death he might destroy him that had the 
power of death.”
Heb. 7:27—“This he did once, when he offered up himself.”
Heb. 9:12—“By his own blood he . . . obtained eternal redemption 
for us.”
Heb. 9:26—“He appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of 
himself.”
Heb. 9:28—“Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many.”
Heb. 10:10—“Sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus 
Christ once for all.”
Heb. 10:12—“Offered one sacrifice for sins for ever.”
Heb. 12:2—“Endured the cross, despising the shame.”
UNIQUE WITNESS OF PETER AND JOHN 
381
1 Peter 2:24—“Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on 
the tree .”
1 Peter 3:18—“Hath once suffered for sins . . . being put to death 
in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit.”
1 Peter 4:1—“Christ hath suffered for us in the flesh.”
To deny that Christ died is consequently to repudiate the 
whole irrefutable testimony of Holy Writ.
5. Christ’s Post-Ascension Testimony From Heaven.— 
And here is the infallible witness of the risen, ascended Christ 
Himself that He was dead, but from the resurrection onward 
lives for evermore:
Rev. 1:18—“I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am 
alive for evermore.”
Rev. 2:8—“These things saith the first and the last, which was dead, 
and is alive.”
Rev. 5:9—“Thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy 
blood.”
Rev. 5:12—“Worthy is the Lamb that was slain.”
Rev. 7:14—“These are they which . . . have washed their robes, and 
made them white in the blood of the Lamb.”
Rev. 13:8—“The book of life of the Lamb slain from the founda­
tion of the world.”
6. Christ’s Death Established, Certified, Attested.— 
In the light of such an array of divine predictions of Old Testa­
ment prophets, iterated and reiterated New Testament fore­
casts by Jesus Himself, together with the inspired eyewitness 
record of His actual death and burial, and of multiple con­
curring apostolic witness, and finally of attestation from the 
ascended Christ Himself in Heaven, we rest the case. Jesus 
actually and truly died! And He rose therefrom on the “third 
day.”
7. All Is Lost if Christ Did Not Actually Die.—Now 
comes the tremendous alternative: If Christ did not Himself 
truly, actually die, as called for in the terms of atoning sub­
stitution—but only His body, while His spirit lived on as a con­
tinuing discarnate entity and busily visited the confined 
“spirits in prison” during the interim betiueen the alleged mo­
ment of His “death” and the “resurrection” (within the “three
day” asserted and reasserted)—then the declared transaction 
of the cross is a travesty; and the veracity of God and of Christ 
is impugned.
The credibility of their characters is destroyed. And the 
sole basis of our hope of repentance, reconciliation, and atone­
ment is canceled and nullified, and all the benefits springing 
from an atoning death are alike swept away. Then we are in­
deed left destitute of any sound hope and trustworthy expec­
tation of redemption—past, present, and future.
Then the promises of God would be invalidated, the in­
spired assurances rendered null and void, and the justice of 
God impugned. And most sobering of all, Satan’s claim, “Ye 
shall not surely die” (Gen. 3:4), would be vindicated and sus­
tained. And God’s solemn declaration, “Thou shalt surely die” 
(chap. 2:17), would stand discredited and disproved before the 
entire universe—His veracity shattered. That is the gravity 
and the essence of the issue. But let us examine these dread 
possibilities in greater depth and detail.
8. 
Multiple Benefits Annulled 
if Christ Did Not 
Die.—Look at the imposing array of promised benefits, here 
listed, all contingent upon Christ’s death—but all canceled and 
lost if He did not truly die, but actually lived on. The terse 
point of the text is here listed, with the key word or phrase 
italicized. Observe:
Matt. 20:28—Ransom, not paid.
Matt. 26:28—Remission of sins not effected.
John 1:29—Sins of world not taken away.
John 3:16—Everlasting life voided.
John 12:31—“Prince of this world” not cast out.
Rom. 3:25—Propitiation for our sins not accomplished.
Rom. 5:9—Justification through blood not received.
Rom. 5:10—Reconciliation not brought about.
Eph. 1:7—Redemption and forgiveness nullified.
Col. 1:20—Peace through blood abolished.
Col. 
1:22—Holiness and blamelessness thwarted.
1 Thess. 1:10—Deliverance from wrath to come unaccomplished.
Heb. 2:14—Destruction of devil’s power of death aborted.
Heb. 2:15—Deliverance from bondage breaks down.
Heb. 9:26—Putting away sin unaccomplished.
382 
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
UNIQUE WITNESS OF PETER AND JOHN
383
Heb. 9:28—Substitutionary 
bearing of sin collapses.
Heb. 10:14—Perfection of 
those sanctified 
voided.
1 Peter 3:18—The bringing of us to God thwarted.
1 John 1:7—Cleansing from all sin canceled.
1 John 2:2—Propitiation for our sins voided.
Rev. 1:5—Washing from our sins abandoned.
Rev. 7:14—Washing of robes in Lamb’s blood not accomplished.
That is the tremendous, sobering sweep of salvation that 
would be nullified, aborted, canceled—IF Christ did not die a 
complete, vicarious, atoning, all-sufficient, once-for-all death 
on Calvary’s cross. That is 
the gravity of the contention that
Christ did not die, but lived on during the 
fateful “three days.”
All redemption hinges on His death, as well as His resurrec­
tion, as His part of the transaction. But He did die, and was 
raised forevermore. Our redemption is assured by the immu­
table fact of Christ’s actually accomplished death, followed by 
His triumphant resurrection. Hear it:
“But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were 
yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, being now justified 
by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. For if, when 
we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, 
much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life. And not 
only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom 
we have now received the atonement” (Rom. 5:8-11).
IV. Problem Text (2 Peter 2:4)—Fallen Angels 
Detained in “Tartarus”
“For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down 
to hell [tartaroo], and delivered them into chains [seirais, “cord,” 
“rope,” “chain”] of darkness [zophou, “nether darkness,” “murkiness”], 
to be reserved unto judgment; and spared not the old [antediluvian] 
world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, 
bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly” (2 Peter 2:4, 5).
Had it not been that tartaroo6 unfortunately has been 
rendered by the translators, “cast down to hell,” there would 
be no occasion to allude to this text as having any bearing upon
5 Tartaroo is the verb form of the noun tartaros. “Tartarussed” would be a good
English translation of this verb. This compares with the verb “jailed” for “cast into jail.”
384
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
the doom of wicked men. The background is simply this: The 
designation Tartarus (in Gr. tartaros, the noun form of this 
verb) belongs to Greco-Roman mythology, and occurs only 
here in Scripture. Although it is a Greek word, it does not 
appear at all in the Septuagint.
Virgil, however, and Horace, Lucian, Lucretius, Statius, 
and other pagan Greek poets use it to designate what they un­
derstood to be the dark abyss of the infernal regions. Homer 
describes it as a subterranean region, or prison, into which 
were cast the Titans, or giants, who rebelled against Zeus. 
Pluto was supposed to be the reigning deity of those regions, 
and was called “Father Tartarus.”
1. Place of Detention for Fallen Angels.—Tartarus, 
as here used by Peter, represents the place of temporary con­
finement of the demons, or wicked angels, until such time as 
they should be judged and then destroyed. It is to be partic­
ularly noted that Tartarus in no way relates to the place where 
the wicked dead (men) are at present reserved, which is hades, 
or gravedom—she’ol in the Hebrew. Nor is it to be confused 
with Gehenna, where the resurrected wicked will be destroyed 
in the future, in the lake of fire.
These fallen angels were, as a result of their sin and rebel­
lion, cast down from the highest heights of glory to the deepest 
abyss of darkness—from “ministering spirits” to the ignomini­
ous state of restricted prisoners awaiting judgment.
2. No Punishment Before Decisions of Judgment.—It 
is to be noted, however, that neither wicked men nor fallen 
angels receive their punishment until after determinations of 
the judgment. So Tartarus is here used as a place of detention, 
not of torment.
The modern notion that Tartarus is an apartment of 
Hades, a sort of underground dungeon of torture, is based solely 
on heathen fables, without a scintilla of scriptural support. 
Any attempt to make a pagan out of Peter is based wholly on 
Greek mythology.
UNIQUE WITNESS OF PETER AND JOHN
385
It is regrettable that she’ol, hades, and gehenna were 
alike translated “hell,” and tartardo as “cast into hell,” when 
they are by no means synonymous. Such a procedure has only 
perpetuated and increased the confusion of ideas on the ques­
tion of future punishment. We repeat: She’ol and hades 
stand for gravedom, wherein the dead sleep until the last 
trump, while gehenna is the place of final punishment, after 
judgment. We must not borrow our theology from the heathen 
world.
To assert that these angels, and human sinners as well, 
are now in a place of burning torment is to charge God with 
the gross injustice of punishing before judgment. (See 1 Cor. 
6:2, 3; Rev. 20:10-14; Dan. 7:22, 26.) Tartarus, then, is pri­
marily a place of detention—not of torment—for the tempo­
rary confinement of evil angels, who are reserved unto judg­
ment and ultimate destruction. It has nought to do with men.
“The Lord knoweth how ... to reserve the unjust unto 
the day of judgment to be punished” (2 Peter 2:9).
V. John’s Epistles: Life in and Through Christ 
Is Central Thought
As might be expected, the Epistles of John, like his Gos­
pel, are infused with the same sublime theme of life. John be­
gins and ends his first epistle with the dominant thought of 
eternal life in Christ—Christ as the fountain, source, and per­
sonification of life. The expression “eternal life” appears six 
times in this one short epistle.
1. 
Life Manifested, Promised, Possessed in Christ.— 
Note this illuminating and progressive series:
(1) 
“That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, 
which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, 
and our hands have handled, of the Word of life [logou tes zoes, “God 
Incarnate”]; (for the life was manifested ["brought to light”], and we 
have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which 
was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;)” ... (1 John 1:1, 2).
13
The Throng of 
the Re­
deemed That No Man Can 
Number, Before the Throne 
of God — Saved, Immortal­
ized, and Secure Forever.
(2) “This is the promise that he hath promised us, even eternal 
life" (chap. 2:25).
(3) "We know that we have passed from death unto life [zoeri], 
because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in 
death. Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that 
no murderer hath eternal life [zoen aionion] abiding in him” (1 John 3:14).
That is it—manifested, promised, possessed.
2. 
Possession of Eternal Life Conditioned on Indwell­
ing Christ.—The Christian believer, then, has “eternal life” 
now, as a gift of God—but vested in Christ, for “this life is in 
his Son” (1 John 5:11; cf. 3:2). Everything turns on this relation­
ship. “He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the 
Son of God hath not life” (chap. 5:12). The possession of ever­
lasting life, then, is wholly conditioned upon Christ's abiding 
in the heart by faith. He who believes in, and experiences, this 
indwelling has everlasting life, vested in Christ, and has
386
UNIQUE WITNESS OF PETER AND JOHN
387
“passed from death unto life” (1 John 3:14; also John 5:24, 
25; 6:54; 8:51). Note the inspired phrasing:
"And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and 
this life is in his Son” (1 John 5:11).
“He that hath the Son hath life [the life]; and he that hath not 
the Son of God hath not life [the life]” (v. 12).
"These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of 
the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life” (v. 13).
But this is a dual, or reciprocal, relationship:
“We know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an un­
derstanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him 
that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and 
eternal life” (v. 20).
Stronger, more explicit phrasing could scarcely be framed, 
nor higher testimony cited. The only way to turn away its force 
is to deny that life—eternal life in Christ—does not really 
mean life, through giving it a metaphysical twist. But if men 
attempt to change the intent of such positive testimony to 
suit their preconceived concepts, then their controversy must 
be with God, the Author and Inspirer of these lucid statements. 
Life, eternal life in Christ, is the dominant note and burden.
CHAPTER 
TWENTY-ONE
Revelation—Inspiration’s Supreme 
Portrayal of Human Destiny
Of all the disciples, John the Beloved caught the vision of 
Christ’s inner message and reflected the genius and goal of His 
mission on earth more clearly and fully than all others. His 
Gospel record of the utterances and emphases of Christ consti­
tutes our supreme source book on the eternal life that He came 
to bestow. And his epistles are replete with their application. 
Contrary to popular conception, John actually wrote of life as 
frequently and as fully as of love.1
But the Apocalypse, penned by John the revelator, consti­
tutes the climax, the ultimate, in divine revelation. In it, all 
books of the canon “meet and end.” It was John who was 
chosen of God to convey the last New Testament message of 
God to men, with its supreme entreaty to repentance and life, 
and its final admonition and warning against rejection and 
death—necessary to complete the record of the Book of God, 
and to round out and close the inspired revelation of truth. 
Any deviation from or perversion of this perfect norm, or any 
addition to or subtraction from the terms and specifications 
of this inspired depiction, is therefore fraught with gravest 
peril. Its closing words of warning are:
“If any man shall add unto these things [“the words of the prophecy 
of this book”], God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this 
book: and if any man shall take away from the words of the book of
1 John used the terms “life” Uoi). “give life” (z&opoied), and “live” (zao) a total 
of 56 times, and used the terms for 
love 
(agape, agapad, and phileo) only 57. So even by 
count there was as great and constant an emphasis upon life as upon love in the Gospel 
of John.
388
RUSSELL HARLAN, ARTIST
© 1959 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
Christ Reveals the Glories of the Radiant Immortal Life in Store for Those 
Who Accept the Proffered Gift.
this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and 
out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this 
book” (Rev. 22:18, 19).
I. Tremendous Scope and Grand Finale of Book of Revelation
The majestic, towering figure of the book of Revelation is 
the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. He fills the Apocalypse from 
the opening verse to its closing benediction. And in the motif 
and movement of the book all the events portrayed sweep in­
exorably onward toward the great consummation—the triumph 
of God and righteousness, and the immortalization of the 
righteous at the Second Advent and resurrection, together with 
the establishment of the everlasting kingdom of Christ. But 
along with it is placed the grim portrayal of the total destruc­
tion of sin and sinners and the complete eradication of the
389
originator and of the fearful fruitage of sin and death—and 
which will eventuate in a clean universe forever.
Man has titled this inspired portrayal the “Revelation of 
St. John the Divine.” But the Spirit-inspired title is instead, 
“The Revelation of Jesus Christ” (Rev. 1:1), which it most as­
suredly is. It is the unveiling, revealing, and presentation of 
Jesus (the Saviour) Christ (the Messiah-Priest), and now soon 
to appear pre-eminently in all His power and glory as King of 
kings and Lord of lords, together with the inauguration of His 
everlasting kingdom.
1. Sweeps in Past, Present, but Primarily Future.— 
The Apocalypse is a prophetic message. It declares that it 
deals with three major classes, or divisions, of “things”: (1) 
“The things which thou [John] hast seen”—the vision of Jesus 
Christ, His eternal pre-existence, incarnate life, atoning death 
and triumphant resurrection-life forevermore, and His posses­
sion of the “keys of hell [hades, “the grave”] and of death”— 
(Rev. 1:10-20); (2) “the things which are”—those then existing 
or now taking place—and (3) “the things which shall be here­
after”—up to and through the close of the present world order. 
That is its tremendous scope and declared emphasis.
2. Triumph 
of 
“Seed” 
and Crushing 
of 
Serpent.— 
These all-embracing developments are presented in a series of 
significant sevens—seven churches, seven seals, seven trumpets, 
seven prophetic symbols, seven vials, seven dooms, and seven 
“new” things forevermore. Basically, the Revelation covers the 
time of the Christian Era (with retrospective glimpses) from 
John’s day to and through the great consummation, and the 
epochal entrance upon the aeons of eternity.
It brings the initial prophecy of the triumph of the “seed” 
(Gen. 3:15) and the paralleling crushing of the serpent to its 
predestined close. Genesis (the book of beginnings) and Reve­
lation (the unveiling of the endings of the disclosures of the 
Written Word) are thus tied together in Christ, the Begin­
ning and the End, the First and the Last (Rev. 1:8, 17).
390 
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
SUPREME PORTRAYAL OF HUMAN DESTINY 
391
The Revelation is clearly the complement and glorious 
completion of Genesis. Either book without the other would be 
wholly incomplete and actually incomprehensible. So the Crea­
tion and the Fall of Genesis 1 to 3 find their complete coun­
terpart in the re-creation and restoration of Revelation 20 to 
22. Truly, without the opening chapters of Genesis the Reve­
lation would be an insoluble riddle. And likewise, without 
these closing chapters the conflicts of the chronicles of history 
would be but a heartbreaking record of the failure of man, the 
triumph of Satan and sin and death, and the doom of the 
human race.
But history does not so end. It closes with the glorious 
triumph of truth and righteousness, and of those who have 
ranged themselves on the side of God. It is God’s message of 
hope and assurance. It completes the eschatological portrayal 
of the “last things.” There is no more beyond.
In the Old Testament, Christ the King and His kingdom 
are set forth in promise, symbol, and prophecy. In the Gospels 
the Messiah-King is presented and proclaimed to men, and 
rejected. But in the Revelation the King is enthroned amid 
the acclamations of the redeemed and His everlasting kingdom 
set up forever. Thus promise and prophecy are completely 
fulfilled. Types and symbols all give way to glorious antitypical 
realities that are now established forevermore. The vague 
eternity of the Old Testament becomes the absolute reality 
of the New.
3. 
“Day of the Lord” Is Master Key to Apocalypse.— 
The term “day of the Lord” (Isa. 2:12; Eze. 13:5; 30:3) will 
be seen to be the key that unlocks the vast meaning and remark­
able scope of the Apocalypse, which inspired expression in­
cludes “day of vengeance,” “day of wrath,” and multiple paral­
leling terms (for example, Isa. 61:2; 63:4). In 1 Thessalo- 
nians 5, the apostle Paul shortens the full term “day of the 
Lord” (v. 2) to the terse “that day” (v. 4). It is the prophesied 
day of reckoning, of judgment, of redemption, of retribution, of 
visitation, of rewards and punishments, of the Advent and the
Present 
World 
Conditions 
Are Foretold in the New 
Testament as Harbingers of 
the End of the Age.
resurrection, and the finishing of the mystery of God and of 
godliness (1 Tim. 3:16; 1 Cor. 2:7; 15:51).
The Revelation sets forth the consummation of all the af­
fairs of time. It depicts the successful suppression of the great 
rebellion, and the vindication of the wisdom, justice, and om­
nipotence of God. It portrays the end of time and ushers in 
the beginning of eternity. It sets forth the end of all ages and 
dispensations.
Careful scholars claim that in the Revelation there are 
no fewer than 285 quotations, references, and allusions to the 
Old Testament, thus showing the inseparable intertwining 
of the Old Testament and the New. Consequently the book of 
Revelation is the consummation of all divine revelation.
REVIEW PICTURES
392
SUPREME PORTRAYAL OF HUMAN DESTINY 
393
4. 
Covers Transition From Time to Eternity.—While 
the Apocalypse covers the Christian Era in five great repeating 
prophetic outlines, each presenting a different angle and as­
pect, so as adequately to compass the whole, its chief emphasis 
is on the climactic last things. While it points out the waymarks 
and issues along the highway of the ages, it deals primarily 
with the great approaching consummation of all things. Each 
prophecy, like a descriptive timetable of the journey, leads up 
to and through the “last days,” or “time of the end,” to the 
Second Advent, the actual “end,” and its attendant events—in­
cluding the resurrection and immortalization of the righteous 
at our Lord’s return.
But the Apocalypse goes far beyond the cataclysmic end of 
the present age at the Second Advent. It introduces the millen­
nial thousand years, which is, in reality, the remarkable transi­
tion period between the world that now is and the world to 
come. No other inspired penman portrays it in such fullness or 
sequence. That was left for John. Here is portrayed the ap­
proaching period of the confining of Satan in a vast abysmal 
world prison house, as it is described.
This leads up to the third coming of Christ, at the millen­
nium’s close, to raise the wicked dead— the “rest of the dead,” 
of Revelation 20:5. Then, after the final, futile, desperate 
stand of the wicked, the just sentence of God’s judgment is 
pronounced upon them, and is executed by the raining down 
upon the incorrigibles the predicted Gehenna of fire, to destroy 
them.3
This compasses the end of Satan and his evil angels, who 
participated in the great rebellion in Heaven (Rev. 12:7-9), 
and ever since have been the relentless tempters of men on 
earth and the instigators of war, sin, sickness, sorrow, suffering, 
and death, as well as the persistent purveyors of error and 
deception. These all have their part in the Gehenna of fire 
“prepared for the devil and his angels” (Matt. 25:41).
2 Fully covered in L. E. Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, volume 4.
The Assault on the Holy City by the Resurrected Wicked Ends in Their Total
Destruction.
But this is not to be accomplished until Satan makes his 
final effort to rally the multitudes of the resurrected wicked of 
the ages in a final but futile attempt to overwhelm the saints 
and wrest the kingdom of God from them, and to establish him­
self instead, as malign dictator. But it all ends in the ultimate 
and utter overthrow of Satan, the evil angels, and incorrigibly 
wicked men forevermore. Ultimately they will all be burned 
up, destroyed, brought to nought, become ashes. The fires of 
destruction will do their fateful work.
5. 
Complete Vindication of God and Righteousness. 
—And after the fires have done their cleansing work, God will 
create new heavens and a new earth, wherein the immortal­
ized saints will dwell forevermore in Paradise restored. That 
is the transcendent promise of the Apocalypse. And that, in a 
nutshell, is the divine plan of salvation, the divine plan of the 
ages. That is the consummation of God’s great outline of time 
and eternity.
Man has long had his day of rejection of God and righteous­
ness. Now the great day of the Lord, as it is constantly termed, 
brings the end of all rebellion and the establishment of right­
eousness forevermore. It is marked by the triumph of God and 
the vindication of His justice, wisdom, grace, and love—and 
the bestowal of eternal life and Immortality upon man for­
evermore. It is God’s day. That is the essence of the book of 
Revelation that we will now examine.
394
II. “Day of the Lord”—God’s Great Day of Reckoning 
With Man
As intimated, the key that unlocks the understanding of 
the book of Revelation is to be found back in Isaiah:
“For the day of the Lord of hosts shall be upon every one that is 
proud and lofty, and upon every one that is lifted up; and he shall be 
brought low” 
(Isa. 2:12).
This may properly be referred to as the inception, be­
cause it is the first of twenty Old Testament occurrences of this 
epochal expression, “day of the Lord.” In fourteen instances 8 
it is simply ydm Yahweh. In four (Isa. 2:12; Eze. 30:3; Zech. 
14:1, 7) it appears with the Lamed prefix “for” or “to,” that is, 
a day known to Jehovah. In all other places it is combined with 
such momentous words as “wrath” and “vengeance,” the in­
escapable accompaniments of the day.
In the New Testament the same significant term occurs 
four times (1 Thess. 5:2; 2 Thess. 2:2; 2 Peter 3:10, 12). The 
“day of the Lord” is the “day” when sinful man will be judged 
and abased, and Jehovah exalted.
This is now “man’s day,” when man exalts himself and at­
tempts to crowd God out of the control of the very world He 
has created. The Lord’s “day,” or “day of the Lord,” will bring 
the great reversal—when man shall be “brought low,” and 
the just and righteous sovereignty of God established forever­
more.
In order to grasp the far-reaching implications and signifi­
cance of this tremendous time of reversal—of rectification of 
all inequities and of justification of God and His punishment 
of sin and sin’s proponents, both demonic and human—we 
must follow the development of this tremendous motif through­
out the Book of God. This involves the consecutive tracing of 
the pertinent passages across the pages of Holy Writ.
SUPREME PORTRAYAL OF HUMAN DESTINY 
395
3 The fourteen occurrences are here recorded for reference: Isa. 13:6, 9; Eze. 13:5; 
Joel 1:15; 2:1, 11; 3:14; Amos 5:18, 20; Obadiah 15; Zeph. 1:7, 14 (2); Mai. 4:5.
396
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
III. OT Texts and Terms Portraying “Day of the Lord”
Without injecting diverting comment we first present 
the remaining texts of the striking Old Testament witness 
in the sheer words of Scripture, that they may speak cumu­
latively for themselves, with key words or phrases emphasized 
—the term in capitals and small capitals and the description 
in italics.
Isa. 10:3—“What will ye do in the day of visitation, and in the 
desolation which shall come from far?”
Isa. 13:6—“Howl ye; for the day of the Lord is at hand; it shall 
come as a destruction from the Almighty.”
Isa. 13:9-13—“Behold, the day of the Lord cometh, cruel both with 
wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate: and he shall destroy the 
sinners thereof out of it. For the stars of heaven and the constellations 
thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall he darkened in his going 
forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine. And I will punish 
the world for their evil, and the wicked for their iniquity; and I will 
cause the arrogancy of the proud to cease, and will lay low the haughti­
ness of the terrible. ... I will shake the heavens, and the earth shall remove 
out of her place, in the wrath of the Lord of hosts, and in the day of
HIS FIERCE ANGER.”
Joel 1:15—“Alas for the day! for the day of the Lord is at hand, 
and as a destruction from the Almighty shall it come.”
Joel 2:1—“Blow ye the trumpet in Zion, and sound an alarm in 
my holy mountain: let all the inhabitants of the land tremble: for the 
day of the Lord cometh.”
Joel 2:11—“For the day 
of the Lord is great and very terrible; 
and who can abide it?”
Joel 2:31—“The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon 
into blood, before the great and terrible day of the Lord come.” 
Amos 5:18—“Woe unto you that desire the day of the Lord! to 
what end is it for you? the day of the Lord is darkness, and not light” 
(also v. 20).
Zeph. 1:7—"Hold thy peace at the presence of the Lord God: 
for the day of the Lord is at hand: for the Lord hath prepared a sacri­
fice, he hath bid his guests.”
Zeph. 1:14, 15—“The great day of the Lord is near, it is near, 
and hasteth greatly. . . . That day is a day of wrath, a day of trouble and 
distress, a day of wasteness and desolation, a day of darkness and 
gloominess.”
Zech. 14:1-7—“Behold, the day of the Lord cometh. . . . Then shall 
the Lord go forth. . . . And his feet shall stand in that day upon the 
mount of Olives. . . . And the Lord my God shall come, and all the
PAUL REMMEY, ARTIST 
© 1956 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
The Redeemed Saints in the Holy City, the New Jerusalem, Safe With Their
Saviour Forever.
saints with thee. And it shall come to pass in that day, that the light 
shall not be clear, nor dark: but it shall be one day which shall 
be known to the Lord."
Mai. 3:2—“Who may abide the day of his coming? and who shall 
stand when he appeareth?”
397
398
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Mai. 4:5—“Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the 
coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord .”
Summarizing: The “day of the Lord” will be a day of 
retribution, of humbling, of punishment, of destruction, of 
desolation, and of terror, with celestial phenomena as precur­
sors twice mentioned; a day of the shaking of the heavens, of 
the removal of the earth, of darkness and wasteness, of the 
coming of God, of heart searching, of separation of the righteous 
from the wicked, and of the reward of the righteous. And it 
will be preceded by the coming of symbolic “Elijah the 
prophet.” Such is the multiple Old Testament description. It 
is a tremendous panorama of the day of God’s reckoning with 
defiant man. Its intent cannot be escaped.
IV. NT Portrayal of Day of the Lord Jesus Christ
Next follow through, in the same way, the amazing wit­
ness of the New Testament testimony, likewise italicizing the 
key descriptive phrases:
Matt. 7:22—“Many will say to me in that 
day [when the saints 
shall “enter into the kingdom of heaven”], Lord, Lord, have we not 
prophesied in thy name? . . . And then will I profess unto them [the 
hypocrites], I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.” 
Acts 2:20, 21—“The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the 
moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come: 
and it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the 
Lord shall be saved.”
Rom. 2:5-7—"Wrath against the day 
of 
wrath and revelation of 
the righteous judgment of God; who will render to every man according 
to his deeds: to them who by patient continuance in well doing seek 
for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life.”
1 Cor. 1:7, 8—“Waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ: 
. . . that ye may be blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.”
1 Cor. 5:5—“May be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.”
2 Cor. 1:14—"Our’s in the day of 
t
h
e Lord Jesus.”
Phil. 1:6—“Will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ.”
Phil. 1:10—“That ye may be sincere and without offence till the 
day 
of 
Christ.”
Phil. 2:16—“That I may rejoice in the day 
o
f Christ, that I have 
not run in vain, neither laboured in vain.”
SUPREME PORTRAYAL OF HUMAN DESTINY 
399
1 Thess 5:2—“For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the 
Lord so cometh as a thief in the night. For when they shall say, Peace 
and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, . . . and they 
shall not escape. But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day 
should overtake you as a thief.”
2 Thess. 2:1, 2—“We beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our 
Lord Jesus Christ . . . that ye be not soon shaken in mind, ... as that 
the day of Christ is at hand [in their generation, as the “falling away” 
must come first, whom the Lord will “destroy” at “his coming”]."
2 Peter 3:10—“But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the 
night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and 
the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works 
that are therein shall be burned up.”
2 Peter 3:11, 12—“Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, 
what manner of persons ought ye to be . . . looking for and hasting 
unto [from speudo, “hastening”] the coming of the day of God, wherein 
the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt 
with fervent heat?”
Rev. 1:10—Some scholars would add, “I was in the Spirit on the 
Lord’s 
day [he kuriake hemera]," or “day 
of 
the 
Lord.” Compare 
Isaiah 2:2 where the Hebrew terms are equivalent to the Greek he kuriake 
hemera.
Again summarizing: Celestial signs appear as harbingers 
of the Second Advent, then wrath, judgment, retribution, sur­
prise, destruction for the wicked, heaven and earth dissolved 
in physical cataclysms, but with immortality and reward for 
the righteous. What a portrayal! The day of the Lord is clearly 
the climax, the grand finale of all things terrestrial, when God 
takes charge of the affairs at the great consummation.
V. “Day of the Lord”—Fulfills in Historical Actualities 
of Apocalypse
We will restate briefly the over-all prophetic portrayal of 
the day of the Lord, of the Old and New Testaments, and then 
proceed to note the identity of the terms of fulfillment ma­
jestically spread before us in the Apocalypse that seals off the 
Book of God, and its parting message to mankind. Then we 
will note certain supplemental variant phraseology, which now 
appears in the detailed application in the Revelation recital, 
which enforces and establishes the fundamental truth that had
400
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
been cumulatively unfolded over the centuries. Observe par­
ticularly the additional features.
1. 
New Note Has Increasing Volume and Tempo.— 
Beginning with the eighth-century B.C. prophet Isaiah, a new 
note was introduced, and a new term (with its variants) was 
injected into Holy Writ. This motif persisted and grew in sig­
nificance throughout the remainder of the Old Testament 
canon, and swept on through the New Testament with in­
creasing volume and tempo. In the Old Testament, it was em­
ployed by Isaiah, Joel, Amos, Zephaniah, Zechariah, and Mala- 
chi. And in the New Testament it was enforced and amplified 
by Jesus, Peter, Paul, and John.
That momentous term was the day of the Lord, and its 
cognate expressions. God was beginning to prepare mankind 
for the great day of reckoning, the mighty consummation, and 
God’s determinate settlement of the sin problem that had 
plagued the race and given boldness to the enemies of God.
Back in chapter eight of the Old Testament discussion, 
mention was made of eight similar terms of increasing intensity 
—“The day,” “latter day,” “day of the Lord,” “day of his 
coming,” “great day of the Lord,” “great and terrible day of the 
Lord,” “great and dreadful day of the Lord,” and “day of the 
Lord’s wrath.” But its climax was also called the “end,” to be 
preceded by the “time of the end,” or “latter days.”
As we have seen, it is variously depicted as a day of 
wrath, anger, vengeance, trouble, distress, destruction, waste­
ness, desolation, darkness, gloominess, trumpet, alarm, trou­
ble, terror, and dread—for the wicked. It forms a swelling cre­
scendo of developments climaxing with the “end of the world,” 
or age—and consequent developments—comprehended 
in 
the one all-inclusive term, “day of the Lord.”
And in the New Testament it is similarly called a day 
of wrath, judgment, and harvest for the wicked, but of recom­
pense, reward, and eternal life and habitations for the saints. 
But the dominant note is retribution, punishment, perdition, 
and judgments, terminating with total destruction of sin and
sinners, and especially of Satan and his minions, then followed 
by a clean universe forevermore.
2. Detailed Bill 
of Particulars 
in Apocalypse.—As 
the day of the Lord is prophetically pictured in the Apocalypse, 
other intensified terms are employed in the portrayal: Tor­
ment, sorrow, wrath poured out without mixture, and tor­
mented with fire and brimstone. Specifically, spread over the 
various prophecies of the Revelation, the day of the Lord is 
declared to include the time of reaping (Rev. 14:15, 16), of 
crushing in the wine press of the wrath of God (v. 19), of judg­
ment made manifest (15:4), of the pouring out of the vials of 
the wrath of God (16:1), of the consummating fiat, “It is 
done” (16:17), of judgment (17:1), of going into perdition 
(vs. 8, 11), of burning with fire (v. 16; 18:9, 10), of torment 
and sorrow (v. 7), of weeping and wailing (v. 15), and of the 
smoke of burning (v. 18).
It is the time when iniquity is thrown down and found no 
more at all (18:21), of further allusion to the smoke of her 
torment (19:3), of righteous judgment and making war on 
iniquity (v. 11), of smiting the nations (v. 15), of treading the 
wine press of the wrath of “Almighty God” (v. 15), of cast­
ing alive into lake of fire burning with brimstone (v. 20), 
of slaying with the sword (v. 21). And finally fire comes down 
from God out of Heaven and devours them (20:9), and they 
are tormented “day and night” (v. 10). It is the execution of 
a just judgment, for they have been judged out of the infal­
lible record of the books of Heaven.
“And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the 
books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book 
of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were 
written in the books, according to their works” (Rev. 20:12).
“And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was 
cast into the lake of fire” (v. 15).
3. “Old” Passes Forever; “New” Established Forever. 
—Such is the galaxy of terms and descriptions necessary to por­
tray the actual day of the Lord and God’s righteous disposal
SUPREME PORTRAYAL OF HUMAN DESTINY 
401
Holy Angels—Special Order 
of Celestial Beings Dwelling 
in the Presence of God and 
Constituting His Messengers 
—Are Major Actors in the 
Plan of Salvation.
of the sin problem. Then comes the “new heaven and a new 
earth,” the former having passed away forever (Rev. 21:1). 
Thenceforth there is forever no more death, neither sorrow, 
nor crying, nor any more pain, and no more curse, “for the 
former things are passed away” (v. 4). “Behold, I make all 
things new” (v. 5).
And the two—the new earth, and the utter passing of the 
present earth, and its sin, sorrow, injustice, and rebellion— 
were both predicted in Isaiah 65:17, by the very prophet who 
initiated the term and launched the intent of the day of the 
Lord. Such is the profound unity of the Old and New Testa­
ments. They both had one inspired Author, impelling the 
inspired penmen—the prophets and the apostles. And this is 
a prime exhibit.
4. Consummating T
estimony Seals Age-old W
itness.—
HERBERT RUDEEN. ARTIST
402
SUPREME PORTRAYAL OF HUMAN DESTINY 
403
Another feature must be stressed ere this section is closed. It 
is this: “And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that 
defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh 
a lie” (Rev. 21:27).
Satan, the original rebel and ruthless deceiver and father 
of lies, will not be there—having then been totally de­
stroyed—and his catastrophic lie in Eden will have been utterly 
discredited, disproved, and brought to an end. Sin, with its 
lethal train of woe, will not rise up again. In the “second death” 
all sinners will have utterly perished and passed from being— 
thus disproving Satan’s lying claim announced in Eden, “Ye 
[our first parents, and all mankind] shall not surely die” (Gen. 
3:4). Six thousand years of unremitting death confute it.
So the saved all know by actual experience the verity of 
God’s word and the falsehood and fraud and deception of Sa­
tan’s first lie. They have seen its falsehood fulfilled before 
their eyes. The controversy is thus ended. The day of the Lord 
is over, fulfilled, past. The truth of God as to the nature and 
destiny of man is vindicated and established forever. The cruel 
experiment of sin is ended.
That is the triumph of God in the day of the Lord. A sin­
less universe and a redeemed humanity will then have entered 
upon the aeons of eternity. That is the primary message of God’s 
last book of the canon—the Revelation. And it is in complete 
harmony with the over-all witness of all the inspired messages 
across the centuries that preceded it.
CHAPTER 
TWENTY-TWO
Apocalypse Reveals Final Fate 
of Wicked
I. Teaching of the Apocalypse on Final Punishment
As we have seen, the Apocalypse is pre-eminently a book 
of life and death. As to the life phase, we find the tree of life 
(Rev. 2:7; 22:2, 14), the book of life (20:12, 15; 21:27; 22:19), 
the river of water of life (22:1, 2), the crown of life (2:10; 
3:11), and the water of life (21:6; 22:17). All of these are for 
the recipients of eternal life.
As to the death (thanatos) aspect we find the “second 
death” four times portrayed, and defined as death in and 
through the “lake of fire” (2:11; 20:14, 15; 21:8). It is also 
termed “killing with death” (apokteino, “to kill outright,” 
“to slay,” “to put an end to”); “destruction” (from diaph- 
theird, “decay wholly,” “perish”—11:18); and being “de­
voured” (katesthio, “denoting utter excision”—20:9). These 
terms are always used in the sense of bringing to an utter end. 
As twice intimated in the Old Testament, the wicked will 
then “sleep a perpetual sleep, and not wake, saith the King, 
whose name is the Lord of hosts” 
(Jer. 51:57). There is 
identity of punishment in both Testaments.
Observe first that the universal “first” death, with its ac­
companying hades (gravedom), is cast into and swallowed up 
by the lake of fire (Rev. 21:8). Then Satan, the keeper of 
gravedom, which is the stated “house of his prisoners” (Isa. 
14:17), is at last consigned to the same fiery fate. But this all
404
APOCALYPSE REVEALS FINAL FATE OF WICKED 
405
indicates, not endless continuance in misery, but the actual 
ending of existence itself.
II. Gehenna “Lake of Fire” Totally Destroys All Sinners
1. 
“Second Death” Tied In With “Day of Wrath.”— 
The Apocalypse gives the ultimate word on the final destiny of 
both righteous and wicked. While some of the Apocalyptic 
symbols are difficult and mysterious, the Apocalyptic teachings 
on the destiny of man are not in that category. And it is to be 
observed that this is the message of Jesus, the “first and the 
last: ... he that liveth, and was dead,” and is now “alive for 
evermore.” He, as the Life-giver, has the “keys of hell and of 
death” (Rev. 1:17, 18). Here “life” and “death” are obviously 
used in their natural and normal sense. Here is found Inspira­
tion’s final word thereon.
From first to last the Revelation rings with the dominant 
note of life. But also heard throughout are the somber under­
tones of death—both the universal first death of sleep for all 
and the inescapable second death of total destruction, re­
stricted exclusively to the wicked. First note its tie-in with the 
day of God’s wrath, alternative for the day of the Lord:
“He that overcometh shall not be hurt of the second death” (Rev. 
2:11).
“And the heaven departed as a scroll. . . . And the kings of the 
earth [and great, rich, chief, mighty, bond, and free], . . . hid themselves 
in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains; and said to the mountains 
and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the 
throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb: for the great day of his 
wrath1 is come” (Rev. 6:14-17).
“And thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they 
should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy serv­
ants . . . and shouldest destroy [from diaphtheiro, “to cause to wholly 
perish”] them which destroy the earth” (Rev. 11:18).
* It may be well to note two other “wrath” texts: (1) The “wrath” of the devil, “for 
the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but 
a short time”—Rev. 12:12; and “the great dragon . . . , that old serpent, called the Devil, and 
Satan which deceiveth the whole world” (v. 9); who was “wroth with the woman [the church]” 
(v. 17): and (2) the “wrath” of Babylon, “Babylon is fallen, is fallen . . . because she 
made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication” (Rev. 14:8). So there 
are three wraths—of God, Satan, and Babylon—all actual, and all in fundamental conflict.
2. “Lake of Fire” Equated With “Second Death.”—In 
chapter 14 the drinking of the “wine of the wrath of God” 
involves being “tormented with fire and brimstone ” with the 
“smoke of their torment” ascending “up for ever and ever,” 
and having “no rest day nor night” for a special designated 
class (Rev. 14:9-11). Chapter 17:8 depicts the going of the 
“beast” into “perdition” 
(apoleia, “destruction,” “ruin”), 
which declaration is repeated in verse 11.
Chapter 19 describes the judging of the symbolic harlot, 
and her “smoke” going up forever (Rev. 19:2, 3), the casting 
of the “beast” and the “false prophet,” and their special follow­
ers, into the “lake of fire burning with brimstone” (v. 20). 
Chapter 20 describes the casting of the devil into this seeth­
ing “lake of fire and brimstone,” where he, too, is “tormented 
day and night for ever and ever” (v. 10). Then follows the 
declaration:
“And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell 
[hades, “the grave”] delivered up the dead which were in them. . . . And 
death and hell [hades, gravedom] were cast into the lake of fire. This 
is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the 
book of life was cast into the lake of fire” (vs. 13-15).
“But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murder­
ers, 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” (Rev. 21:8).
That is the total testimony of the Apocalypse on the “lake 
of fire” and the final destruction therein. And it is this cluster 
of texts that furnishes the supporting weight of evidence cited 
by proponents of the endless torment theory. It is therefore 
incumbent upon us to examine those expressions upon which 
such reliance is placed. We here assemble them for convenient 
reference.
3. “Lake of Fire” Is Predicted “Gehenna of Fire.”— 
That the “lake of fire” of the Apocalypse is simply the “hell 
[gehenna] fire” (occasionally “outer darkness,” as indicated 
by an asterisk [*]) of the rest of the New Testament, and still 
future, into which the wicked, including Satan, are to be cast
406 
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
f£ír
árv
The Peril of Looking Back 
and 
the 
Destruction 
of 
Sodom—Symbol of the Final 
Excision of Sinners.
1-4%. 
p
,?T*V
G. DORÉ, ARTIST
at the end of the age, will be apparent from running the eye 
down over the expressions in italics and small capitals in the 
texts that follow:
Matt. 5:30—“That thy whole body should be cast into hell [gehenna].”
Matt. 8:12—*“Be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weep­
ing and gnashing of teeth."
Matt. 10:28—“Fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body 
in hell [gehenna]."
Matt. 13:41, 42—“Gather out of his kingdom all . . . which do 
iniquity; and shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing 
and gnashing of teeth."
Matt. 18:8—“Rather than ... to be cast into 
everlasting 
fire 
[pur to aionion]."
Matt. 18:9—“To be cast into hell fire [ten geennan tou puros, “fire 
of Gehenna”].”
Matt. 22:13—*“Cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weep­
ing and gnashing of teeth."
Matt. 25:30—*"Cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer 
dark­
ness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth."
407
408
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Matt. 25:41—“Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, pre­
pared for the devil and his angels.”
Matt. 25:46—“These shall go away into everlasting punishment.” 
Mark 9:43—"To go into hell [gehenna], into the fire that never 
shall be quenched [to pur to asbeston, with no hope of escape].”
Luke 3:17—“The chaff he will burn with fire unquenchable.”
2 Thess. 1:9—“Shall be punished with 
everlasting 
destruction 
[olethron aiónion, age lasting] from the presence of the Lord, and from 
the glory of his power.”
2 Peter 2:4—“God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them 
down to hell 	artaróo'\, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to 
be RESERVED UNTO JUDGMENT.”
Jude 6—“The angels which kept not their first estate, but left their 
own habitation [Heaven], he hath reserved in everlasting chains under 
darkness unto the judgment of the great day [of the Lord].”
Rev. 2:11—“He that overcometh shall not be hurt of the second 
death”
Rev. 14:10—“He shall be tormented with fire and brimstone.”
Rev. 19:11-15—The “Faithful and True” rides forth to “judge and 
make war,” His eyes as a “flame of fire,” on His head “many crowns”; 
His name “The Word of God.” He smites the nations and treads the 
“winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.” On His vesture 
is the name “King of kings, and Lord of lords.”
Rev. 20:6—“Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resur­
rection: on such the second death hath no power.”
Rev. 20:10—“The devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of 
fire and brimstone."
Rev. 20:15—“Whosoever was not found written in the book of life 
was cast into the lake of fire.”
Rev. 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 brim­
stone: which is the second death.”
4. 
Constitutes Inexorable Chain 
of Evidence.—Now 
just observe: Here are 
twenty-two references—seven of 
them in the Apocalypse—dealing with this one theme. Here 
is the complete round of equivalent, or contingent, terms: 
Gehenna, fire, furnace of fire, everlasting fire, everlasting 
punishment, Gehenna fire, everlasting destruction, lake of fire 
burning with brimstone, second death, reserved unto the judg­
ment of the Great Day, lake of fire and brimstone, lake of fire 
—and finally, the comprehensive “lake which burneth with fire 
and brimstone: which is the second death” (Rev. 21:8).
APOCALYPSE REVEALS FINAL FATE OF WICKED 
409
The fire of Gehenna, portrayed by Christ, was then fu­
ture. It was to be preceded by the judgment. It was part of the 
operation of the great day of God. It was destruction by fire. 
It was the lake of fire, or fire and brimstone. And to round 
out the inexorable sequence, this lake, burning with fire and 
brimstone, is the second death 
(v. 8). And the fires, having 
then done their destined work, burn out. And those destroyed 
thereby are no more, as elsewhere portrayed.
The lake of fire thus involves and results in the second 
death. This is in exact accord with Christ’s declaration that 
God can, and will, “destroy [apollumi, “destroy utterly,” 
“kill,” “cause to perish,” “come to an end”] both soul and 
body in hell [gehenna]” 
(Matt. 10:28). That is the evi­
dence of the Apocalypse on the final doom, or destruction, of 
the wicked.
III. Problem Text (Rev. 14:11)—Torment Day and Night;
Smoke Ascending Forever
1. 
Terms 
of Revelation 14:11 
Limited 
to 
Specified 
Group.—Various terms in the Apocalypse are figurative or 
symbolical—such as the “smoke” of Revelation 14:11. “Smoke” 
has aptly been said to be the formless relic of an object that 
has been consumed, or decomposed, by the action of fire. It is 
but a relic, a vestige, an emblem, a lingering trace of the pass­
ing, the drifting aftermath that remains from an object that has 
been destroyed. A perpetual smoke may, therefore, well stand 
for a perpetual reminder before the universe of an irreparable 
ruin that has taken place, a burning up that has accomplished 
its allotted purpose.
The same inspired portrayal, it is to be ever remembered, 
declares that God will “consume,” “devour,” “destroy,” cause 
to “perish,” and “blot out” all the wicked. That dread trans­
action, or operation, involves and constitutes the “second 
death.” The perpetuity intended is not, therefore, of the tor­
ment, but of the death following thereafter and caused thereby.
410
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
And as to the “torment” of Revelation 14:11, the renowned 
Greek specialist and translator, Dr. R. F. Weymouth, truly 
says: “There is nothing in this verse that necessarily implies 
an eternity of suffering.” 2 And he adds that it “gives in itself 
no indication of time. Cp. Gen. xix, 28; Jude 7.”
It is further important to remember that in Revelation 
20:15 and 21:8, where all the lost are involved, no period of 
duration is mentioned or specified. There is no indication that 
the “fire” depicted does not perform its normal and desig­
nated function of extirpating destruction, then ultimately and 
utterly going out—for in the new earth there will be no more 
pain, tears, anguish, or death (Rev. 20:14; 21:4; 22:3). These 
will all have “passed away” (chap. 21:4). And that agrees pre­
cisely with the terms of Romans 6:23—that “the wages of sin 
is death ”
2. 
Smoke Ascends Up Forever—Fires Burned Out.—As 
to the intent of the figure of “smoke” ascending up “for ever 
and ever ” other scriptures must be allowed to interpret and 
explain this expressly recorded term. Just such an explicit defi­
nition appears, for example, in Isaiah 34:
“And the streams thereof [of Idumea, or Edom—v. 6] shall be 
turned into pitch, and the dust thereof into brimstone, and the land 
thereof shall become burning pitch. It shall not be quenched night 
nor day; the smoke thereof shall go up for ever [Heb., lenesach nesachim, 
“perpetuity of perpetuities”] (vs. 9, 10).”
Then follows immediately the conjoined explanatory 
clause:
“From generation to generation it shall lie waste; none shall pass 
through it for ever and ever. But the cormorant and the bittern shall 
possess it; the owl also and the raven shall dwell in it: and he shall 
stretch out upon it the line of confusion, and the stones of emptiness" 
(vs. 10, 11).
That definitely indicates perpetual desolation, not an end­
less life of pain. The fires have burned out. If, therefore, the 
place that was once a raging fire came, in due time, to “lie
3 Richard F. Weymouth, The New Testament in Modern Speech 
(3d ed.), Rev. 
14:11, n. 7, p. 715.
APOCALYPSE REVEALS FINAL FATE OF WICKED 
411
waste,” while the smoke drifted endlessly on, as a reminder, 
back in Isaiah’s time, the same would be true of the smoke 
from the fires of gehenna when they will have accomplished 
their designated work in the great day of the Lord.
3. 
Neither “Torment” 
nor “Smoke” Are Eternal.— 
Of the expressions appearing in Revelation 14:10, 11—(1) 
“tormented3 with fire and brimstone,” (2) the "smoke of 
their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever ,” and (3) “they 
have no rest day nor night”—it must again be remembered that 
these specifications all refer to the punishment of a special 
class, whose guilt is exceptional. On them, in this retributive 
“day of the Lord,” the “wrath of God” is “poured out 
without mixture” 
(v. 10). Their punishment is therefore 
exceptionally severe.
Nevertheless, even with that understanding the passage 
does not say that their torment is to continue forever; rather, 
it is the “smoke” of their time of “torment” that drifts on 
endlessly.
The psalmist wrote, “The wicked . . . shall consume; into 
smoke shall they consume aivay” (Ps. 37:20). The smoke could 
never be regathered and reorganized, so as to form the con­
tinuing individual personality again. This is evident from the 
fact that the same expression is used concerning mystical “Bab­
ylon” (an ecclesiastical organization, not an individual), whose 
smoke likewise “rose up for ever and ever” (Rev. 19:3), else­
where referred to as “smoke of her burning” (Rev. 18:18).
But neither is this endless burning, for her doom is else­
where set forth as utter obliteration—Babylon shall with 
“violence” be “thrown down, and shall be found no more at
3 Several occurrences of the term “torment” (basanos). or “tormented” (basanizd, 
literally, “to test,” as with metals by a touchstone, or “to torture ), appear in the Apocalypse. 
These are:
Rev. 9:5—“tormented [from basanizd, “test, prove, torture”] five months”
11:10—“tormented them that dwelt on the earth”
12:2—symbolic woman “pained [lit., “tormented”] to be delivered”
14:10—“tormented with fire and brimstone”
14:11—“smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever”
18:7—“so much torment and sorrow give her”
20:10—“tormented [from basanizd] day and night for ever and ever”
There will assuredly be torment, but not endless torment. It ultimately ends when 
the destined utter extinction of being has taken place.
412
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
all” (v. 21). She shall be “utterly burned with fire’’ (v. 8). 
Consequently she does not live on and suffer on endlessly, but 
ultimately ceases to be. Now, inasmuch as Babylon is to be 
obliterated, and yet her smoke said to continue to rise, it is 
plain that her “smoke” obviously represents a perpetual attes­
tation or reminder of her burning.
4. 
“Father” of First “No-Death” Lie Last to Die in 
Gehenna.—Among the closing prophetic declarations of the 
Apocalypse is the significant affirmation that “all liars, shall have 
their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: 
which is the second death” (Rev. 21:8).
Satan, the deceiving and malignant source of the original 
Edenic “no-death” lie (John 8:44; cf. Gen. 3:4)/ is himself 
destroyed forever in this very fire of Gehenna “prepared for the 
devil and his angels” (Matt. 25:41). Thus his own lie is com­
pletely disproved by his own death, and brings his age-old de­
ceptions and tragically accepted perversions to an utter end. 
Here is the fateful declaration: “And the devil that deceived 
them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone.” “This is the 
second death” (Rev. 20:10, 14).
Thus he dies, and dies forever. There is no resuscitation 
for Satan.
Hence the first lie will be completely canceled out by the 
extirpation of all liars and lying in the terminating “lake of 
fire.” The introduction of the fateful first death is counterbal­
anced by the destruction and cessation of all death and dying 
in the “second death.” And all sorrow, pain, sickness, and mis­
ery, and finally the grave (all comprehended in that one orig­
inal word “death”) are nullified forever by the obliteration of 
Satan and all that is evil.
So, with Satan’s destruction the great day of the Lord comes 
to its end. The great challenge and rebellion are over. Truth is 
triumphant forever, and God and His righteousness and equity
* The falsity of Satan’s claim (“Ye shall not surely die”), as pertains to Adam, is 
recorded by inspiration—“All the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: 
and he died” (Gen. 5:5). So the inspired Old Testament record attests that the serpent lied 
as to Adam—as well as perpetrating and perpetuating his deceit upon Adam’s posterity.
G. DAVIS, ARTIST
Our Accountability Is Not Only for Our Talents but for Our Decisions on the
Issues of Life.
are vindicated before all for all eternity. All falsehood, error, 
and deception have been unmasked and overthrown. God’s word 
and wisdom, His power and justice, His grace and mercy, His 
government and law, omniscience and sovereignty, are now 
established beyond all challenge—and that forevermore! The 
new heaven and new earth follow, and abide forevermore.
IV. No Eternally Seething “Lake of Fire” in Coming 
“New Earth”
1. 
Dogma 
of Eternal Torment Involves Notorious 
Dualism.—Let us frankly face this point: The Immortal-Soul- 
ist postulate of the eternity of sin would necessitate (1) the 
creation or conditioning of special bodies for the wicked, upon 
their resurrection, in order that they might suffer forever; 
(2) the redeemed would always behold the agonies of the 
damned; (3) there would be an eternal activity in death, and
413
414
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
(4) this would involve an inescapable denial of the finished 
work of Christ. These are all in conflict with the Word. More 
than that, such a concept involves evil coexisting eternally with 
good, and Satan coexisting eternally with God—which, in ac­
tuality, is simply the ancient Dualism perpetuated.
According to such a thesis, sin and Satan, pain and the 
curse, sinners and death, will last as long as God exists and is 
God. But the Apocalypse denies and excludes any such pagan 
concept, derived as it was from Persian Zoroastrianism, and 
transmitted therefrom. How could an “eternal evil” coexist 
forever with the Absolute God, “who only hath immortality” 
(1 Tim. 6:15, 16)? These are wholly incompatible concepts.
The lake of fire will not seethe alongside the New Jeru­
salem throughout all eternity. There will be no endlessly burn­
ing, perpetually torturing lake of Gehenna fire. The tree of 
life will not be rooted in the searing sands on the shore line 
of the lake of fire and brimstone. The flames of the lake of fire 
will in time die out, just as did the unquenchable fires of 
Sodom and Gomorrah, and of Idumea of old, when they have 
accomplished their destined mission of complete destruction of 
wicked men, evil angels, and Satan the root and source of all 
evil.
2. 
Celestial 
Conflict 
Terminates 
on 
Earth.—It 
should also be noted that the real existence and fearful activ­
ity of evil spirits, or fallen angels, has been an integral and in­
separable factor in the great controversy between God and 
Satan, as well as between good men and evil. Behind the earthly 
struggle lies the original universe-shaking rebellion (Rev. 12: 
7-12), in which angelic principalities and powers are in relent­
less revolt against divine truth and heavenly authority, in­
cluding the law and government of God. It was into this dread 
conflict that earth was tragically drawn in the days of Eden 
(Gen. 1-3).
However, that celestial conflict is to come to a climax and 
be crushed forever on this very earth, where Satan will be con­
fined during the thousand years (Rev. 20:1-3). Indeed, the un-
APOCALYPSE REVEALS FINAL FATE OF WICKED 
415
precedented attack of Revelation 20:7-10, at the close of the 
thousand years, is the last battle in the age-old warfare that has 
racked the universe. We repeat that, according to Holy Writ, 
this very earth will be the battleground of the last fearful 
contest, and then of the final suppression of the great rebel, 
following the resurgence of his forces at the close of the millen­
nial thousand years.
So the Bible history of man, and of man’s redemption, is 
inextricably bound up with the chronicling of the infernal 
activities of these demonic enemies of God and man, knowl­
edge of whose temporary victory but final defeat is impera­
tive to the right understanding of the role of death and destruc­
tion in the conflict of the ages, and of Satan’s final frenzy, as well 
as of the bestowal of immortality upon the glorified saints, 
prior to the close of the great controversy.
3. 
New Earth and New Jerusalem Gloriously Real. 
—As the heavens and the earth “which are now,” are real, so, 
after the tremendous transition period of the day of the 
Lord—with its millennial events that will likewise be real—so 
will the new earth and the New Jerusalem be real (2 Peter 
3:5-13). And at the close of the retributive “day of the Lord” 
God then becomes the prophesied God of the whole earth 
(2 Peter 3:10, 12, 13). The tragic experiment of sin will be over 
forever. It is that wondrous time twice prophesied of by 
Isaiah, the prophet, and now confirmed and elaborated by the 
seer of Patmos. Here are Isaiah’s forecasts:
“For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the 
former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind” (Isa. 65:17).
“For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, 
shall remain before me, saith the Lord, so shall your seed and your name 
remain” (chap. 66:22).
The foundations of the New Jerusalem are planted eter­
nally upon this very earth, renewed and restored, and destined 
to continue forevermore. And the tree of life and the river 
of life, as portrayed in Revelation 21 and 22, are real. This de­
piction is not mere poetic imagery.
416
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
The tree of life, removed from the original Paradise of 
Genesis, is here restored to the whole earth. And man, ban­
ished from the presence of God, now dwells in the presence of 
the “God of the whole earth” (Isa. 54:5), who will dwell with 
men and be their God. We would stress the fact that this is not 
merely beautiful symbolic imagery—but actual, glorified con­
ditions, re-established when God’s eternal, original purpose 
concerning Heaven and earth is consummated.
Hear it: “No more curse!” (Rev. 22:3). In place of the 
Fall, the restoration. In place of expulsion—“lest he put forth 
his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for 
ever” in his sinful condition (Gen. 3:22)—the gracious in­
vitation to those who now “have right to the tree of life” (Rev. 
22:14), “Come. . . . Whosoever will, let him take the water 
of life freely” (v. 17).
Transitory existence in this present world gives place to 
those blessed “everlasting habitations” (Luke 16:9) alluded 
to by Christ. Death, and the death principle, are effaced. End­
less life forevermore is established. Just punishment upon all 
sinners is past and ended. God and righteousness reign for­
evermore. And the redeemed abide forever with Him in a 
clean universe. They have now become “unassailable” by death, 
for death itself is destroyed—the “last enemy” having been 
destroyed, abolished forevermore (1 Cor. 15:26; 2 Tim. 1:10; 
Rev. 20:14; 21:4). Satan himself, its instigator, is destroyed 
(Heb. 2:14; Rev. 20:10)—being reduced to “ashes” 
(Eze. 
28:18, 19).
Yes, it is a clean universe. The divine purpose of Eden is 
now carried out, more wonderfully than ever. God made this 
earth to be inhabited by a race of holy, happy beings. And 
now the glories foretold by the prophets and the apostles of 
old have met their complete fulfillment. The majesty and 
grandeur of the eternal scenes baffle and defy all adequate 
description.
4. 
Endless Life in Christ Undeviating Note of Apoca­
lypse.—Let us close this survey of the Apocalypse with this
APOCALYPSE REVEALS FINAL FATE OF WICKED 
417
positive note: The vast company from among the descendants 
of Adam—a mighty host which “no man could number” (Rev. 
7:9), whose names were “written in the Lamb’s book of life”— 
are now clothed forever in the spotless robe of Christ’s right­
eousness. They now walk the golden streets of Paradise re­
stored, with fadeless crowns of life (Rev. 2:10), praising the 
“Prince of life” (Acts 3:15), who redeemed them with His 
own precious blood, which symbolized His Life. Here they 
again have a “right to the tree of life,” and drink freely forever 
of the inexhaustible water of life in the Paradise of endless 
life. And “the Lamb which is in the midst of the throne shall 
feed them, and shall lead them unto living fountains of waters: 
and God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes” (Rev. 7:17).
In closing let the eye run down the following italicized 
“life” texts of the book of the Revelation, that their cumulative 
force may be sensed. These have been sustaining promises, 
now fulfilled as glorious realities. See how this is the undeviat- 
ing theme of God’s last book of the canon—the record of the 
triumph of God in the fateful day of the Lord. The redeemed 
now inherit the promises—
Rev. 2:7—“Give to eat of the tree of life.”
Rev. 2:10—“Give thee a crown of life.”
Rev. 3:5—"Not blot out his name out of the book of life.”
Rev. 11:11—“The spirit of life from God entered into them.”
Rev. 13:8—“Whose names are not written in the book of life of the 
Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.”
Rev. 17:8—“Whose names were not written in the book of life 
from the foundation of the world.”
Rev. 20:12—“Another book was opened, which is the book of life.” 
Rev. 20:15—“Whosoever was not found written in the book of life 
was cast into the lake of fire.”
Rev. 21:6—“I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the 
water of life freely.”
Rev. 21:27—“They which are written in the Lamb’s book of life.” 
Rev. 22:1—“A pure river of water of life, clear as crystal.”
Rev. 22:2—“The tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits.” 
Rev. 22:14—“That they may have right to the tree of life.”
Rev. 22:17—“Let him take the water of life freely.”
Rev. 22:19—“God shall take away his [the tamperer with the truths 
of God’s Word] part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city.”
14
418
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Thus fifteen times in this last book of Holy Writ, life is 
stressed as the supreme gift of God, bestowed by the Lord of 
life upon the righteous recipients of endless life, as an insep­
arable part of God’s matchless provisions of eternity—tree of 
life, crown of life, and water of life. That is the note of glad­
some assurance with which the Apocalypse closes. It presents 
life—endless, boundless, fadeless, measureless, life forever- 
more. Death has passed forever.
That is Inspiration’s parting portrayal of the origin, na­
ture, and destiny of man. God’s eternal purpose, delayed but 
not defeated by the episode of sin, is now carried out in full­
ness. What a marvelous plan of redemption! What a matchless 
Saviour—in Resurrection and in Life!
CHAPTER 
TWENTY-THREE
Greek Terms and Usages—“Psuche” 
(Soul); “Pneuma” (Spirit)
I. Characteristic Advantages, Disadvantages, and Pitfalls
of Greek
The New Testament was written in Greek. The very 
terms we are now to survey were all fully established in this 
universal tongue, dominant at the dawn of the Christian 
Era. But at that time, it is to be remembered, the world was in 
pagan confusion. At that time endless being was regarded by 
some as a boon devoutly to be cherished, while by others it was 
considered an evil to be shunned.
With some, influenced by Orientalism, existence was a 
curse rather than a blessing, and nirvana, or annihilation of 
the individual personality, was esteemed as the goal of life and 
the summit of hope. Consequently, at the time of Christ and 
the apostles the Immortality of the soul was the question of all 
questions in the various schools of Grecian philosophy, as well 
as a point of division and contention. And as elsewhere seen, 
its penetration had tragically split the ranks in the Jewish faith.
Further, bodily resurrection to immortality—which was 
the supreme message of the primitive church and the para­
mount article of the early Christian faith—had no place in 
pagan speculation. When the early Greek sages brought back 
the lore of Egypt into Attica, it did not include the concept of 
a resurrection. And to the Greek intellect such an idea was ut­
ter foolishness. They saw the body return to the dust, and there 
they left it forever.
419
420
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
1. Issue 
of Immortality 
of Paramount Concern.— 
As stated, immortality was a subject of swirling speculation 
among the Greeks, some maintaining and some refuting it— 
with a majority of pagan citizenry currently treating it as a jest. 
Nevertheless, the whole of life turned on the issue of the 
Immortality of the soul. The noblest specimens of human rea­
soning that ever charmed (and bewildered) the human in­
tellect were the lofty speculations of Socrates and Plato, as set 
forth in the Phaedo—an attempt to establish the Innate Im­
mortality of the soul and the assumption that whatever changes 
or pollutions it might suffer, or whatever pain it might endure, 
the soul could not cease to be.
By such there was believed to be a deathless, innate 
principle in the human soul, or spirit, that utterly refused to 
die. According to Plato it never could become a thing of the 
past, blotted out forever. And many of the Jews, particularly 
around Alexandria, had imbibed these teachings of undenia­
ble pagan origin. Philo had just given this notion tremendous 
impetus. Such was the historical setting at the dawn of the 
Christian Era. This is all covered in Part III.
And all this involved certain language problems—advan­
tages and disadvantages—in the proclamation of the gospel. 
Such was the complex linguistic and historical situation that 
confronted Christ and His apostles, to whom He committed 
His message, and the launching and upbuilding of His infant 
church.
2. Conflict Over Punishment of Wicked.—The terms 
and specifications of the punishment of the wicked, set 
forth by Christ and the apostles in the New Testament, were 
likewise in direct contradiction to the Platonic assertion that 
the soul cannot die, and therefore cannot be destroyed. The 
New Testament Christians insisted that the whole man could 
and would die, and cease to be. Platonism held that the real 
being could not perish and see corruption. The New Testa­
ment Christians asserted that the entire person of the wicked 
could and would ultimately and utterly perish and suffer cor-
“PSUCHE” (SOUL); “PNEUMA” (SPIRIT) 
421
ruption. And the Greek terminology unavoidably used by both 
sides was the same. What Plato affirmed, the primitive Chris­
tians denied. And likewise, what Platonism disavowed, the New 
Testament Christian asserted. And, be it remembered, both 
groups in the early Christian Era clearly sensed the utter 
clash in viewpoint.
All the phrases employed were in the Greek language, 
with its large vocabulary, its fine shadings, and its multiple 
tenses. Wherever the Christian preacher expounded his mes­
sage on man, his origin, nature, and destiny, there were Plato- 
nists, Epicureans, Stoics, and Alexandrian Jews with their var­
iant views, set to hear and refute—but all were bound together 
under the “scepter” of a common tongue, as someone has 
phrased it. To the Greek terminology and usage involved, 
then, we now turn.
II. Psuche in New Testament Usage
1. 
Hebrew Background of the Early Church.—First 
of all, when we discuss the meanings of Greek words in the 
New Testament, we must remember that Christ and the dis­
ciples did not ordinarily converse in Greek during the events 
recorded in the Gospels, but in Aramaic. Their whole back­
ground was Hebrew, and their theological concepts were 
based on the Old Testament. It is true they lived in a Hellen- 
ized society, but when they used the Greek equivalents of 
Hebrew words, they certainly carried over into the new lan­
guage the meanings they were accustomed to in their mother 
tongue.
Thus it is with the Greek word psuche (“soul”). In the 
Septuagint, the Hebrew nephesh is rendered psuche. When a 
New Testament Christian used the word psuche he assuredly 
meant what nephesh connoted in his usual speech. On the 
other hand, of course, Hellenized Jews who had accepted the 
immortality of the soul doctrine from the Greek philosophers, 
would read back into nephesh the philosophy they had im­
bibed.
As Rejectors of the Overtures 
of Noah 
Perished in the 
Deluge, So Will Spumers of 
God’s Overtures of Life Like­
wise Perish in the Flood of 
Fire.
2. 
How 
the 
Translators 
Rendered 
“Psuche.”— 
Psuche occurs 105 times in the New Testament, and in the 
K.J.V. is rendered “soul” 58 times, “life,” or “lives,” 40 times, 
“mind” 3 times, and “heart,” “heartily,” “us,” and “you” once 
each. Since the word “soul” carries certain overtones of mean­
ing that do not properly belong to the Greek word, or its 
Hebrew antecedent nephesh, it is proper to ask if the English 
“soul” is really the best word to use in an English rendering of 
the Greek.
It is interesting to notice the change in the number of 
times the word is used in the more recent English translations. 
In the R.S.V. “soul” or “souls” is used only 40 times in the 
New Testament. And in The New English Bible “soul” as a
© 1952 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
VERNON NYE, ARTIST
422
translation of psuche is used only 19 times. These newer trans­
lations tend to use personal pronouns or their equivalents and 
“life” to replace “soul” as a rendering of psuche.
It must be admitted that translators have been influenced 
by their theological beliefs to some extent at least. For a man 
who believes that a person possesses an immortal soul, it is 
surely easier to render psuche as “soul” in many places where 
complete objectivity would choose a different rendering. It 
would appear that later translators have been able to achieve 
this objectivity without regard to their personal beliefs more 
frequently than earlier translators.
It is possible to pass this kind of judgment because of the 
fact that the Bible does not teach that man has an immortal 
soul. The immortality of the soul can be read into the Bible 
only when one already believes that “soul” means an immortal 
something that can separate from the body at death and 
maintain a separate, conscious existence. Neither psuche nor 
nephesh ever has any qualifying words like “immortal,” “ever­
lasting,” “undying,” or “endless,” or any modifier of equivalent 
meaning attached to them. That is significant.
3. 
Meanings of “Psuche” Fall Into Four Categories. 
—An examination of Biblical usage reveals that the various 
meanings of psuche may be divided into four basic groups.
(1) A living organism. First of all, used of man as an 
individual, as “The first man Adam was made a living soul 
[psuche, here properly “living being”; see Gen. 2:7, R.S.V.]” 
(1 Cor. 15:45); and of lower animals, as, “every living soul 
[psuche, here properly “living creature”; see Gen. 1:24, R.S.V.]” 
(Rev. 16:3).
(2) A person, or personality. “And fear came upon every 
soul [psuche]” (Acts 2:43); and “Every soul [psuche], which 
will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed” (Acts 3:23). 
David’s inspired Old Testament prediction of Christ is, “Thou 
wilt not leave my soul [psuche] in hell [hades]” (Acts 2:27, 
quoting Ps. 16:10)—“my soul,” that is, “myself,” emphasizing 
the pronoun. And Peter at Pentecost says that David “spake
"PSUCHE” (SOUL); "PNEUMA” (SPIRIT) 
423
424
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul [psuche] was not 
left in hell [hades, gravedom], neither his flesh did see cor­
ruption” (Acts 2:31). That was Christ Himself, His person.
(3) The physical life of man. Life, which can be de­
stroyed, saved, laid down, et cetera.
(4) The inward man. The more remote but logical meta­
physical meaning of the “inward man” appears in “Seeing ye 
have purified your souls [psuche] in obeying the truth” (1 
Peter 1:22), and in “My soul [psuche] is exceeding sorrow­
ful unto death” (Mark 14:34).
So the living organism in the physical realm is followed 
by the person or personality, and next the physical life itself. 
And finally comes the more remote metaphysical meaning of 
the inward man. It should be remembered that this inward 
man is not in Biblical usage a separate entity that can main­
tain a conscious existence apart from the body, but merely de­
scribes those aspects of man’s nature that we might call spiritual 
as opposed to physical.
In general The Neiv English Bible demonstrates a keen 
discrimination in the words used to translate psuche. This is 
particularly well shown in the parable of the rich fool, where 
the various meanings of the word psuche come in rather close 
juxtaposition:
“And he told them this parable: ‘There was a rich man whose land 
yielded heavy crops. He debated with himself: “What am I to do? ... I 
will pull down my storehouses and build them bigger. I will collect in 
them all my corn and other goods, and then say to myself [my psuche], 
‘Man [psuche], you have plenty of goods laid by, enough for many 
years: take life easy, eat, drink, and enjoy yourself.’ ” But God said to 
him, “You fool, this very night you must surrender your life [psuche].” 
. . . ‘Therefore,’ he said to his disciples, ‘I bid you put away anxious 
thoughts about food to keep you alive [K.J.V., “your life 
(psuche), 
what ye shall eat”] and clothes to cover your body. Life [psuche] is 
more than food, the body more than clothes’” (Luke 12:16-23).1
It is interesting to note that in The New English Bible 
the word “soul” is used in most cases to refer to the inward
1The New English Bible, New Testament. © The Delegates of the Oxford University 
Press and the Syndics of the Cambridge University Press 1961.
“PSUCHE” (SOUL); “PNEUMA” (SPIRIT) 
425
man. In the few exceptions there may be a variety of opin­
ions as to the exact shade of meaning intended. On the basis 
that in many cases both nephesh and psuche represent the 
man himself, personal pronouns would have served as accurate 
translations in at least three of these texts: James 5:20, “res­
cuing his soul [him] from death”; 1 Peter 1:9, “salvation for 
your souls [you]”; 1 Peter 4:19, “commit their souls [them­
selves] to him.” In Revelation 6:9, “souls of those slaugh­
tered,” psuche represents dead people; and in Revelation 20:4, 
“souls of those who had been beheaded,” psuche represents 
people who have died and have been resurrected in the sec­
ond resurrection.
The one text that makes a clear distinction between soul 
and body in relation to death is Matthew 10:28 (N.E.B.): “Do 
not fear those who kill the body, but cannot kill the soul. Fear 
him rather who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.” 
Some might wish to see in this text proof that man has an 
immortal soul that survives death. But no matter what defini­
tion is applied to the word “soul” here, Immortality is one 
quality that is excluded, for the “soul” as well as the “body” 
may be destroyed in Hell.
III. Pneuma in New Testament Usage
In the Septuagint pneuma is the translation of the He­
brew word ruach, and what has been said about ruach in the 
Old Testament section can in general be said about pneuma 
in the New Testament.
The Greek word pneuma is related to pneo, meaning “to 
blow, breathe, or draw breath.” The lexicons on classical Greek 
give “breath” and “wind” as the first meanings of pneuma. 
“Spirit” is also a common meaning of pneuma.
In the Greek text of the New Testament, pneuma occurs 
385 times, and is translated in the K.J.V. as follows: “Spirit,” 
133; “spirit,” 153; “spiritual,” 1; “ghost,” 2; “life,” 1; and 
“wind,” 1; or a total of 291. Then with the genitive, “spiritu-
426
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
ally,” 1; with hagion (“holy”) as Holy “Spirit,” 4; Holy “Ghost,” 
89, a grand total of 385 times.
The R.S.V. drops the use of “ghost” as a translation of 
pneuma. Thus the words “spirit” and "spirits” occur 383 a times 
in the R.S.V. Concordance. The R.S.V. retains the translation 
“wind” for pneuma in John 3:8, “The wind blows where it 
wills,” but translates pneuma as “breath” in Revelation 13:15, 
where the K.J.V. has “life.”
Pneuma is used of Deity in the New Testament. In the 
R.S.V. this is indicated by capitalization, and a check reveals 
about 235 such usages. The New English Bible adds to this 
number by applying a few more occurrences of pneuma to 
Deity. Since there is obviously some measure of interpretation 
in this classification, perhaps no unanimity of opinion will give 
an absolutely accurate count. In nearly all of these instances 
“Spirit” is used of the third person of the Trinity.
Pneuma is also used of spirit beings—angels, both good 
and evil. Evil, unclean, or devilish spirits are referred to about 
40 times. As applied to man, pneuma is used with the fol­
lowing meanings:
1. Man himself, by the figure synecdoche, a part being 
put for the whole. Thus in Luke 1:47 “my spirit” equals I 
myself.
2. Life, the living principle, which is represented by 
breath. Thus in Luke 8:55: “Her spirit [breath of life] came 
again, and she arose.”
3. Character, as being itself invisible, and manifested 
only in one’s actions (2 Tim. 1:7).
4. Other invisible characteristics, as feelings or desires. 
Matthew 26:41: “The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is 
weak.”
5. The new nature in the child of God, “begotten” by 
God (John 3:3-7; Rom. 8:4-9).
6. The resurrection body (1 Cor. 15:45).
* The difference between the K.J.V. and the R.S.V. in the number of occurrences 
is partly due to the critical text used for translating.
COURTESY OF STANDARD PUBLISHING COMPANY
Rejectors of the Provisions of 
God’s Grace Will Be Cast 
Out From Heaven’s Feast of 
Eternal Happiness and Life.
IV. Exit and Re-entry of the Spirit
1. 
Departure of “Spirit” From “Body” at Death.—It 
is essential for us to bear in mind that the Greek New Testa­
ment pneuma (“spirit”) of man is the same as the rüach of the 
Old Testament Hebrew. There is no question about this. 
That they are identical not only is everywhere recognized but 
is established by the fact that the usual, if not invariable, ren­
dering of rüach, in the Septuagint, is by pneuma, just as are 
the passages of the Old Testament containing rüach, when 
translated into the New Testament Greek (cf. Luke 23:46 
and Ps. 31:5). This is incontrovertible proof.
Moreover, the very same things that are taught in the 
New Testament concerning pneuma are set forth in the Old 
Testament concerning rüach. And “spirit,” in English, is 
pneuma. To this should be added the fact that the Latin 
spiritus is uniformly used in the Vulgate to render pneuma, 
just as in the LXX pneuma is used to express the Hebrew
427
428
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
ruach. Furthermore, “ghost” is from the Anglo-Saxon word 
meaning “spirit,” “breath.” Hence the three—pneuma, spiritus, 
and ghost—convey the same thought in the three languages.
The New Testament sets forth pneuma as being the 
source of physical life for man, together with its withdrawal 
as causing death. Pneuma may be defined as the activating prin­
ciple of life, residing in the breath, breathed from God into 
man at creation, and returning to God again at death.8 God also 
made the air (Gen. 1:6-8), which man must breathe and have 
within him (Zech. 12:1), in order that life may be continued 
by constant breathing. The general principle is laid down 
by James, “The body without the spirit [pneuma] is dead” 
(chap. 2:26).
Thus our Lord’s death is uniformly described in the four 
Gospels as yielding up 
(aphiemi, “dismiss,” “send forth,” 
“send back,” “let escape”), breathing out (ekpneo), or giving 
up (paradidomi, “give up” or “hand over to another”) the 
“ghost” (pneuma) or spirit, or to “commend” (paratithemi, 
“to entrust,” as a deposit). Note the varying forms of expres­
sion by the four evangelists—but with identical meaning, as 
concerns ghost, or spirit.
2. 
Variant 
Ways 
of 
Expressing 
Act 
of 
Dying.— 
There are, in fact, seven passages in which “ghost” is thus used, 
which determine its meaning. First the Gospels, concerning 
Christ:
Matt. 27:50—apheken to pneuma (“let go,” or “send forth His 
spirit, or breath”).
Mark 15:37, 38—exepneusen (“breathed out,” “breathed His last,” 
that is, “drew His last breath,” “expired”). Cf. ekpneo ("breathe out,” 
“expire”).
Luke 23:46—exepneusen (“breathed out,” etc.).
John 19:30—paredoken to pneuma (“gave over the breath”).
Next note the other three—all wicked characters:
Acts 5:5—(re Ananias) exepsuxen (“breathe out,” "expire,” “die,” 
etc.). From ekpsucho, a medical term used by Luke.
»Job 33:4; Ps. 146:4; 150:6; Isa. 2:22; Eze. 37:5, 10.
"PSUCHE” (SOUL); "PNEUMA” (SPIRIT) 
429
Acts 5:10—(re Sapphira) exepsuxen (“breathe out,” etc.).
Acts 12:23—(re Herod) exepsuxen ("breathe out,” "go out,” "be­
come extinct,” etc.).
These variant ways of expressing the act of dying explain 
what takes place at death. They all refer to the physical act 
of dying—not dying a spiritual death, or the release of an un­
embodied spirit entity. (Cf. Gen. 2:7; Ps. 104:29, 30; 146:4; 
Eccl. 12:7.) That is the witness of the Word.
3. “Spirit” Departs at Death; Restored at Resurrec­
tion.—As the presence of the “spirit” (pneuma) is the source 
of physical life to man, so its withdrawal, or dismissal, brings 
death—life’s exact counterpart. This is exemplified in various 
instances, as just noted when our Lord’s death is described as 
yielding “up the ghost [pneuma, “spirit”]” 
(Matt. 27:50; 
John 19:30). This is in direct antithesis to the restoration of 
life, or recovery from death, which the New Testament de­
scribes as the re-entry of the pneuma (“spirit”) into the per­
son who was dead.
Thus with Jesus’ raising of Jairus’ daughter to life—The 
record is that “her spirit [pneuma] came again” (Luke 8:55). 
And “she arose straightway,” and was given food. Similarly, 
in the Apocalypse the resurrection to life of the two symbolic 
“witnesses” who were “slain,” is there portrayed as “the spirit 
[pneuma] of life from God entered into them” (Rev. 11:11). 
These passages establish the principle.
And as with Christ—“Father, into thy hands I commend 
my spirit [pneuma]: and having said thus, he gave up the 
ghost [pneuma, “spirit”]” 
(Luke 23:46). So with Stephen, 
the first Christian martyr—when stoned and dying, he solemnly 
and trustfully called upon the ascended Jesus and said, “Lord 
Jesus, receive my spirit [pneuma]" (Acts 7:59). He did not 
pray, “Lord, receive me,” but “my pneuma.” “And when he 
had said this, he fell asleep” (v. 60), with the sure and certain 
hope of receiving it back at the resurrection.
Thus in death the “spirit” (pneuma), which has been 
the source of life to man, returns to God who gave it, having
4S0
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
been commended by the believer into the hands of his God. 
But this expression, be it particularly noted, is never used of 
the “soul.” However, it is frequently said of the “spirit,” com­
mitted to God for safekeeping during the time of the death- 
sleep.
It is only believers who so commit the “spirit.” Indeed, 
they are the only ones warranted in doing so. And thus when 
so given over to the care of God, the “spirit” is always com­
mitted with a view to its restoration. The “spirit” came from 
God, and returns to God (Eccl. 12:7). There is, however, this 
difference: In the resurrection of the wicked, the “spirit” is re­
stored only for the purpose of the execution of judgment, and 
at the second death it returns permanently to God who gave it.
On the contrary, with the righteous the “spirit” is re­
stored through Christ at the first resurrection, with life 
eternal following. Thus the righteous part with the pneuma 
only for a time, to receive it back forever. That is the joy of the 
Christian believer—the sure and certain hope of receiving the 
“spirit” back on the resurrection day, as the concomitant of 
life everlasting, pledged and promised in Christ. Such is the 
significance of the pneuma.
This caution should perhaps be added: Where Scrip­
ture is silent, we should be silent too. When the Scripture says, 
“The spirit shall return unto God,” just as the dust shall return 
to dust (Eccl. 12:7), that is as far as we are authorized to go. 
Speculative theories on and beyond this point are unwise and 
unwarranted. And we dare not contradict Inspiration’s declara­
tion by assuming to put the spirit in “Paradise” or “Purgatory,” 
as some are prone to do.
CHAPTER 
TWENTY-FOUR
Terms and Usages: “Aion” 
and “Aionios”
I. Principles Governing the Meaning of Aion and Aionios
1. 
Definitions 
and Usages.—According to Young, the 
noun aion (meaning “aeon” or “age”) occurs 128 times in the 
New Testament, in 102 passages—34 times in simple form, and 
64 times in prepositional phrases and forms. The adjective 
aionios (belonging to an age) is used 67 times—42 times ren­
dered “eternal” and 25 times as “everlasting.” Even if aion 
meant “eternity”—which it does not—aionios could only mean 
“belonging to eternity,” not necessarily lasting through it. And 
in not one of the passages does the word itself mean endless. 
There are classical Greek words that do stand for endless, but 
such words are not used in the New Testament. That too is 
significant.
Aion may be defined as a period of existence, or contin­
uous being, whether a lifetime or an age. It is sometimes lim­
ited and sometimes denotes boundless periods and endless 
eternity. In 23 instances aion is doubled. The basic thought is 
always continuity, whether for a definite period, long or short, 
or for all time. It is often a “hidden” period—hidden as to pre­
cise length, sometimes terminable, sometimes interminable. 
So aion, like our term “age,” denotes a period of undefined 
length.
In order to determine its length in any given instance, 
even relatively, the context and other passages where used 
must be considered, and especially the substantive to which
431
CLYDE PROVONSHA, ARTIST 
© I960 BY THE VOICE OF PROPHECY
Creator, Redeemer, Mediator, and Coming King, Christ Is the Sole Source and 
Bestower of Life Eternal for Mortal Man.
it is attached. Therefore aionios does not, and cannot, always 
have the same meaning, for it is modified or even altered by 
the substantive that it modifies.
432
TERMS AND USAGES: “AION” AND “AIONIOS” 
433
2. 
Specific “Aionios” Usages Outlined.—According to 
the Englishman’s Greek Concordance, in the 24 passages in 
the New Testament where aionios is rendered “everlasting” 
14 are used with zoe-life—meaning life without an end. Of the 
remaining 10, two are used with “fire” 
(continuing un­
quenchable until that on which the fire feeds is consumed); 
once with “punishment” (permanent in effect); once with 
“habitations” (doubtless the new earth) without end; once 
with “destruction” 
(like punishment); once with “consola­
tion” (unending for the saved); once with “power” (ascribed 
to God, and hence without limit); once with “covenant” (un­
ending in results); once with “kingdom of our Lord” (hence 
unceasing); and once with “gospel,” or “power of God” (and 
thus limitless in duration—Rom. 1:16). So aionios always takes 
its meaning from the word to which it is attached.
In the Authorized Version, in prepositional phrase form 
(with aidn as the base), it appears some 68 times, and has been 
variously rendered: “since the world began” (Luke 1:70; Acts 
3:21); “from the beginning of the world” (Eph. 3:9); “for 
ever” 
(20 
times); 
“ever” 
(Heb. 
7:24); 
“for 
evermore” 
(Heb. 7:28); “for ever and ever” (20 times), et cetera.
II. Aidn and Aionios in the Contrasts of Scripture
1. 
Golden 
Rule: 
Perpetuity 
Within 
Limits.—Aidn 
and aionios, when used in connection with life (zde) for the 
righteous, mean constant, abiding, eternal, measureless. It in­
volves unbounded existence and duration in the world to 
come. But when used of the continuance (or more accurately 
of the consuming) of the wicked, who are to be destroyed, it is 
transitory, and comes to an end. Everything consequently and 
consistently depends upon the nature and destiny of the sub­
stantive that it modifies. That is the golden rule of interpreta­
tion of these terms. It is perpetuity within limits—the dura­
tion being determined by the person, or thing, or condition 
to which it is attached.
434
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Thus with the fate of the wicked. It is until their de­
struction is accomplished—not a process going on forever. 
The “fire” that shall not be “quenched” does not mean that it 
shall not ultimately cease. The fire that destroyed Sodom and 
Gomorrah was “unquenchable” (no one could put it out), but 
it finally ceased burning. But this was not until its objective 
was accomplished. (This is discussed under “destruction,” and 
“punishment.”)
2. Two Determinative 
Principles 
re 
“Aionios.”—All 
are aware that aidn and aionios have been the subject of avid 
dispute among proponents and opponents of the Innate-Im- 
mortality postulate. The issue has been: Do these terms mean 
endless or age enduring, or both, upon occasion? Two things 
need to be noted at the outset:
(1) 
Aionios is constantly predicated of the new super­
natural life, received through regeneration by the Spirit of 
God. But, in contrast with this, aionios is never, in any of its 
forms, used in Scripture of the old, or natural, life of man. 
Furthermore, 
(2) it is never, anywhere throughout the 
entire Word of God, predicated of a continuing death as the 
penalty of sin. When used of death, it means a period of lim­
ited duration. These principles are determinative.
The terms “eternal death” and “everlasting death” are con­
sequently not found in the Bible. Life may be brief, or long 
—or endless if it pleases God to perpetuate it—but death is a 
finality in itself, and needs no qualifying epithet. And that is 
the doom denounced upon sinners—“Sin, when it is finished, 
bringeth forth death” (James 1:15; cf. Rom. 6:23). This is the 
“second death,” which follows the judgment of the wicked. 
From this there is no resurrection. But of the new life, the 
spiritual life, the divine life, upon which the people of God 
enter, and of which the epithet aionios is predicated, and no 
other, is zde aionios. It is without any limitation.
3. Gehazi’s “For Ever”-Leprosy Lasted Until Poster­
ity Extinct.—The master key that unlocks the meaning of any
passage employing the terms aion or aionios is that they are to 
be taken to mean as long as the thing or person under considera­
tion (in the light of the surrounding circumstances) can exist. 
Its duration is always determined by the noun to which it is 
attached. That simple principle will solve all problems and 
meet all cases.
Take an Old Testament example: The curse of leprosy 
upon Gehazi (2 Kings 5:27)—that the leprosy of Naaman 
“shall cleave unto thee [Gehazi], and unto thy seed for ever” 
—simply means that it should continue as long as Gehazi and 
his posterity should continue to exist. In other words, until the 
line became extinct. Then it would cease. And, under the 
terms of this prophecy, it must have taken place fairly soon. 
It is restricted to the extent of the duration of the thing or 
person to which it is applied. The “for ever” of Gehazi was 
consequently only until his posterity became extinct.
4. 
Length Governed by Noun to Which Attached.— 
When aion and aionios are applied to Divine Beings, or to the 
eternal home of the saints, or to the redeemed, immortalized 
saints, they then obviously denote eternal duration, or eternity 
of being. But as noted, when aion and aionios are applied to 
things that will have an end, they are correspondingly limited 
in meaning. Thus, when they are applied to the existence of 
the wicked—who will finally cease to be as the result of the 
“second death”—they must be limited, according to their sig­
nification.
We must consequently conclude that the modifiers aion 
and aionios, with reference to the two classes—“saints” and 
“sinners”—mean, respectively, bliss throughout all eternity, 
on the one hand, for the eternally righteous, and on the other 
hand coming to an end forever, after a due and just period of 
suffering for the unrepentant and doomed sinner. The wicked 
are ultimately and utterly extinguished because they refused 
the eternal life so freely offered to them, which is nevertheless 
to continue throughout the ages without end for the righteous, 
who accepted its provisions.
TERMS AND USAGES: “AION” AND “AIONIOS” 
435
436
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
5. Body 
Bl
ow 
t
o 
Im
m
o
r
t
a
l-Soul 
T
heo
r
y.—We have 
already established the fact that aiónios (“eternal” or “ever­
lasting”) is constantly coupled with zóé in Scripture—giving 
the meaning of endlessness to the life. And we have stressed 
the point that aiónios is never, in Scripture, joined with 
psuché. It therefore follows that such terms as “immortal 
soul,” “never-dying soul,” and the like, though frequently used 
by many ecclesiastics and philosophers, are not found anywhere 
between the covers of Holy Writ.
That inexorable fact is a body blow to the Immortal- 
Soul theory. Those who possess nothing higher than the nat­
ural psuché-Ute from Adam are destined to perish, and ulti­
mately cease to be. And inspired Bible usage counterbalances 
and nullifies any and all human opinions to the contrary.
6. R
est
r
icted 
U
se 
in 
t
h
e 
Apo
ca
l
ypse.—And observe 
this added point: In the Apocalypse, where the plural form 
eis tous aiónas ton aiónón (“to ages of the ages”) appears fre­
quently,1 the reference is usually to personified organizations, 
systems, or associations (such as “beast,” “Babylon,” “false 
prophet”) which must be punished, but which will not exist 
in the world to come.
III. Texts Exemplify Diversified Meanings of 
A ion and Aiónios
Before testing out these principles with a diversified 
group of New Testament passages, let us first establish the 
connection between Old Testament and New Testament usage.
The Septuagint again constitutes the vital link between 
the Hebrew Old Testament ‘olam and the Greek New Testa­
ment aión and aiónios, and provides a second valuable key to 
right understanding. In the Septuagint use of aiónios, God and 
His attributes, kingdom, and covenant are set forth as unlim­
ited and eternal. But earthly objects, belonging to a passing dis-
1 Rev. 1:6; 4:9, 10; 5:13, 14; 7:12; 10:6: 11:15; 14:11; 15:7; 19:3; 20:10; 22:5. 
The difference between the K.J.V. and the R.S.V. in the number of occurrences is partly 
due to the critical text used for translating.
TERMS AND USAGES: “AION” AND “AIONIOS” 
437
pensation, and divine dealings not lasting beyond the contin­
uance of the earth in its present form are always set forth as 
limited, or restricted, in duration.
Thus it is with the priests’ office (Ex. 29:9), “perpetual” 
statutes (Lev. 3:17), the burning of Ai (Joshua 8:28), “per­
petual hissing” (Jer. 18:15, 16), “perpetual desolations” (Jer. 
25:12; Eze. 35:9; Zeph. 2:9), “perpetual wastes” (Jer. 49:13), 
et cetera. This mixed usage constitutes a reliable guide to New 
Testament practice.
Eighteen Dissimilar Examples Typify Differences
Here are eighteen annotated New Testament examples 
of this multiple usage with the Greek original, and its literal 
meaning:
Matt. 13:39—“The harvest is the end of the world [sunteleia tou 
aiönos, “consummation of the age,” or aiön]."
Matt. 21:19—“Let no fruit grow on thee [barren fig tree] hence­
forward for ever [eis tön aiöna, for the remainder of its life—not to all 
eternity].”
Luke 1:70—“Which have been since the world began [tön ap’ 
aiönos, "since time began,” “from all time,” "from the age,” “from of 
old”].”
Luke 20:35—“Accounted worthy to obtain that world [tou aiönos, 
“that other age,” “the age to come”].”
John 9:32—"Since the world began [ek tou aiönos, “out of the 
age”] was it not. . . .”
John 13:8—“Thou shalt never wash my feet [eis tön aiöna, “never 
while the world lasts,” “as long as I live,” “not to all eternity”].”
Acts 15:18—“All his works from the beginning of the world [ap’ 
aiönos, “from the age,” “from of old,” “eternity”].”
Rom. 
16:25—“Which was 
kept 
secret 
since 
the 
world 
began 
[chronois aiöniois, “through ages long past,” or “along with times 
eternal”].”
1 Cor. 2:7—“Which God ordained before the world [pro tön 
aiönön, “age or age-time,” “of indefinite duration”].”
1 Cor. 10:11—“Upon whom the ends of the world [tön aiönön, “of the 
ages”] are come.”
2 Cor. 4:4—“The god of this world [tou aiönos toutou, “of this 
present age”] hath blinded.”
Gal. 1:4—“Deliver us from this present evil world [ek tou . . . 
aiönos, “out of the present age or period”].”
Eph. 2:7—"That in the ages to come [en tois aiosin, "in the periods 
of the future’’] he might shew.”
2 Tim. 1:9—"Given us in Christ Jesus before the world began [pro 
chronon aidnion, "before the ages of time,” or “before times eternal”].”
Titus 1:2—“Eternal life, which God . . . promised before the world 
began [pro chronon aidnion, "before times eternal,” "before the commence­
ment of the ages,” “long ages ago”].”
Heb. 1:2—"By whom [His Son] also he made the worlds [tons 
aidnas, “ages”].”
Heb. 11:3-—"The worlds [torn aidnas, “ages”] were framed by the 
word of God.”
Jude 25—“Be . . . dominion and power, both now and ever [eis 
pantas tous aidnas, “to all the ages,” “before every age and now' and unto 
all the ages”].”
Let us now analyze the evidence, seeking out and applying 
the sound guiding principles disclosed by these and other pas­
sages wherein usage alone is determinative.
IV. Sound Interpretative Principles Emerge for Guidance
The fact that the adjective aionios is applied to some 
things that are “endless” does not for a moment prove that it 
always means endless, for such a rendering would, in many pas­
sages, be manifestly impossible and absurd. Further, the adjec­
tive “eternal” (aionios) and the adverbial phrases that express 
eternity (such as “forever,” and “forever and ever”), indi­
cate an indeterminate duration, whereof the maximum de­
pends upon the nature of the person or thing that it modi­
fies.
It is clearly infinite when predicated of God and eternal 
things, which are above and beyond time, or of beings who live 
by faith in communion and connection with Him. On the 
contrary, it is only relative for other beings, such as mortal 
man. Thus the sufferings of perishable creatures logically can­
not be prolonged longer than is compatible with their perish­
able nature.
The length must be inferred and determined from the 
context and the nature of the thing or persons under considera-
438 
CONDITIONALIST FAITH 
.
TERMS AND USAGES: “AION” AND "AIONIOS” 
439
tion. For example, in Romans 16:25, 26 the mystery of the gos­
pel, hidden in times past—“chronois aidniois” (along with 
eternal times, but which have come to an end)—is placed in 
contrast with aioniou Theou (“eternal God,” v. 26, R.S.V., 
endless and independent of all time). To hold that aionios in 
the one instance must mean the same as the other is manifestly 
an absurdity.
The Old Testament equivalents of aidn and aionios 
were applied to the passing Aaronic priesthood, the inherit­
ance given to Caleb, the period of the slave’s life, the burn­
ing of the fire upon the altar, the leprosy of Gehazi, et cetera.2 
One notable case in point was “the land thereof shall become 
burning pitch. It shall not be quenched night nor day; the 
smoke thereof shall go up for ever: from generation to genera­
tion it shall lie waste; none shall pass through it for ever and 
ever” (Isa. 34:9, 10). And in Deuteronomy 23:3, 6 “for ever” 
is limited to the “tenth generation.” Such examples afford 
sound principles for our guidance.
1. 
Vast Scope 
of Meaning of “Aion” Exhibited.—In 
the Authorized Version aidn is frequently translated “world.” 
Later, the revisers usually rendered aion by “age,” at least in 
the margin. The Greek word for “world,” in its material 
framework, is, of course, kosmos, while aion is earth’s history 
in the larger setting of eternity. It is finite man in a finite world, 
preceded and followed by the timeless eternities of past and 
future. God, the King of the “ages,” laid His redemptive plans 
before the ages began to unroll, and sent forth His Son at the 
appointed time to consummate His matchless plan for the re­
demption of humanity.
In its backward look in depth, aion was a period lost in the 
mists of past eternity—the farthest dawn of time (Luke 1:70; 
John 9:32; Acts 15:18; Jude 25). But it may refer not only
2 Dean F. W. Farrar states that in the Septuagint, which gives a reliable Greek 
parallel, the Hebrew ‘61am is rendered by aion 439 times. And in Exodus, twelve of its four­
teen usages are “of things which have passed away; in Leviticus, twenty-four times, always 
of things which have come to an end; and in Numbers ten times; in Deuteronomy about ten 
times.”—Mercy and Judgment (2d ed.), p. 378.
440
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
backward to time without beginning, but forward as well, as 
without end in the future. Thus we see that one group of 
aion texts tells of that which is divine and endless—God Him­
self (Rom. 16:26); His attributes (1 Tim. 6:16); His kingdom 
(2 Peter 1:11); His covenant (Heb. 13:20), et cetera.
Another group tells of the “ages” planned by God (Rom. 
16:25; 2 Tim. 1:9; Titus 1:2). A third group tells of His var­
ious acts and activities—“punishment” (Matt. 25:46); “judg­
ment” (Mark 3:29; Heb. 6:2); “destruction” (2 Thess. 1:9); 
“salvation” (Heb. 5:9); “redemption” (chap. 9:12), et cetera. 
And there are lesser categories, but there is no conflict. Let us 
note a few important points.
2. 
God Has Infinity; Man Does Not.—There is a com­
mon misconception that any existence beyond this life is 
eternal, and that anything that is indefinitely extended is in­
finite and endless. But infinity is an attribute of God alone. 
He is the “King eternal, immortal, invisible,” et cetera (1 Tim. 
1:17), “who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light 
which no man can approach unto” (chap. 6:16). Therefore, 
intrinsic eternity 
of being cannot be the attribute 
of any
creature, or he would be equal to his Creator.
Man does not, and cannot, possess God’s infinite attri­
butes. Man can and does have wisdom, intelligence, power, 
and other attributes of free moral agents. But because of the 
very fact of his creation he must be dependent upon God for all 
that he is and has (Acts 17:28).
God gives to 
man “life.” But this life is subordinate to
God’s own absolute, original, underived, self-existent life. God 
may prolong man’s life, even without end. But such life is ever 
conditioned on God’s will, power, and pleasure. It is con­
tingent, and cannot be an independent life. The life everlast­
ing, or immortality—which He has promised to all who are 
united to Him—is everlasting simply because such beings are 
in vital connection with Him. Such life is not absolute, but 
conditional. It is because He thus keeps them that the re­
deemed will be immortal.
TERMS AND USAGES: “AION” AND “AIONIOS” 
441
Again, because the wicked will live again after the first 
death, some jump to the conclusion that such life after death 
will be endlessly perpetuated. But the Scriptures solemnly 
assure us that the wicked dead are to be raised, judged, and 
destroyed with an everlasting destruction, which is the “sec­
ond death” (Rev. 20:6, 14, 15; 21:8).
The present earth and sinners are not to be forever in 
process of destruction by the purifying fires of the last day. The 
new earth is to rise from its ashes (Rev. 21; 22; 2 Peter 3:10- 
13). And the new earth, purified from all the pollutions of sin 
and free from all the deformities of the curse, is to be the ever­
lasting abode of the righteous forever. Those are the con­
trasts left on record for our guidance.
3. 
“Aiónios”—Eternal in Results, Not 
in Process.— 
Many illustrious scholars recognize that the meaning must be 
sought not in aiónios but in the noun to which it is attached.3 
Let us apply the principle: If the noun stands for that which 
is essentially eternal, then the accompanying adjective (aión­
ios) is properly translated eternal. But if it is applied to that 
which is temporal and terminable, then aiónios simply means 
lasting to the natural limits of the noun. Thus the “eternal 
God” (Rom. 16:26, R.S.V.), “eternal Spirit” 
(Heb. 9:14), 
and “eternal kingdom of our Lord” (2 Peter 1:11, R.S.V.) are 
all clear and incontrovertible. Here the adjective has the mean­
ing of endless, for the existence of Deity and His divine attri­
butes and kingdom are without end.
But when aiónios modifies nouns of action, such as an 
“eternal judgment” 
(Heb. 6:2), “everlasting punishment” 
(Matt. 25:46), and the everlasting fires of Gehenna, it must be 
understood as lasting “forever” in the sense of everlasting 
results rather than an everlasting process. It is the verdict of 
the judgment that is immutable and stands forever—eternity 
of result, not of process. The same is true of “eternal redemp-
3 That aidn can mean either a finite or an infinite period—a human lifetime or an 
eternity of endless duration, according to the nature of the case or usage—is sustained by 
many standard authorities, such as Greenfield, Schrevelius, Liddell and Scott, Parkhurst, 
Robinson, Schleusner, Wahl, Cruden, Strong 
Young, Bullinger, et cetera.
442
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
tion” (Heb. 9:12). This is not an endless process, but the 
eternal result of Christ’s once-for-all redemptive activity for 
man’s salvation.
Similarly with “eternal destruction” A thing is not de­
stroyed until the act of destroying comes to an end. The re­
sults of the destructive process are therefore eternal. When 
aidnios modifies “punishment,” the process is not one of eter­
nally punishing but the eternal result of a terminative process. 
When a criminal is hanged, electrocuted, or gassed, the process 
is not one of eternal hanging, electrocuting, or gassing. The 
criminal is deprived of life forever.
In the case of “eternal fire” (Jude 7), the duration is de­
termined by the nature of the fire, which burns until it con­
sumes that upon which it is feeding, and then ceases—as with 
Sodom and Gomorrah, where the complete destruction of the 
cities is set forth as an example of the puros aidniou which 
will destroy the wicked.
4. 
Revelation 20:10—Example 
of Limited Torment. 
—That the terms aion and aidnios often denote a limited pe­
riod, and not always one of eternal duration, is apparent even 
from Revelation 20:10.
“And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire 
and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be 
tormented day and night for ever [eis tous aidnas ton aionon, “to the 
ages of the ages”].”
The limitation in the text is explicit. The verse does not 
refer to all the wicked, but speaks only of the devil and the 
symbolic “beast” and the “false prophet.” The “lake of fire,” 
as the place and means of torment, is mentioned in verse 14. 
But there it is the declared symbol of complete and final utter 
destruction. “Death and hades” are cast into the lake of fire, 
after which it is recorded, “There shall be no more death” 
(Rev. 21:4). It comes to an end. Whatever was cast into the 
lake of fire, after it has wrought its destruction, no longer 
exists. In Revelation 20:15 is the declaration that “whosoever 
was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake
TERMS AND USAGES: “AION” AND “AlONIOS” 
443
of fire.” This marks the final disposition, through destruction, 
of all who are not saved in the kingdom of God.*
Again, Revelation 14:11 represents the duration, or pe­
riod, of the unrest of a special group. It, too, represents a lim­
ited period that will end. As seen elsewhere, this allusion to the 
smoke ascending is clearly a figure of speech, and to make that 
the basis of a doctrine which contradicts all the plain teaching 
of the Word on this question, as well as making God infinitely 
cruel, cannot be the proper exegesis.*
5. 
Beware of Unscriptural Foundations and Unsound 
Reasoning.—The rendering of the same word 
(aionios) 
once by “everlasting” and the other by “eternal”—as they 
appear twice in the same verse—is a purely arbitrary translator 
variation. Note it: “And these shall go away into everlasting 
punishment [kolasin aidnion, “everlasting in result”]: but 
the righteous into life eternal [zden aidnion]” (Matt. 25:46).
But, far more important, we must beware of eisegeti- 
cally reading into the word kolasis (“punishment”) a sense 
that it does not possess. “Punishment,” here, is the opposite 
of life only if that punishment be “death”—which it is. The 
eternal result is the same in both cases. There is no validity, 
for example, to Augustine’s argument that if we do not make 
aionios kolasis mean endless punishing/ we have no assurance 
that the aionios zoe that follows means endless living—and that 
we thereby lose our promise of everlasting happiness.
Such an Immortal-Soulist contention is utterly invalid.
* In this Dr. R. F. Weymouth concurs:
“The use in the N.T. of such words as ‘death,’ 
‘destruction,’ ‘fire,’ 
‘perish,’ _ to 
describe Future Retribution, point to the likelihood of fearful anguish, followed by extinction 
of being, as the doom which awaits those who by persistent rejection of the Saviour prove them­
selves utterly, and therefore irremediably, bad. —The New Testament in Modern Speech 
(3d ed.), on Heb. 10:27 n. 1.
“According to Archbishop R. C. Trench (Synonyms of the New Testament, pp. 206, 
209) aion often means the ‘‘duration of the human life.” Prof. Herman Cremer (Biblico 
Theological Lexicon, p. 74) likewise says. “Duration of human life, as limited to a certain 
space of time . . . hence the duration of life, course of life, terms of life, life term, life in 
its temporal form.”
• As to Augustine, Dean F. W. Farrar soundly remarked that—
“aiOn, aionios, and their Hebrew equivalents in all combinations, are repeatedly used of things 
which have come and shall come to an end. Even Augustine admits (what, indeed, no one 
can deny) that in Scripture aidn, aionios must in many instances mean ‘having an end’; and 
St. Gregory of Nyssa, who at least knew Greek, uses aionios as the epithet of ‘an interval.’ ” 
—Eternal Hope (1879), excursus HI, “On the Word Aionios," p. 197. (Italics his.)
444
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Our sure and certain hope of everlasting happiness rests on 
no such flimsy foundation as the disputed meaning of a Greek 
adjective, which is often used of things that are transitory. 
We have the clear, positive, and explicit foundations of God’s 
nonfigurative affirmations recorded for our assurance.7 Sound 
doctrine is based on solid Scripture, and sound reasoning 
therefrom.
7 Here arc a few: I*a. 25:6-8; Hosea 13:14; Luke 20:36; 1 Cor. 15; 2 Tim. 1:10;
1 Peter 1:4; 5:4; Rev. 21:4; et cetera.
CHAPTER 
TWENTY-FIVE
Terms and Usages: “Immortal,” “Incor- 
ruption,” “Immortality,” “Eternal Life”
I. “Immortality”—Springs From God, Bestowed on Man
We next note the Greek terms and usages involved in 
the Immortality aspect. First, note the three foundational 
words used to express Immortal, Incorruption, and Immortal­
ity—together with eternal life. These are:
(1) 
Athanasia (“immortality”), which occurs three times 
in the New Testament, and is each time translated “immor­
tality.” In the Latin Vulgate it is rendered immortalitas, 
whence comes our “immortality.” (2) Aphtharsia (“incorrup­
tion” “incorruptibility ” “unending existence,” “immortal­
ity”) occurs eight times in the New Testament. It is ren­
dered “incorruption” four times; “immortality” twice, and 
“sincerity” twice. In the Vulgate it is usually rendered incor- 
ruptio, whence comes our “incorruption.” But it is once given 
as immortalitas (1 Cor. 15:45). Then (3) aphthartos ("incor­
ruptible“undecaying,” “immortal”), the corresponding Greek 
adjective, occurs seven times in the New Testament—six times 
translated “incorruptible” and once as “immortal” (1 Tim. 
1:17).
1. 
“Athanasia” 
(“Immortality”)—Possessed 
by 
God; 
Put On by Man.—Thrice translated “immortality,” athanasia 
is defined by Greenfield and Robinson simply as “immortality.” 
Here are the passages:
(1) 
1 Cor. 15:53—“This mortal must put on [endusasthai, as a 
garment] immortality [athanasian].”
446
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
(2) 1 Cor. 15:54—“When . . . this mortal shall have put on immor­
tality [athanasian].”
(3) 1 Tim. 6:15, 16—“The King of kings, and Lord of lords; who
only hath immortality [athanasian].”
It is to be particularly noted that in these three places
where athanasia occurs, the two points most vital to the doc­
trine of Immortality are included. These are: (1) That it is 
possessed only by God—“who only hath immortality,” and
(2) that “mortal” man must “put on” Immortality in order to 
receive it. And this, as seen elsewhere, is not until the resur- 
rection-translation day, at the second coming of Christ.
2. “Immortality” Is Immunity to Death or Destruc­
tion.—“Immortality,” then, according to definition and scrip­
tural usage, is deathlessness—immunity to death or destruc­
tion. It is endless duration of life, or undyingness. Athanasia is 
made up of “a” without, and “thanatos,” death. (There is also 
the comparable aphtharsia, or imperishability, which is like­
wise immunity to death or destruction.)
There are thus two angles to the concept of Immortality 
in the New Testament, namely: (1) That of freedom from 
death, or deathlessness—never dying from any cause; and (2) 
freedom from the elements of corruption that bring forth 
death. Both, in the absolute, ultimate sense, apply exclusively 
to God, and to man only contingently and conditionally 
through voluntary and conscious union with Christ. This will 
be received personally and actually at the resurrection, or 
translation, of the righteous, at the second coming of Christ.
3. 
Not 
Natural 
Endowment 
but 
Special 
Bestow- 
ment.—Natural Immortality is clearly not the common destiny 
of all men irrespective of the course pursued. Endless life is 
the reward only of seekers for righteousness and life. Immor­
tality is consequently not a natural endowment but a special 
hestowment, made possible through the provisions of God’s 
grace. It is not the universal possession of all mankind, but a 
gift of God to individual regenerate men in Christ. It is there­
fore conditional.
IMMORTAL/’ "INCORRUPTION,” “IMMORTALITY” 
447
Paul’s inspired declaration, that “our Saviour Jesus Christ 
. . . hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immor­
tality to light through the gospel” (2 Tim. 1:10), therefore 
becomes radiant with meaning. Our human nature has no en­
during life apart from God. Separated from Him “who only 
hath immortality,” our nature not only sinks into degenera­
tion but is destined to “eternal destruction.” To God is the 
power and the glory for the Immortality that comes to us.
II. Athanasia, Aphthartos, Aphtharsia—Restrict Innate 
Immortality to God
1. 
“Aphthartos” 
(“Incorruptible”) 
Likewise 
Con­
fined Exclusively to God.—The Greek adjective aphthar­
tos (“incorruptible”), from which the single instance of the 
term “immortal” is translated (1 Tim. 1:17), occurs seven 
times in the New Testament, the six other cases being ren­
dered “incorruptible”—and defined by Greenfield as “incor­
ruptible, immortal, imperishable, undying, enduring.” The 
seven passages follow, with the key statement of the text:
(1) Rom. 1:23—“Changed the glory of the uncorruptible [aphthar- 
tou\ God into an image made like to corruptible man.”
(2) 1 Cor. 9:25—“They do it to obtain a corruptible crown; but 
we an incorruptible [aphtharton(3) 1 
Cor. 
15:52—“The 
dead 
shall 
be 
raised 
incorruptible 
[aphthartoi], and we shall be changed.”
(4) 1 Tim. 1:17—“The King eternal, immortal [aphtharto], in­
visible, the only wise God.”
(5) 1 Peter 1:4—“To an inheritance incorruptible [aphtharton], 
and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you.”
(6) 1 Peter 1:23—“Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but 
of incorruptible [aphthartou]."
(7) 1 Peter 3:4—“That which is not corruptible [aphtharto], even 
the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit.”
The first four usages are by Paul, the last three by Peter. 
In the first passage aphthartos is used to describe God. In the 
second Paul utilizes it to depict the heavenly crown of the 
overcomer. In the third it is used to set forth the glories of
448
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
the redeemed at the resurrection. In the fourth it is trans­
lated “immortal” and presents this unique and absolute attri­
bute of God, the Eternal One. In the fifth Peter makes use of 
it to describe the inheritance reserved in Heaven for the over­
comer. In the sixth it is used to set forth the creative principle 
by which regeneration is wrought in us. And in the seventh 
Peter again employs it to describe the heavenly adorning we 
are laboring to secure. These complete the instances.
Be it noted that in no case is aphthartos applied to man as 
a whole or to any part of man as a natural possession. It affirms 
that Christ brought Immortality, or incorruption, to light by 
coming to abolish death (2 Tim. 1:10), There could have been 
no life or Immortality without this, for the race was hopelessly 
doomed to death through sin. Christ abolished death by dying 
for man, and rising again a victor over death, thus preserving 
Immortality for us.
But this avails only for those who accept the proffered 
provision. Those who reject it will meet the same fate as 
would have been the lot of all, had not Christ undertaken the 
work of redemption with its imperishable boon. And it is to 
be particularly observed that aphthartos is never joined with 
the words for "soul” or “spirit” of man, in any of their 1,644 
occurrences. It is predicated of only one being—the Eternal 
God. This is both highly significant and conclusive.
2. 
“A
ph
t
h
a
r
sia” 
(“In
co
r
r
u
pt
io
n”)—
N
ot 
Ina
l
ien
a
bl
e 
Possession 
o
f M
a
n.—And finally there is aphtharsia, defined 
as “incorruptibility,” “incorruptness,” and by implication, 
“immortality.” Aphtharsia occurring eight times (and twice 
rendered “immortality”)1 presents Immortality or incorrup­
tion from the material side (1 Cor. 15:42, 50, 53, 54), also from 
the spiritual (Eph. 6:24), and also from both aspects (Rom. 
2:7 and 2 Tim. 1:10). The passages follow:
(1) 
Rom. 
2:7—“Seek 
for 
glory 
and 
honour 
and 
immortality 
[iaphtharsian], eternal life [zoen aidnion].”
1 Thus in Rom. 2:7 and 2 Tim. 1:10 aphtharsia is translated “immortality”—otherwise 
“incorruption” or “sincerity.”
IMMORTAL,” “INCORRUPTION,” “IMMORTALITY" 
449
(2) I Cor. 15:42—“Sown in corruption; it is raised in incorrup­
tion [aphtharsia].”
(3) 
1 Cor. 
15:50—“Neither doth corruption inherit incorruption
[<aphtharsian].”
(4) 
1 Cor. 
15:53—“This corruptible must put on 
incorruption
[aphtharsian].”
(5) 1 Cor. 15:54—“When this corruptible shall have put on incor­
ruption [aphtharsian].”
(6) Eph. 6:24—“Love our Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity [lit., “un­
corruptness,” aphtharsia]."
(7) 
2 
Tim. 
1:10—“Who [“our Saviour Jesus Christ”] hath abol­
ished death, and hath brought life [zoen] and immortality [aphtharsian]
to light.”
(8) Titus 2:7—“Uncorruptness, gravity, sincerity [aphtharsian, “in­
corruptibility”].” a
Note that in the second one Paul refers to the body after 
the resurrection. And in the third, fourth, and fifth Paul de­
clares that “incorruption” cannot be inherited in our present 
mortal condition, and that “incorruption” must be put on be­
fore we can enter the kingdom of God. In the sixth and eighth 
it is used to describe the love we should bear to Christ, and 
the quality of doctrine we should hold. The seventh shows the 
relation of the gospel to Immortality.
3. 
Observation.—That is the complete Biblical testi­
mony on Immortality and incorruptibility. So far from being 
applied to man inherently, it points out the supreme contrast 
between God and man. Man is now only corruptible and mor­
tal. Incorruptibility and Immortality are for man an object of 
hope, for which he is to seek. These terms contrast the heav­
enly and the eternal with the earthly and the decaying. In 
other words, the Biblical usage in no way implies or sustains 
the popular Innate Immortality of the soul postulate.
III. The Five English Uses of Immortal/Immortality Examined
1. 
God the Possessor, Man the Future Receiver.—Let 
us next coordinate the evidence of the terms “immortal” and 
“immortality.” These are used but five times in the whole of
2 Omitted by Griesbach, Lochmann, Tischendorf, Tregelles, Alford, and Codex Sinaiticus.
15
The Reality of Christ’s Res­
urrection Body Is a Type of 
Our Glorified Bodies That 
Will Live Forever in 
the 
Earth Made New.
Scripture, and all occur in the New Testament. An examina­
tion of these five illuminates and clarifies the whole immor­
tality question. Note them:
(1) “The blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord 
of lords; 
who only hath 
immortality 
[athanasian, 
“deathlessness’’], 
dwelling in the light which no man [oudeis, “no one of men”] can ap­
proach 
[aprositon, “inapproachable,” "inaccessible”] 
unto” 
(1 
Tim. 
6:15, 16).
Here the word “immortality,” one of three places where 
it comes from the Greek athanasia in Holy Writ, is expressly 
declared to be an attribute that belongs to God alone, along 
with His omnipotence, omniscience, and omnipresence. It is 
in the same category of exclusives. The inescapable inference 
therefore is that Immortality (like the other restrictive attri­
butes of Deity) is a quality that man does not possess inher­
ently, inalienably, or naturally.
This declaration agrees with the description in 1 Tim­
othy 1:17 of “the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only 
wise God.” It stands out in contrast with “mortal man” (Job 
4:17), who is subject to time and to death. We are admonished
REVIEW PICTURES
WILLIAM HOLE. ARTIST
450
“IMMORTAL,” “INCORRUPTION,” “IMMORTALITY” 
451
to “seek” for Immortality (Rom. 2:7), and are to receive it as 
a “gift” (chap. 6:23). But it will not be “put on” until the 
resurrection, when “mortality” shall “be swallowed up of life” 
(2 Cor. 5:4). It is not ours inherently, or actually, as yet. It 
is ours now in Christ—vested in Him.
(2) “By the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abol­
ished death, and hath brought life [;zden] and immortality [aphtharsian, 
“incorruption”] to light through the gospel” (2 Tim. 1:10).
Here Christ is presented as the revealer and bringer of 
Immortality to man. The eternal Son of God came into the 
world to bring within the knowledge and range and experience 
of man that everlastingness of perfect being which is now the 
exclusive possession of Deity alone. But it is promised to and 
for us.
(3) “To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for 
. . . immortality [aphtharsian, “incorruption”], eternal life [zden aidnion]” 
(Rom. 2:7).
Immortality is therefore not a present, innate possession 
of the human race, but is something diligently to be sought for 
and gained, and to those who seek for it in God’s approved way, 
Immortality, or eternal life (zde aidnios), will be granted. 
It is incredible to think of being admonished to seek for some­
thing already possessed, and from which, according to popular 
theology, we could not be dispossessed.
(4) “For this corruptible [phtharton] must put on incorruption 
[aphtharsian], and this mortal [thneton, “liable or subject to death”] 
must put on immortality [athanasian]” (1 Cor. 15:53).
The inference is consequently clear that man in his pres­
ent state is mortal and corruptible, but that it is God’s plan for 
him to “put on” Immortality and incorruption. Needless to say, 
one does not put on what is already a natural, inherent, and 
inalienable quality or possession. We would not put on what 
we have had ever since being born into the world. And man 
obviously cannot be both mortal and immortal at the same 
time. He is not immortal now.
452
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
(5) 
"So when this corruptible [phtharton] shall have put on in­
corruption [aphtharsian], and this mortal [thneton] shall have put on 
immortality [athanasian], then shall be brought to pass the saying that 
is written, Death is swallowed up in victory” (1 Cor. 15:54).
The time, according to the same apostle, when this 
mortal shall “put on” Immortality is at the resurrection, or 
translation—the resurrection at the Second Advent being the 
central theme of this chapter (see v. 52).
2. 
Recapitulation 
of Fivefold Witness.—God is the 
sole present possessor of Immortality. He is therefore the 
source from which man, at present mortal, must obtain Im­
mortality. Christ is the revealer, the channel, the custodian, 
and the conveyer of immortal life. Not only has He brought to 
light the possibility of Immortality for dying man but He has 
provided in Himself the channel through which it may flow 
to us. Man is to seek for it by patient, godly living in Christ— 
and all such seekers will be rewarded. It is the reward of 
vital faith. Mortal man will put on Immortality at the resur­
rection of the just (Luke 20:36).
Immortality, then, is not a prerogative but a privilege, not 
an inheritance but an achievement, not a natural endowment 
conferred by nature at birth but a conditional gift conferred 
by Jesus Christ at His second advent, on the ground of a new 
birth, and abiding faith in and obedience to Him throughout 
life. The belief that man is immortal is an a priori assumption, 
that is, a reasoning based upon deducing consequences from 
definitions regarded as self-evident, but by reason alone, and 
not through established Biblical evidence. It is therefore pre­
sumption, without Scripture proof, and contrary to Scripture.
Next let us turn to a serious problem that perplexes many.
IV. Problem: “Eternal Life” and “Immortality”—Differences, 
Similarities, and Relationships
1. 
Problem: Are “Eternal Life” and “Immortality” 
Equivalents?—A very real problem that must be faced frankly 
and resolved honestly and Biblically is the relationship between
two frequently used scriptural terms, “eternal life” and 
“immortality,” and the far-reaching provisions for which 
they stand. Are they actually identical in meaning, being sim­
ply different expressions for the same thing, such as “regenera­
tion” and the “new birth”? Or are there basic differences? 
Some maintain that they are one and the same—“eternal life” 
being, in reality, simply an equivalent for “immortality.” If 
that be so then the terms can properly be equated, and the one 
expression used interchangeably for the other.
But this assertion must be put to test, for if such a con­
tention be true, then its correctness can be substantiated by 
substituting one term for the other in the various passages. If 
correct, such a usage should always make sense, without strain­
ing the meaning or creating conflict and confusion. On the 
other hand—and far more important—if such a procedure 
does violence to both the general and the specific teachings of 
Scripture, it is manifestly wrong. Let us therefore test out 
this matter, for much haziness and grave misconception exist 
in the popular mind over the question, Are eternal life and 
Immortality interchangeable terms? We cannot afford to be 
mistaken as to their relationships.
As a clue in advance, we shall find, in general, that eternal 
life is a life of union with God in Christ. It begins now, in trust, 
and comes to consummation in the tangible bestowal of Im­
mortality, or deathlessness, for man at the Second Advent and 
its attendant resurrection. It is likewise true that eternal life 
is the portion of the believer only, not the inherent privilege 
of the sinner. Awareness of these principles will make it 
easier to follow the specific evidence to be presented. First look 
at some foundational facts.
2. 
God’s Immortality Absolute; 
Man’s Always Con­
tingent.—The “life” that Greek philosophy fondly fancied 
might exist intrinsically in the soul itself is, on the contrary, 
to be found solely in the person of Jesus Christ Himself. More­
over, the life that He will bestow upon His people is vastly 
greater and more wonderful than Plato ever conceived. But the
“IMMORTAL,” "INCORRUPTION,” "IMMORTALITY” 
453
454
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
fundamental point of disparity is this: Apart from Christ, 
there is no abiding life. And aside from the pure Christian 
faith, all other systems or philosophical concepts as concerns 
life and Immortality are distorted by error. In the gospel of 
the Word alone is to be found truth without error, as pertains 
to life in all its aspects. To this Word we therefore turn.
First of all, Scripture reveals that God alone is eternal, 
that is, without beginning or end. 
(“From everlasting to 
everlasting, thou art God”—Ps. 90:2.) He alone has absolute 
Immortality—independent, 
innate, 
inalienable, 
“original, 
unborrowed, underived,” inviolable, inexhaustible, all-compre­
hensive Immortality (1 Tim. 1:17; 6:16). Man, on the con­
trary, is a created being, a creature of time, who was not, but 
came into being, and can pass out of being at the will of God. 
Man, mortal since the Fall and subject to death, is to receive 
Immortality, or immunity to death. It is to be bestowed upon 
him as a gift, but not until the Second Advent and its attendant 
resurrection-translation of the righteous.
In contrast with God’s Innate Immortality, man’s con­
ferred Immortality will be derived, dependent, contingent, 
and not self-perpetuating, but ever subject to God’s contin­
uing grace and power. Man will never have Immortality inde­
pendent of God. This should never be forgotten. What God 
has created He can dissolve and destroy. Without life from God 
we are under sentence of death, past all hope, and dead or dy­
ing by reason of trespasses and sins. And Immortality will 
never be bestowed upon the willfully wicked. It is for the right­
eous alone.
3. 
Eternal Life—God’s by Nature; Man’s to Receive. 
—Eternal life \zoe aidnios] is proffered to man, and promised 
to him if he believes and obeys the conditions laid down for its 
reception. In such an event he is “ordained” unto eternal life. 
It will become his as a “gift.” He is to “lay hold” upon it. But 
for man, eternal life is ever vested in Christ. Man has it now 
in Christ—but only when he is “in Christ ” and Christ is “in 
him.” So “eternal life” is the broader, more comprehensive
term. It is God’s inherently, and man’s to receive conditionally 
and contingently. And it is his now in the way God has pro­
vided. The distinctions are precise and consistent but are 
often confused.
4. Both 
Eternal 
Life 
and 
Immortality 
Center 
in 
Christ.—As with Immortality, so with eternal life for man, it 
likewise centers exclusively in the Person of Jesus Christ our 
Lord—incarnate, sinless, crucified, risen, ascended, minister­
ing, and coming again as inerrant Judge and eternal King. He, 
and He alone, is its source and spring. Man forfeited eternal 
life through sin, but it is offered to him anew by God through 
Christ, as a future eternal inheritance for the “world to come.” 
But more than that, it is assured now through regeneration, 
and possessed now in Christ, then to be enjoyed in immortal­
ized realization through resurrection or translation at the Ad­
vent.
Eternal life is therefore much more comprehensive than 
Immortality, which in time begins for man only at the resur­
rection. Eternal life is a present possession, as well as being 
a postresurrection heritage forever. It is positive. It is endless 
fullness of life, while Immortality is negative, that is, not sub­
ject to death and corruption.
5. Eternal Life Based 
on Dual Relationships.—Eter­
nal life, then, is something we both have now in Christ and 
shall receive with new fullness and personalized reality in the 
world to come (Luke 18:30). This dual relationship must be 
sustained. We must be, and continue to be, “in Christ,” and 
Christ “in us”—this being our sole “hope of glory” (Col. 1:27). 
Christ lives in me, bringing His life and power and victory to 
bear in my life—my eternal life being vested in Him (Gal. 
2:20).
Thus my present eternal life and my future Immortality 
for eternity are assured as long as this relationship continues. 
And as the gospel is positive, and eternal life is positive, the 
term “eternal life” is consequently used by the New Testament
“IMMORTAL,” "INCORRUPTION,” “IMMORTALITY” 
455
456
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
writers much more frequently than “immortality.” It is God’s 
over-all offer of life to man. So much for a general statement.
6. 
Sound 
Conclusions 
D
educibl
e 
Fr
om 
Scr
ipt
ur
e 
Evi­
d
en
ce.—Coming now to the detailed examination of the Scrip­
ture evidence, we hereafter tabulate three groups of texts that 
present the scope and reveal the distinctions and relationships 
between eternal life and Immortality. The first group unfolds 
the broad, over-all, comprehensive eternal life that character­
izes God and Christ, as well as the regenerating life principle 
implanted in man, in contrast with the immortalized resurrec­
tion life for the future. Eternal life for man now, is a present 
possession that transforms the life that is lived “in Christ,” 
and that assures the resurrection of the believer unto Immor­
tality at the last day.
It is the life that brings full assurance and glorious hope, 
and that has the inviolable guarantee of God the Eternal, the 
Immortal One, back of it. Scan the list carefully in order to 
grasp the sweep of provisions. Sound conclusions will be de­
ducible from this comprehensive Scripture coverage.
New Testament Testimony on “Eternal Life”
Matt. 19:16—"What good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal 
life [zoen aionion]?"
Matt. 25:46—“The righteous [“shall go"] into life eternal."
Mark 10:17—"What shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?"
Mark 10:30—“Receive an hundredfold now . . . ; and in the world 
to come eternal life."
Luke 10:25—“What shall I do to inherit eternal life?"
Luke 18:18—“What shall I do to inherit eternal life?"
Luke 18:30—“In the world to come life everlasting."
John 3:15—“Not perish, but have eternal life."
John 3:16—“Not perish, but have everlasting life."
John 4:14—“Springing up into everlasting life."
John 4:36—“Gathereth fruit unto life eternal."
John 6:27—“Labour ... for that meat which endureth unto ever­
lasting life."
John 6:40—“Every one which . . . believeth . . . may have everlast­
ing life."
John 12:25—“Shall keep it [his life] unto life eternal."
“IMMORTAL," “INCORRUPTION," “IMMORTALITY” 
457
John 12:50—“His commandment is life everlasting.”
John 17:2—“He should give eternal life to as many as thou hast 
given him.”
John 17:3—"This is life eternal, that they might know thee.”
Acts 13:46—“Ye . . . judge yourselves [the Israelites] unworthy of 
everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.”
Acts 13:48—“As many [Gentiles] as were ordained to eternal life 
believed.”
Rom. 2:7—“Seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life.” 
Rom. 5:21—“Through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ 
our Lord.”
Rom. 6:22—“And the end everlasting life.”
Rom. 6:23—“The gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ 
our Lord.”
Gal. 6:8—“Shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.”
1 Tim. 1:16—"Should hereafter believe on him to life everlasting.”
1 Tim. 6:12—‘‘Lay hold on eternal life, whereunto thou art also 
called.”
1 Tim. 6:19—“That they may lay hold on eternal life.”
Titus 1:2—‘‘In hope of eternal life . . . , promised before the world 
began.”
Titus 3:7—“Heirs according to the hope of eternal life.”
1 John 1:2—“That eternal life [the Word], which was with the 
Father, and was manifested unto us.”
1 John 2:25—“This is the promise that he hath promised us, even 
eternal life.”
1 John 5:20—‘‘This [Jesus Christ] is the true God, and eternal life.” 
Jude 21—“Looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto 
eternal life.”
Note the qualifiers: “May have,” “shall go into,” “may 
inherit,” “in the world to come,” “springing up into,” “unto,” 
“should give,” “unworthy of,” “ordained to,” “seek for,” the 
“end” resultant, “reap,” “lay hold on,” “in hope of,” “mani­
fested unto,” and “promised.” That is the conditional, or con­
tingent, side. It is expressly not innate, natural, inherent, nor 
automatically possessed.
V. Eternal Life—Present Possession, but in Christ
Now look at a second tabulation of texts, at first possibly 
in seeming conflict with the previous listing, yet upon closer 
examination found to be in complete harmony therewith and
explanatory thereof. Only the believer has eternal life, and he 
has it now, and is passed from death to life. And because he has 
eternal life now, Christ will raise him up at the last day and 
bestow Immortality, or deathlessness, upon him at His second 
advent, and resurrection or translation. That is the time of 
immortalization.
But eternal life is contingent upon believing on Christ, 
receiving Christ, abiding in Christ, experiencing the new birth, 
and maintaining the “in Christ” position. No unregenerate 
sinner has eternal life, and no one who breaks off the living 
fellowship with Christ retains eternal life. Here is the Biblical 
documentation in nine passages, all in the apostle John’s 
writings.
John 3:36—“He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life.” 
John 5:24—“He that . . . believeth . . . hath everlasting life, and 
shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.” 
John 6:47—“He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.”
John 6:54—“Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath 
eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.”
John 10:28—"I give unto them [“my sheep”] eternal life.”
1 John 3:15—“No murderer hath eternal life abiding in him.”
1 John 5:11—“God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his 
Son.”
1 John 5:12—“He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not 
the Son of God hath not life.”
1 John 5:13—“That ye may know that ye have eternal life.”
Note the conditions in the light of these texts: Present 
possession is contingent upon believing, and continued believ­
ing, on the Son, and thus one passes from the realm of death 
unto life. Having eternal life is contingent upon living union 
with Christ, and such recipients will be raised up for the be­
stowal of Immortality at the resurrection. Eternal life is a gift, 
but only God’s “sheep” have eternal life; no unrepentant 
“murderer” (or sinner) has eternal life. But most important 
of all, God has given us this eternal life in His Son. Eternal 
life is consequently dependent upon believing, having, and 
abiding in the Son. That is the simple but complete story of 
Holy Writ.
458 
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
“IMMORTAL,” “INCORRUPTION,” “IMMORTALITY” 
459
VI. Immortality—God’s Alone, Man’s to “Put On” at Advent
As already observed, absolute, ultimate Immortality is 
God’s only. Mortal man must “seek” for it, must “put it on,” 
must find it in the gospel promises and God’s enabling acts. It 
is not his presently, nor his naturally, inherently, innately, or 
independently. It is conditional, contingent, and still future— 
received at and retained after the resurrection-translation.
But it is ours in promise and provision. Note the six perti­
nent texts sustaining these statements of relationship to the 
one and only innately Immortal One, whose light no man can 
approach unto—unless he presumptuously claims immortality 
on the basis of tradition, based in turn at the beginning on 
Satan’s original lie in Eden (Gen. 3:4; John 8:44).
Rom. 2:7—“Seek for glory and honour and immortality."
1 Cor. 15:53—“This mortal must put on immortality.”
1 Cor. 15:54—“When . . . this mortal shall have put on immortality.”
2 Tim. 1:10—“Hath brought life and immortality to light through 
the gospel.”
1 Tim. 1:17—“Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the 
only wise God.”
1 Tim. 6:15, 16—“The King of kings, and Lord of lords; who only hath 
immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto.”
VII. Basic Twofold Provision-Condition of Eternal Life
It is essential that we grasp the revealed twofold basis 
for eternal life, which is ours here and now, in a special and 
specified sense. Let us look at one facet of this scintillating gem 
of truth: “There is therefore now no condemnation to them 
which are in Christ Jesus” (Rom. 8:1).
But to this “in Christ” aspect Paul immediately adds the 
converse side of this dual relationship—if “the Spirit of God 
dwell in you” (v. 9). And he immediately repeats this aspect 
by stressing plainly, “If Christ be in you, . . . the Spirit is 
life” (v. 10). That is unequivocal. Then comes this conse­
quence and climax:
FREDERICK SHIELDS, ARTIST
Lazarus, Raised by Christ From the Sleep of Death, Still Bound With Grave- 
clothes, Attested the Omnipotent Power of the Life-giver.
“If the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead 
dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also 
quicken your mortal bodies” (v. 11).
We are thus led up to our “change,” or “quickening,” 
at the resurrection. But Paul explains our present relationship 
even more explicitly:
“I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life 
which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son 
of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me” (Gal. 2:20).
It is therefore both His life within us and His faith that 
are effective. That is the provision and the guarantee of our 
safety and triumph. Jesus likewise set forth the same twofold 
relationship in these words:
“He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood [receiv­
ing and assimilating Christ in the life], dwelleth in me, and I 
in him” (John 6:56).
That twofold integration is identical in intent with His 
previous statement:
“That every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on 
him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the 
last day” (v. 40).
460
"IMMORTAL,” “INCORRUPTION"IMMORTALITY” 
461
There we have it: eternal life now; and Immortality at 
the Second Advent. That is God’s gracious plan and wondrous 
provision.
1. 
Sim
il
a
r t
o Ch
r
ist’s R
el
a
t
io
n
sh
ip 
t
o t
h
e Fa
t
h
er.—
 
This life, integrated with the life of Christ, is much the same 
relationship as that between Christ and the Father when Christ 
was on earth as a man among mortal men, subject to death. 
This He presented in these words: “I am in the Father, and the 
Father in me” (John 14:11). And He added, “The Father 
that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works” (v. 10). That was the 
basis of Christ’s triumphant life. So Christ says assuringly to 
the believer, “We [Christ and the Father] will come unto him 
[the believer], and make our abode with him” (v. 23). Then 
He adds one further provision: “Ye shall know that I am in 
my Father, and ye in me, and I in you” (v. 20).
That becomes an invincible threefold union. Never are 
we to forget that Christ is operatively present in us through 
the Holy Spirit. “For he [the Holy Spirit] dwelleth with you, 
and shall be in you. I will not leave you comfortless: I will 
come to you” (vs. 17, 18). And our eternal life is safe in Him. 
There is no occasion for failure. That is why and how our 
eternal life, vested in Christ, is ours now and here—with 
immortalization to follow.
2. Life of G
od Im
pl
a
n
t
ed T
hr
ough N
ew Bir
t
h.—One 
further point needs to be remembered. Eternal life is the life of 
God, revealed in and through Christ, who is God (John 1:4; 
5:26; 1 John 1:1, 2). This life of God is implanted in the 
believer through the new birth (John 3:3-15; Gal. 6:15). And it 
is through this new birth that the believer becomes a partaker 
of the divine nature and a recipient of the life of Christ Him­
self (Gal. 2:20; Eph. 2:10; 4:24; Col. 1:27; 1 Peter 1:23, 25; 
2 Peter 1:4; 1 John 5:10-12). This is not a mere reformation 
or rejuvenation of the old nature, but the creative act of the 
Holy Spirit (John 1:12, 13; 3:5; 2 Cor. 5:17). But it cannot 
be overemphasized that this life remains vested in Christ,
and its operation in us is dependent upon our being in Him:
“And this is the record, that 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. These things have I written unto you 
that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye 
have eternal life” (1 John 5:11-13).
This is the living, vitalizing relationship of the heavenly 
Vine and the human branches (John 15:1-6).
VIII. Believers Predestined Heirs of Eternal Life Hereafter
But let us turn the gem and observe the light flashing 
from another facet. Believers are declared to be both “sons” 
and “heirs.” Paul says, “If children, then heirs; heirs of God, 
and joint-heirs3 with Christ; . . . that we may be also glorified 
together” (Rom. 8:17). Our heirship is therefore tied in with 
our relation to Christ. But the “earnest expectation of the crea­
ture waiteth for the manifestation [apokalupsin, “unveiling,” 
“revealing,” “appearing”] of the sons of God” (v. 19), “waiting 
for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body” (v. 23), 
as we come to our full estate as sons. Our change, or immortali­
zation, is therefore involved.
“For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate 
[from proórisen, “decree or ordain beforehand”] to be con­
formed to the image of his Son” (v. 29).
Foreknowing therefore precedes predestinating, and pre­
destinating precedes historical fulfillment. Transformation, or 
glorification, at the Second Advent is our destined goal.
“Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: 
and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he 
justified, them he also glorified” (v. 30).
That is the inexorable logic of the sequence and the 
glorious outcome in God’s plan and provision of redemption.
1. 
A
lr
ea
dy 
H
eir
s, 
A
w
a
it
ing 
T
im
e 
o
f 
Possession.—
 
Pursuing this point further, Paul gives assurance that “if ye be
*Cf. Eph. 3:6 ("fellowheirs”); Heb. 11:9; 1 Peter 3:7.
462 
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Christ’s, then are ye . . . heirs according to the promise” (Gal. 
3:29). But he immediately adds this qualifying factor:
“That the heir, as long as he is a child [a minor under age], 
differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all” 
(Gal. 4:1)—“until the time appointed of the father” (v. 2).
He does not actually come into his inheritance until he 
is of age. So each child of God is a “son,” and “heir of God 
through Christ” (v. 7). We are “heirs of salvation” (Heb. 1:14), 
“heirs of promise” (Heb. 6:17). (And James adds, that we are 
“heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that 
love him”—James 2:5.) But we have not yet reached the day 
of maturity. The apostle crystallizes and completes this entire 
“heir” line of reasoning by declaring that we shall “be made 
heirs according to the hope of eternal life” (Titus 3:7).
That is the grand objective—to receive eternal life in its 
fullness, under God’s enabling act, in the time and the way of 
His appointment.
2. 
Pr
o
l
ept
ic 
Figur
e 
Em
pl
o
yed 
r
e 
“Et
er
n
a
l 
Life.”—
 
God often employs the proleptic figure of calling “those things 
which be not as though they were” (Rom. 4:17)—things de­
signed and destined to take place in the future—referring to 
them as though they were already accomplished. For example, 
Paul says that Christ “hath abolished death” (2 Tim. 1:10)— 
yet death is still actively operative, and will continue to be until 
Christ’s return. But its end is assured. Or, John’s “These are 
they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed 
their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb” 
(Rev. 7:14)—yet these Christian martyrs were not as yet bom. 
Thus also with the wondrous provision of eternal life:
“This is the record, that 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 “gift of God,” 
Rom. 6:23).
Everything, then, depends upon and is determined by, that 
unique relationship.
“IMMORTAL,” “INCORRUPTION,” “IMMORTALITY” 
463
464
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
3. Eternal Life Vested in Christ, Not in Us.—This 
eternal life is not in us intrinsically, but is vested and preserved 
in Christ. It is safe and it is sure, and it is ours—in Him, when 
He dwells in us. It is thus that we have it. That is the divine 
safeguard and assurance. We have title but not yet posses­
sion. He that “endureth to the end shall be saved” (Matt. 10:
22). On the contrary, ‘‘If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth 
as a branch, and is withered” (John 15:6). But we have this 
immutable assurance:
‘‘This is the will of him that sent me, that every one which 
seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life 
[zden aidnion]: and I will raise him up at the last day” (John i/ 
6:40).
That is the relationship of eternal life to Immortality at 
the resurrection. It is the inevitable outgrowth of eternal life 
now, in Christ.
Paul himself thus lived ‘‘in hope of eternal life, which 
God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began” (Titus 
1:2; cf. 2 Tim. 1:9; Eph. 1:4). Eternal life is still in trust in 
Christ. This is ‘‘the promise of life which is in Christ Jesus”
(2 Tim. 1:1). Again, ‘‘This is the promise that he hath promised 
us, even eternal life” (1 John 2:25). It is as sure as the Word 
and as certain as the integrity of God. It is ours now in Christ, 
when He is in us. That is God’s provision. It is infinitely more 
safe and secure than if given outright to us.
4. Minor Heir Does Not Have Possession Until of Age.
—Thus the one who abides in Christ can truthfully say that he 
“hath everlasting life,” for Christ is the embodiment, the source, 
the personification of life—both the life and resurrection (John 
5:24-29; 11:25; 14:6). But Paul specifies, ‘‘Your life is hid [laid 
up, hidden away in store] with Christ in God” (Col. 3:3).
No one can deprive us of it (John 10:28). It is ours, if faithful, 
just as the heir to an estate (who is still a minor) can say, ‘‘The 
estate is mine!”
But he cannot take personal, tangible possession of it until 
he is of age, as it were, under the terms and specifications of
“IMMORTAL,” “INCORRUPTION,” “IMMORTALITY” 
465
his father’s will and testament. Eternal life is received in final 
immortalized form at the resurrection, when we enter upon our 
full estate. It is thus that we are to understand these precious 
declarative assurances:
“Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath ever­
lasting life” (John 6:47).
“Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; 
and I will raise him up at the last day” (v. 54).
“Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and 
believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life” (chap. 5:24).
There is thus harmony, logic, love, assurance, and the 
pledged word of the Eternal God, “who only hath immortality,” 
and who has made full provision for us to be clothed with 
Immortality appropriate for us, at the appointed time—the 
Second Advent.
CHAPTER 
TWENTY-SIX
Technical Terms: Sleeping, 
Waking, Resurrection
I. “Sleeping” and “Awakening”—NT Terms for Death 
and Resurrection
D
efin
it
io
n 
of T
er
m
s.—Two Greek words are rendered 
“sleep”—(1) katheudd (“to compose one’s self in voluntary or 
natural sleep,” as in 1 Thess. 5:6), employed 22 times, and never 
used of death; and (2) koimao (“to fall asleep involuntarily,” 
as in 1 Thess. 4:14). This is used of the sleep of death because 
it is involuntary, while katheudd is voluntary. Koimao occurs 
18 times, and is constantly used of death (except Matt. 28:13; 
Luke 22:45; John 11:12; Acts 12:6).
1. 
M
u
l
t
ipl
e Specul
a
t
ion
s O
ver St
a
t
e 
in D
ea
t
h.—The 
mystery of man’s state in death has frequently been used as a 
springboard for plunging into philosophic speculation, poetic 
fancy, superstitious credulity, and religious yearning. Here 
Immortal-Soulist speculation ranges all the way from Oriental 
belief in transmigration, Platonic escape to the starry spheres, 
American Indian happy hunting grounds, Spiritualism’s eerie 
world of progressive spheres, Romanism’s Purgatory and limbo, 
and on to Protestantism’s magic gateway to Heaven.
But the human mind, unaided, is baffled by the mystery 
of the death state. Man craves certainty and solace on this point. 
Scripture alone pierces the veil and gives us trustworthy infor­
mation. Only the Bible gives us the true understanding of the 
intermediate state. Even after three years of personal com-
466
FRED COLLINS, ARTIST 
© 1955 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
The Taking of Elijah to Heaven Prefigured the Translation of the Living 
Saints at Christ’s Second Advent.
panionship with Christ during His earthly ministry, the early 
apostles still needed the risen Christ to open “their under­
standing, that they might understand the scriptures” (Luke 
24:45). We too must likewise listen to His words today. We 
too as verily need the divine illumination of the Holy Spirit, 
who will guide us, as He did them, into “all truth” (John 
16:13).
2. 
“Sleep”—Common Term for “Dead in Christ.”—That 
man “sleeps” between death and the resurrection is the express 
testimony of Scripture. It is, in fact, the uniform testimony of 
both the Old and the New Testaments—as for example, with 
Moses, David, and Daniel in the Old,1 and Christ, Paul, and 
Stephen in the New.2 Peter expressly said, “David is not 
ascended into the heavens” (Acts 2:34). Man sleeps; then he 
wakens. That epitomizes his experience, covering the inter­
mediate state between the present life and the life to come.
i Deut. 31:16; 1 Kings 1:21; Dan. 12:2.
3 John 11:11; Acts 7-59, 60; 1 Cor. 15:20; 1 Thess. 4:15.
467
468
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
The verb koimad (“to make sleep,” “put to sleep,” “fall 
asleep,” “sleep”) not only is generally used of the “sleep of 
death” but is affirmed to be the condition of man as a whole 
in death (cf. Deut. 31:16—“thou shalt sleep with thy fathers”). 
Death is affirmed to be an unbroken slumber until the resur­
rection morn, when the sleepers will awaken (Dan. 12:2). 
Jesus said of Lazarus, “I go, that I may awake him out of sleep” 
(John 11:11). And when “he that was dead” was awakened, he 
came forth bodily from the tomb (v. 44). And Jesus said, “Loose 
him [from the “graveclothes”], and let him go” (v. 44).
Moreover, Paul in 1 Thessalonians 4 assures us that neither 
those who are alive at the return of Christ nor those who “sleep 
in Jesus,” will go into the Lord’s presence before the other 
group. Both the resurrected and the translated ones are “caught 
up together” to meet their returning Lord. Such a declaration 
confutes the concept that the dead saints have gone before 
to glory, and have been with Christ for centuries, or millen­
niums. Neither the “quick” (“the living”) nor the “dead” 
precede the other, but the “changed” quick and the awakened 
sleepers will go “together” into the presence of Jesus forever 
(vs. 15-17).
3. 
Figure 
of 
“Sleep” Used Only 
of First Death.— 
There is a striking similarity between the beautiful euphemism 
of the “sleep” of the dead and the “sleep” of the living. Both 
indicate a condition of unconsciousness and inactivity, which 
concept is, of course, totally opposed to the popular postulate 
of the superlative consciousness and activity of allegedly im­
mortal souls. But the Bible must be the criterion on this. 
Neither tradition nor speculation nor human aspiration can 
be trusted for reliable information here.
There is also a striking similarity in the awakening that 
follows. In literal sleep the person who sleeps wakes up after 
his rest. There is thus the suggestion of a resurrection. But the 
Scriptures are explicit just here. The dead do awaken. Those 
who “sleep the sleep of death” (Ps. 13:3) are not to remain in
TECHNICAL TERMS: SLEEPING, WAKING, RESURRECTION 469
the death-sleep forever. Both good and evil “sleep,” and both 
righteous and wicked must assuredly “awake” (Dan. 12:2). 
For “as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made 
alive” (1 Cor. 15:22).
But the figure of sleep is used only of the first, or temporal, 
death. When we lie down in the “sleep of death,” the next thing 
of which we are conscious is that of being awakened by Jesus, 
the declared “resurrection, and the life” (John 11:25), to live 
forever or to be judicially condemned to the second, or eternal, 
death, from which there will be no awakening.
4. 
Uniform Usage Determines the Meaning.—To grasp 
the New Testament usage at a glance, let the eye run down 
the italicized words in the following list of passages, and observe 
the frequency and consistency with which the terms “sleepeth,” 
“sleep,” “asleep,” and “slept”—all variants of koimao—are used 
for the sleep of death in the New Testament, paralleling the 
same usage throughout the Old Testament.3 This New Testa­
ment terminology is used particularly of those who sleep “in 
Christ” 
(1 Cor. 15:18), or “in Jesus” 
(1 Thess. 4:14).
Matt. 9:24, 25—“The maid is not dead, but sleepeth. . . . And the 
maid arose.”
Matt. 27:52—“Many bodies of the saints which slept arose.”
Mark 5:39—“The damsel is not dead, but sleepeth.”
Luke 8:52, 53—“She is not dead, but sleepeth. And they laughed 
him to scorn, knowing that she was dead.”
John 11:11—“Our friend Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may 
awake him out of sleep.”
Acts 7:60—“He [Stephen] fell asleep.”
Acts 13:36—“David . . . fell on sleep.”
1 Cor. 7:39—“If the husband have fallen asleep [koimao]” (Rother­
ham tr.).
1 Cor. 11:30—“And many sleep.”
1 Cor. 15:6—“Some are fallen asleep.”
1 Cor. 15:18—“They also which are fallen asleep in Christ.”4
3 Such as Job, “For now shall I sleep in the dust” (Job 7:21), or David, “Lest I 
sleep the sleep of death” (Ps. 
13:3), or “David slept with his fathers” (1 Kings 2:10), or
“Many of them that sleep in the dust 
of the earth shall awake” (Dan. 12:2). For Old
Testament list see pp. 81, 82.
* “In Christ” we have reconciliation, salvation, 
access, hope, peace, sonship, victory,
safety, and resurrection. (See 
Rom. 5:1, 2, 10; 8:37; 1 Cor. 15:57; Eph. 1:5; Col. 1:20;
Titus 3:5, 6.)
470
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
1 Cor. 15:20—“Christ [is] risen from the dead, . . . the firstfruits of 
them that slept ."
1 Cor. 15:51—"We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed.” 
1 Thess. 4:13—“Concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow 
not, even as others.”
1 Thess. 4:14—“Them also which sleep in Jesus.”8 
1 Thess. 4:15—“Not prevent [pkthano, “go before, or precede”] them 
which are asleep.”
1 Thess. 5:10—“Whether we wake or sleep, we should live together 
with him.”
2 Peter 3:4—“Since the fathers fell asleep."
It will be observed that these references include the great 
resurrection chapters, 1 Corinthians 15 and 1 Thessalonians 4.
It is to be particularly noted that “sleep” is used both of 
the good and of the evil dead. It is similarly to be observed 
that koimad to describe the dead was likewise used by the pagan 
ancients to describe the dead—but without hope of a resur­
rection or an awakening. By them it was joined with words 
that excluded the hope of “waking,” or with such qualifiers 
as “eternal,” “unawakened,” or “everlasting,” or “brazen” or 
“iron” sleep. The contrast is impressive. The Christian hope 
of glorious awakening made the difference.
5. 
“Sleep” Implies Assurance of “Awakening.”—Sleep 
is a tender and hope-inspiring figure of speech, chosen by Inspi­
ration to represent death; for, as noted, sleep implies assurance 
of a later awakening. The literal use of the term “sleep” is, of 
course, limited to living persons, while in figurative use it per­
tains only to the dead. It was employed by Christ Himself in 
preference to the harsher literal term “death,” with its inevi­
table “sting” (1 Cor. 15:56).
Speaking figuratively, Jesus said, “Our friend Lazarus 
sleepeth; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep” (John 
11:11). However, when Jesus perceived that He was misunder­
stood, He said “unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead” (v. 14). 
And He quickly added, “Thy brother shall rise again” (v. 23). 
Both sets of expressions meant the same.
5 Equated with the “dead in Christ” in v. 16.
TECHNICAL TERMS: SLEEPING, WAKING, RESURRECTION 471
When Paul speaks figuratively of those who “sleep in Jesus” 
(1 Thess. 4:14), he explains this as literally “the dead in Christ” 
(v. 16). The term “sleep” softens the impact of the blow by re­
minding one of its temporary character and the assured awaken­
ing to follow. It is a euphemism—a gentle, comforting word 
substituted for the harsher, more repellent term. Now note 
the technical term.
6. 
“Awakening” From Death-Sleep Is Inspired Termi­
nology.—To “awake” {exupnizo, “to rouse out of sleep”) 
is Biblically and logically the reverse of “falling asleep” in 
death. They are antithetical terms in striking contrast. The 
classic New Testament example of the use and meaning of the 
term “awake” is in connection with the aforementioned rais­
ing of Lazarus. Observe the entire passage:
“Our friend Lazarus sleepeth [from koimad]-, but I go, that I may 
awake [from exupnizo, “arouse”] him out of sleep. Then said his dis­
ciples, Lord, if he sleep, he shall do well. Howbeit Jesus spake of his 
death: but they thought that he had spoken of taking of rest in sleep. 
Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead” (John 11:11-14).
The resurrection followed, as Christ came to the grave 
and called, “Lazarus, come forth. And he that was dead came 
forth” (vs. 43, 44). That was the “awakening” of Lazarus out 
of the “sleep” of verse 11. The meaning is identical. Christ 
said nothing about Lazarus having gone to Heaven, and that 
He was going to bring him back from glory. He simply inquired 
where they had laid him. And when Lazarus came forth he did 
not report having seen anything in the nether world.
The last-day parallel is, of course, that the sleeping dead 
shall both hear and respond to the voice of the returning Christ, 
the Life-giver, and shall arise at that transcendent hour.® 
Observe:
* In the Old Testament are numerous examples of paralleling usage:
Job 14:12—“Till the heavens be no more, they shall not awake, nor 
be raised 
out
of their sleep.”
Ps. 17:15—“I shall be satisfied, when I awake, with thy likeness.”
Isa. 26:19—“Thy dead men shall live. . . . Awake and sing, ye that dwell 
in dust.”
{
er. 51:39, 57—“Sleep a perpetual sleep, and not wake.”
•an. 12:2—“Many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake.”
Christ’s Ascension Was the 
Assurance of Our Complete 
Bodily Redemption and the 
Pledge of His Return 
to 
Gather His Ransomed Ones 
From Death and the Grave.
John 5:25—“The dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and 
they that hear shall live.”
John 5:28, 29—“All that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and 
shall come forth.”
1 Thess. 4:16—“The Lord himself shall descend from heaven with 
a shout, . . . and the dead in Christ shall rise.”
There is thus harmony and symmetry of expression as to 
“sleeping” and “awaking”—Bible terms for going into and 
coming out of the death state.
7. 
Translation 
Conceals 
Reiterated 
“Awakening” 
Emphasis.—Another but more technical point may well be 
noted, pertaining to translation. Some sixteen times in 1 Co-
G. BIERMAN, ARTIST
472
TECHNICAL TERMS: SLEEPING, WAKING, RESURRECTION 473
rinthians 15 the resurrection “awakening” from the “sleep” 
of death is pressed home by the apostle Paul. First of all, as 
a background he says that Christ “died for our sins” and was 
“buried,” and “rose [from egeiro, “awoke,” “roused up from 
sleep”—the sleep of death] again the third day according to 
the scriptures” (vs. 3, 4). Then He was seen by Peter, next by 
the twelve, then by more than five hundred at one time— 
most of whom were still living when he wrote (about a.d. 57), 
but “some are fallen asleep”—then seen by James and by all 
the apostles (vs. 5-7). Finally He was seen by Paul himself (v. 8).
Now note how, ten times in eight verses (12-20), Paul in 
the original Greek stresses the resurrection as “awaking” (from 
egeiro) from the dead—including that of Christ Himself. 
Observe:
“Now if Christ be preached that he rose [“awakened”] from the 
dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection [“rising up”] 
of the dead? But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ 
not risen [“awakened”]: and if Christ be not risen [“awakened”], then 
is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. Yea, and we are found 
false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised 
up [“awakened”] Christ: whom he raised [“awakened”] not up, if so be 
that the dead rise [“wake”] not. For if the dead rise [“awaken”] not, then 
is not Christ raised ["awakened”]: and if Christ be not raised [“awak­
ened”], your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. Then they also which 
are fallen asleep [from koimao] in Christ are perished” (vs. 12-18).
“But now is Christ risen [“awakened”] from the dead, and become 
the firstfruits of them that slept [from koimao]” (v. 20).
This iterated and reiterated contrast between sleeping 
and awakening is impressive. And in five additional instances 
egeiro (“awaken”) occurs (1 Cor. 15:32, 35, 42, 43, and 52).7 
The term “sleep” enshrines a blessed truth and Biblical fact, 
for the sleeper is unconscious of any lapse of time between death 
and resurrection. He simply goes to sleep and later awakes,8 in 
the resurrection of the dead.
7 V. 32— ‘What advantageth it me, if the dead rise [“awaken”] not?” 
v. 35—“How are the dead raised up?”
v. 42—“It is raised in incorruption.”
v. 43—“It is raised in glory.”
v. 52—“The dead shall be raised incorruptible.”
8 Other examples of egeiro occur: Matthew 8:25—“His disciples came to him, and 
awoke him”; Ephesians 5:14—“Awake thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead”; Romans 
13:11—“Now it is high time to awake out of sleep.”
474
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
8. 
Bears Vital Relationship to Advent Hope.—Christ 
must come again in order to receive His people unto Himself 
(John 14:3) and to reunite those separated by death. In this 
light the Second Advent becomes luminous as the blessed hope 
of the church. The sole means of meeting and reuniting with 
our loved ones is the return of Jesus to awaken them, or raise 
them up, from sleep in their dusty beds. The fact that death 
has been popularly regarded as the immediate gateway to 
Paradise is largely responsible for relegating so far into the 
background the New Testament doctrine of our Lord’s return. 
And it has blurred the resurrection truth. The time has come 
to give again our Lord’s return its rightful, paramount place 
in the preaching of the gospel.
II. Two Separate General Resurrections—of Righteous 
and Wicked
There are two verbs and two nouns, respectively, for 
“resurrect” and “resurrection.” The two verbs are: (1) anistemi 
(“to stand up,” “to raise up,” “to rise up,” “to arise or rise 
again”), occurring 111 times, 35 of which refer to resurrection 
(for example: Matt. 17:9; 20:19; John 6:39, 40, 44, 54); and
(2) egeiro (“to rouse up from sleep,” “to awaken”), occurring 
141 times, 70 of which refer to resurrection (for example: 
Matt. 10:8; 27:63, 64; Luke 20:37; 24:6, 34; John 12:1, 9, 17; 
Eph. 1:20; 5:14; etc.).
The two nouns are: (1) anastasis (“a standing up,” or 
“rising as from the dead”), occurring 42 times, always translated 
resurrection (except Luke 2:34); and (2) egersis (“a waking up 
as from sleep,” “a rousing from sleep,” because death is a sleep), 
as in Matthew 27:53.
1. 
Two G
ener
a
l R
esur
r
ections Fol
l
ow in Seq
u
en
ce.—
 
According to Scripture, after Christ’s resurrection as the “first- 
fruits,” two general resurrections are to follow in sequence. 
First note the Scripture:
“For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 
But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they 
that are Christ’s at his coming. Then cometh the end” (1 Cor. 15:22-24).
(1) The initial resurrection is that of “Christ the first- 
fruits” (1 Cor. 15:23; Acts 26:23). His tremendous, matchless 
resurrection provides the sole basis and assurance of the resur­
rection of all men (1 Cor. 15:16-20), and suggests the nature 
of the change that will come to our bodies.
(2) Then “afterward they that are Christ’s at his [second] 
coming” (v. 23). This is called the “first resurrection” (Rev. 
20:5, 6), the “better resurrection” (Heb. 11:35), the “resurrec­
tion of life” (John 5:29; Dan. 12:2), and the “resurrection of 
the just” (Luke 14:14; Acts 24:15). Those who partake in 
it are called “blessed and holy” (Rev. 20:6), for they will not 
be hurt of the “second death.” They are “children of God, 
being the children of the resurrection” (Luke 20:35, 36).*
(3) Finally come the “rest of the dead”—those that “lived 
not again until the thousand years were finished” (Rev. 20:5). 
So, beyond the “first” resurrection looms the “second.” This 
presupposes that the “rest of the dead” (the wicked) were not 
living during the thousand years. This comprises the resurrec­
tion of the unjust (Acts 24:15), the “resurrection of damnation” 
(John 5:29), the resurrection to “shame and everlasting con­
tempt” (Dan. 12:2). It is the antithesis of the first resurrection. 
These compass the general resurrections. And those who came 
up in the second are, after judgment, cast into the “lake of 
fire,” which is the second death (Rev. 20:6, 12-15).
2. 
Resurrection Universal in Operation.—So the resur­
rection is universal in its operation—“all [shall] be made alive,” 
just as verily as “all die” (1 Cor. 15:22). All men must and 
will be raised to acknowledge the lordship of Christ (Rom. 
14:10, 11). To those who acknowledge that lordship now, in 
this life, there is salvation (chap. 10:9). To those who acknowl­
edge it too late—as a constraint, after the second resurrection— 
there is only destruction. But that lordship will one day be
TECHNICAL TERMS: SLEEPING, WAKING, RESURRECTION 475
9 Bullinger, Lexicon, “Resurrection,” pp. 643, 644.
476
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
acknowledged by all (Phil. 2:9-11; cf. Rev. 19:16), one way 
or the other.
We must therefore conclude that the general term “resur­
rection of the dead” (anastasis nekrdri) includes both the 
resurrection unto “life” for the just and the resurrection to 
judgment of the unjust (John 5:29; Acts 24:15).
3. 
D
r
a
ma 
of 
R
ebel
l
io
n, 
Sin, 
and 
D
ea
t
h 
O
ver.—The 
resurrections now past, the Inspired Record adds, “Then 
cometh the end, . . . when he shall have put down [from 
katarged, “render inactive,” “abolish,” “cause to cease,” “bring 
to nought”] all rule and all authority and power” (1 Cor. 
15:24). Rebellion is subdued. All opposing powers are 
destroyed, abolished (Rom. 6:6; 2 Thess. 2:8; Heb. 2:14). 
Then, significantly, Paul immediately adds, “The last enemy 
that shall be destroyed is death” (1 Cor. 15:26).
Thus the supreme purpose of Christ’s incarnation mission 
is fulfilled, for He came that He might “destroy him that had 
the power of death, that is, the devil” (Heb. 2:14). These 
“principalities and powers” and “rulers of the darkness” and 
spiritual hosts of wickedness are consumed by the “everlasting 
fire, prepared for the devil and his angels” (Matt. 25:41). 
Thus the abolition of death is the last act in the divine drama 
of the ages (1 Cor. 15:26; Rev. 20:14). Sin and sinners, death 
and devil, are gone forever. The drama of time is over. God is 
all in all. Eternal life in the new earth begins, with the saints 
restored and safe forevermore.
III. Glory of Our Immortalized Resurrection Bodies
1. 
R
esur
r
ect
ion o
f Body Indispensa
ble t
o Fut
ur
e Life. 
—According to the New Testament, a bodily resurrection is 
indispensable to our future Immortality. Paul declares that 
without such a consummation of God’s redemptive purpose, 
“they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished” 
(1 Cor. 15:16-18). There would be no restoration of the person.
So the resurrection body is involved in the promised gift of 
immortal life, bestowed at the Advent. “This mortal must 
put on immortality” (v. 53)—something it had not before 
possessed. It is a bodily resurrection that gives reality and 
substance to our forthcoming immortal life. (The thought 
of discarnate immortal souls is wholly un-Biblical. Shades, float­
ing about in mystic aerial regions, are totally foreign to Holy 
Writ. Such a notion stems from Greek philosophy.)
The human personality requires a resurrection body as 
an instrument for further life, thought, and activity. That is 
an integral part of the change, or quickening (Rom. 8:11) 
process, a resurrection-translation act of God, to take place at 
the Second Advent. The record is clear: “He which raised up 
the Lord Jesus shall raise up us also by Jesus” (2 Cor. 4:14). 
His was an actual bodily resurrection, albeit with a glorified 
body. But this involves the quickening of our mortal bodies. 
And this too is imperative but conditional:
“If the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in 
you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken [from 
zoopoieo, “to make alive,” “give life,” especially eternal life] your mortal 
bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you” (Rom. 8:11).
This relationship between the present mortal body and 
the future glorified body is highly important. It is sown in 
“dishonour” and “weakness,” and raised in “glory” and 
“power” 
(1 Cor. 15:43). Here is the inspired description:
"It [the body] is sown in corruption; it is raised in incor­
ruption: ... it is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual 
body.” “To every seed his own body” (vs. 42-44, 38).
This latter expression cannot be overemphasized. Identity 
and personality will be preserved.
2. 
Continuity of Identity and Personality Preserved. 
—This does not mean that the same identical particles of matter 
at the moment of death will reunite to form the same body 
in the resurrection. There is a progressive change of bodily 
structure throughout our present life. But the same essential 
organization is maintained in the provision of God, and the
TECHNICAL TERMS: SLEEPING, WAKING, RESURRECTION 477
478
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
same personality is preserved without change. The body of the 
resurrection will maintain the same recognizable pattern and 
personality.
Even the identity of the same Rhine or Mississippi, the 
Nile, Hudson, or Amazon, remains despite the passage of 
thousands of years. Not a drop of water now flowing is identical 
with the river that flowed at the time of its discovery, yet it is 
the identical, recognizable river. This, of course, is a crude 
illustration, but it affords a suggestion.
Further, Paul’s reference to the body as the “seed,” suggests 
some sort of vital connection—the future counterpart and the 
seed from which it springs. There is identity, but not a physi­
cal connection in the sense that the stalk is built directly from 
the structure of the seed. “Thou sowest not that body that shall 
be, but bare grain” 
(1 Cor. 15:37). There is continuing 
personal identity, the continuing core of personality. However, 
the death of the seed is involved—“That which thou sowest is 
not quickened, except it die” (v. 36). Christ touches on this same 
thought: “Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground 
and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much 
fruit” (John 12:24).
Then comes His explanation: “He that loveth his life 
shall lose it; and he that hateth his life in this world shall 
keep it unto life eternal” (v. 25).
As noted, though the physical form of man is constantly 
changing and being renewed throughout this life, he continues 
to be the same person—as the new materials are organized 
and integrated into the same continuing body. We are able 
to identify the child we knew with the man we now see.
3. 
R
esur
r
ect
ion 
Bodies 
t
o 
Be Vastly 
D
iffer
en
t.—As 
to the precise nature of the resurrection bodies—“How are the 
dead raised up? and with what body do they come?” (1 Cor. 
15:35)—the answer is not revealed. John says, “It doth not yet 
appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall 
appear, we shall be like him” (1 John 3:2). There were
TECHNICAL TERMS: SLEEPING, WAKING, RESURRECTION 479
quibblers in apostolic days as in ours. These Paul rebuked.10
Whatever the exact connection between our present 
mortal bodies and our resurrection bodies, we know that 
they will be vastly different. There will be a tremendous 
“change” (1 Cor. 15:51, 52), as Paul twice emphasizes. All 
infirmities and defects and earthly limitations will vanish. In 
Old Testament times Job was waiting until his “change” 
should come (Job 14:14).
As stated, the precise nature of that change has not been 
revealed. It is beyond our present knowledge and compre­
hension. It is a “spiritual body” in contrast with our present 
“natural body.” Paul compares it with a bare kernel of wheat 
planted in the ground and the sturdy stalk that comes from it. 
In the glory of the resurrection body the contrast is between 
mortality and corruption, and Immortality and incorruption. 
Christ’s risen body, with its exemption from the previous 
laws of time, space, and movement, suggests the nature of the 
change, or contrast. But we must leave it there.
4. “Spir
it
u
a
l Bodies” Per
fect
l
y Ada
pted t
o R
esur
r
ec­
t
io
n L
ife.—Paul assures us that Christ will “fashion anew the 
body of our humiliation, that it may be conformed to the body 
of his glory” (Phil. 3:21, A.R.V.). He presses on the tremen­
dous “change” (1 Cor. 15:50, 51) that will take place, and 
compares our present and future bodies as being that of “bodies 
terrestrial” and “celestial bodies” (v. 40). He makes the con­
trast between the pale, dim “glory of the moon” and the bril­
liant, vitalizing “glory of the sun” (v. 41). And he adds, “So 
also is the resurrection of the dead” (v. 42).
He contrasts the “image of the earthy” with the “image 
of the heavenly,” and the “bare grain” with the “body that 
shall be” (1 Cor. 15:37-49). The contrast is between “dishonour” 
and “glory,” and “weakness” and “power.” Paul categorically
10 Paul invoked unusually strong language in dealing with quibblers on this point, 
employing the term ‘‘fool” (aphrdn, ‘ without mind,” “senseless,” “destitute of sound prin­
ciple”). He was a bit impatient with valueless, hypothetical questions. Christ also twice used 
the same term in Luke 11:40 and 12:20 in dealing with the hypocritical Pharisees—“Thou 
fool, this night thy soul shall be required of thee.
480
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
declares, “There is a natural body [for this life], and there is 
a spiritual body” (v. 44), for the life to come. “As we have 
borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image 
of the heavenly” (v. 49). He does not define or explain the 
spiritual body. But this we do know: This present, earthly 
“flesh and blood” body “cannot inherit the kingdom of God” 
(v. 50), any more than corruption can “inherit” incorruption.
Of this we may be sure: The “spiritual body” will be 
perfectly adapted to the plane of the resurrection or immortal 
life to come. And the earthly limitations of corruption and 
mortality will be put off forever. And what we "put on” is a 
“building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in 
the heavens” (2 Cor. 5:1). That is the source of the resurrec­
tion body, and its glorified character. Death and disintegration 
will be vanquished forevermore. And all this is through Christ 
Jesus. For “when Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then 
shall ye also appear with him in glory” (Col. 3:4).
IV. Many in Heaven Through Special Resurrection 
or Translation
1. 
Enoch, Moses, and Elijah Are Earliest Trophies. 
—The Bible explicitly states that a host of redeemed worthies 
from this earth are already in Heaven. But this is to be particu­
larly noted: All the immortalized from earth who are there 
have gone by way of one of two undeviating channels—special 
resurrection or translation. There are no exceptions. These 
are the only corridors to glory, the sole gateways to Heaven. 
One group passed through death, and was raised immortal 
and incorruptible; the other escaped death through bodily 
transformation and translation to glory.
Take the earliest example of translation. “Enoch, the 
seventh from Adam” (Jude 14), was the first representative 
of the human race to be translated. He was “changed,” trans­
formed, immortalized, and taken to Heaven in his glorified
Every Individual Must Make the Great Decision. Christ and Satan Are Bidding 
for the Soul. Choose Life.
translation body, as the earliest trophy of redemption. He thus 
became a type of the living righteous who will be “changed,” 
and “caught up” at Christ’s second coming. Here is the inspired 
account:
“By faith Enoch was translated [from metatithemi, “trans­
ported”] that he should not see death; and was not found, 
because God had translated him” (Heb. 11:5).
PAINTING BY HARRY ANDERSON 
S I 959 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD 
481
Because He Rose Triumphant Over Death, We Too Shall 
16
Come Forth From the Grave at the Impending Second 
Advent.
482
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Moses, on the other hand, was the first to be resurrected 
from the dead by a special resurrection. Thus, “death reigned 
from Adam to Moses” 
(Rom. 5:14). He “died” and was 
“buried” (Deut. 34:5, 6). Just when his resurrection occurred 
we do not know. But there was a futile challenge by Satan 
over the right of Michael, the Archangel, to bring Moses forth 
from the grave (Jude 9). Reverting again to translation, Elijah 
was more spectacularly translated, as he was taken up to 
Heaven by a “chariot of fire,” evidently transported by angels 
(Ps. 104:4). Here again is the inspired record:
"And it came to pass, as they [Elijah and Elisha] still went on, and 
talked, that, behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, 
and parted them both asunder; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into 
heaven” (2 Kings 2:11; cf. 6:17).
Elisha witnessed it and cried, “My father, my father, the 
chariot of Israel, and the horsemen thereof. And he saw him 
[Elijah] no more” (chap. 2:12). These “chariots” are evidently 
connected with the angels: “The chariots of God are twenty 
thousand, even thousands of angels” (Ps. 68:17).
2. 
Glorified Moses and Elijah Appear at Transfigura­
tion.—At the Transfiguration, witnessed by Peter, James, and 
John, there appeared with the “transfigured” Christ, “Moses 
and Elias talking with him” 
(Matt. 17:1-8). That is very 
specific. Then, after they had conversed concerning Christ’s 
coming death and resurrection, Moses and Elias disappeared, 
and the disciples “saw no man, save Jesus only” (v. 8). They 
were overwhelmed by what they had seen. But Jesus charged 
them to tell no man “until the Son of man be risen again 
from the dead” (v. 9; cf. Mark 9:4-10). It was this experience 
that caused the disciples to discuss among themselves just “what 
the rising from the dead should mean” (Mark 9:10). Light 
was dawning upon their comprehension.
According to Luke, at the Transfiguration “the fashion 
of his [Christ’s] countenance was altered, and his raiment was 
white and glistering” (Luke 9:29). Then these “two men, which
TECHNICAL TERMS: SLEEPING, WAKING, RESURRECTION 483
were Moses and Elias,” similarly “appeared in glory, and spake 
of his [Christ’s] decease which he should accomplish at Jeru­
salem” (v. 31). There was no mistaking their identity. They 
were clearly the illustrious characters of Bible fame—proto­
types of the resurrected and translated saints. This, of course, 
involves belief in the supernatural, life-giving power of God. 
And this we affirm.
3. Special Resurrection 
at Christ’s Resurrection.— 
There was also a singular resurrection of “saints” who had been 
sleeping in death, which occurred in connection with earth­
quaking phenomena attending the death and resurrection 
of Jesus, when—
“the earth did quake, and the rocks rent; and the graves were opened; 
and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, and came out of the 
graves after his [Christ’s] resurrection, and went into the holy city 
[Jerusalem], and appeared unto many” (Matt. 27:51-53; cf. Rom. 1:4).
These glorified risen saints were perhaps trophies from 
every age. In any event, they were witnesses to the reality of 
God’s power to raise the dead, and afforded supreme proof of 
the reality of the resurrection by the very fact that they had 
been raised—and all this at the very time that the Jewish 
leaders were seeking desperately to conceal the fact of Christ’s 
resurrection and offering money to the Roman soldiers to lie 
about His resurrection. But incontrovertible witness was thus 
given both to the Jews and to Christ’s followers. These pro­
vided unassailable attestation. They may be classed among the 
“many infallible proofs” (Acts 1:3) of Christ’s resurrection.
And when Christ ascended He led with Him this "multi­
tude of captives” (Eph. 4:8, margin; cf. Ps. 68:17, 18). The 
chain of death was demonstrably broken. Satan’s captives were 
recaptured by the greater power of Christ, and Christ thus 
led them up to Heaven in triumphal procession. Thus it was 
that “having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a 
shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it” (Col. 2:15).
4. God’s Stipulated Way for Immortalization.—Accord­
484
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
ing to Paul, the living saints will all be “changed” (“altered”) 
at Christ’s second advent, and will “put on” “incorruption” 
and “immortality.” “Changed” is simply another term for 
“translation.” This involves the transformation and glorifica­
tion of the body of the living, as verily as with the transfiguring 
glorification of the resurrected dead. The only difference is 
that for them there is no antecedent sleep in death. Here is 
Inspiration’s detailed portrayal:
“Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall 
all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last 
trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the [righteous] dead shall be 
raised incorruptible, and we [those living at Christ’s return] shall be 
changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal 
must put on immortality” (1 Cor. 15:51-53).
There is no other way. This, as emphasized, is God’s 
stipulated plan and provision—resurrection or translation— 
both occurring simultaneously for the sleeping and living 
saints, respectively, so that both groups may be “caught up 
together” “to meet the Lord in the air,” thenceforth ever to 
“be with the Lord” (1 Thess. 4:17) in the heavenly “mansions” 
(John 14:2, 3) Christ has gone to “prepare” in the Father’s 
house—the city of God, or New Jerusalem.
5. 
General Resurrection and Translation at Christ’s 
Return.—According to Luke, Christ ascended personally, in 
His glorified body, into the welcoming clouds and was “carried 
up into heaven” (Luke 24:51). The concurring record in Acts 
states that He was “taken up; and a cloud received him out of 
their sight” (Acts 1:9). Thus He was “taken up” from the 
disciples “into heaven” (v. 11). And they “looked stedfastly 
toward heaven as he went up” (v. 10). His was a real, a literal 
ascension. And it will be a real, literal return. Upon the 
authority of the angels, He “shall so come in like manner as 
ye have seen him go into heaven” (v. 11).
He will return personally, in the clouds, in the same way: 
“Behold, he cometh with the clouds; and every eye shall see 
him” (Rev. 1:7)—only this time in transcendent “power and
great glory” (Matt. 24:30), with a host of mighty angels to 
“gather together his elect” from the four quarters of the 
globe (v. 31). So our “gathering” is dependent upon, and syn­
chronized with, His return. Special resurrections and transla­
tions are identical in process, only carried out in advance and 
limited in number.
TECHNICAL TERMS: SLEEPING, WAKING, RESURRECTION 485
CHAPTER 
TWENTY-SEVEN
Terms and Usages: Final Disposition 
of the Wicked
The fate of the wicked—the unrepentant irreconcilables 
—is one of the most solemn and tragic aspects in the entire 
area embracing the nature and destiny of fallen man. It is 
sobering and disturbing to contemplate. Nevertheless, the jus­
tice and integrity of God, as well as His love and mercy (not 
to mention the lot of the hardened sinner), are inextricably 
bound up therewith.
We now address ourselves to this crucial question. In the 
all-wise punitive acts of God, manifest in the final disposition 
of confirmed sinners, we find His majestic equity and infinite 
rectitude and righteousness towering above the dreadful mis­
conceptions and fabrications devised by the imaginations of 
men—travesties that have marred the centuries, first under 
pagan, then Catholic, and finally under Protestant hands.
I. Multiple Terms Affirm Destruction, Perishing, Extinction
1. 
English Translations Signify Utter “Destruction.” 
—Like the inspired penmen of the Old Testament, the New 
Testament writers used the strongest terms at their command to 
assert a total bringing to nought, or ultimate excision, both of 
evildoers and of Satan, the source of evil, and of his fallen angels. 
Many of these New Testament terms, it is to be noted, are 
borrowed from the Greek Septuagint translation of the Old 
Testament, likewise distinctly declaring the total extinction,
486
FINAL DISPOSITION OF THE WICKED
487
or absolute suppression and abolition of the wicked. Thus we 
are led dependably into the Greek equivalents.
But let us begin with the simplest and most elemental 
evidence. Here are some twenty of the most common expres­
sions, as they appear in the English Authorized Version trans­
lation, with sample supporting texts. Observe the scope and 
comprehensiveness of the coverage, consistently stressing total 
obliteration. 
Here 
are 
the 
leading 
ones, 
alphabetically 
arranged:
Blot Out of Existence.—Heb. 9:26; Rev. 5:5; 18:21.
Bring to Nought.—1 Cor. 1:19.
Cast Away, Cast Off.—Matt. 13:42, 48, 50; John 12:31.
Consume, Devour Utterly.—Matt. 3:12; 13:30, 40; 2 Thess. 2:8; 
Heb. 12:29; Rev. 18:8.
Crush.—Rom. 16:20.
Cut Off, Cut Down.—Matt. 3:10; 7:19; Luke 13:7, 9; John 15:2; 
Acts 3:23; 23:13, 31; Rom. 11:20, 22, 24.
Death.—Rom. 5:20; 6:21, 23; 7:5; Rev. 21:8.
Destroy.—Matt. 
10:28; 27:20; Rom. 6:6; 
7:6 
(1 Cor. 
1:19); 
2:6; 
5:5; 15:24, 26; Gal. 5:15; 1 Thess. 5:3; 2 Thess. 1:9; 2:8; 
1 Tim. 6:9; 
2 Tim. 1:10; Heb. 2:14; 1 John 3:8.
Devour.—Heb. 10:27; Rev. 11:5; 20:9.
Die.—John 5:24; 6:50; 8:24; Rom. 7:6, 10; 8:13; 1 Cor. 15:22, 32; 
Eph. 2:1, 5; Phil. 2:27; 1 Peter 2:24.
Drown.—1 Tim. 1:19; 6:9; 2 Peter 3:11, 12.
Fall.—Matt. 7:27; Luke 6:49.
Found 
No More.—Rev. 
18:21.
Grind to Powder.—Matt. 21:44; Luke 20:18.
Kill Outright, Put 
to Death.—Matt. 10:28; 21:41; 22:7; Mark 
12:9; Luke 19:27; John 10:10; Rom. 7:11; 8:13; 2 Cor. 3:6; Col. 3:15; 
Rev. 2:23.
Lose Life.—Matt. 7:13; Mark 4:38; John 11:42; 17:12; Acts 8:20; 
Rom. 9:22; Phil. 3:19; 2 Thess. 2:3; 1 Tim. 6:9; 2 Peter 2:1, 2; 3:7, 16; 
Rev. 17:8, 11.
Never See Life.—John 3:36; 5:40; Acts 13:46; 1 John 3:15; 5:12. 
Overthrow.—Luke 1:52.
Perish.—Acts 13:41; 1 Cor. 3:17; Gal. 6:8; 2 Peter 1:4; 2:12; Rev. 
11:18.
Root Out.—Jude 12.
Ruin.—Matt. 7:27; Luke 6:49; 2 Cor. 10:8; 13:10.
Swallow Up.—1 Cor. 15:54; 1 Peter 5:8.
Throw Down.—Rev. 
18:21.
Vanish Away.—Heb. 8:13.
488
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
These are, of course, all English translations. So, let us 
turn next to the original Greek terms, and seek out their 
exact meanings. These are likewise listed alphabetically. But 
we should first note the observation of a noted Anglican 
scholar of a generation back, who likewise made a list and then 
an analysis.
2. 
Constable’s Considered Supporting Conclusions.— 
While various men have developed similar lists,1 one of the 
most scholarly analytical tables of the leading Greek terms by 
which the New Testament describes the future punishment 
of the wicked, either by way of “infliction or deprivation,’’ 
is given by Canon Henry Constable, Prebendary of York, in 
his Duration and Nature of Future Punishment (6th ed., 
London, 1886, pp. 58, 59). Here he lists thirteen principal 
terms, together with a tabulation of “all the meanings,’’ as 
applied 
to 
each 
term. 
The 
result 
is most 
impressive. 
Constable’s considered conclusion is: “A single glance will 
show that what we understand as the terrible punishment 
of the wicked, viz., their ‘loss of existence,’ is found under 
every one of the above terms” (p. 60).
II. Greek Terms Affirm “Destroy,” “Consume,” “Perish,” 
“Obliterate”
1. 
Leading Greek Terms 
Defined.—While the New 
Testament witness on the ultimate and utter destruction of 
the incorrigibly wicked is in perfect agreement with that of 
the Old Testament,2 there is now a change of language.*
1 One, for example, was Denniston (The Perishing Soul), who lists apollumi, olothreuo, 
exolothreud, diabhtheird, kataphtheirO, cxaleipho, analiskd, aphanizo, ektribd, kathaird, kata- 
ballo, kataluo, kataskapto.—J. M. Denniston, The Perishing Soul (2d ed., 1874), p. 79.
2 An exhaustive philological study of more than fifty roots found in the Old Testament 
Hebrew (with New Testament equivalents) was made by scholarly Dr. Emanuel Petavel, of 
the University of Lausanne, and appears in The Problem of Immortality (1892), Supplement 
VI (“List of Biblical Terms Used to Denote Destruction ), pp. 445-452. These are terms 
used to signify the destruction of animated beings as the ultimate fate of the impenitent. 
They set forth the complete, final obliteration of the wicked, and are accompanied by the 
texts wherein the expressions are found.
3 In the Old Testament such terms as the following are typical: 
C
ut 
off (karath)— 
Ps. 37:9, 34; Eze. 28:16; 
consume (ba'ar)—Mai. 4:1, 3: Ps. 21:9; 
destroy 
(shachalh)— 
Ps. 55:23; 145:20; 
devour, 
burn 
up, 
or 
consume (’akat)—Ps. 21:9; 
perish 
(’abad)—
Ps. 
37:20; 68:10.
HARRY ANDERSON, ARTIST
© 1956 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
Jesus, the Seeking Shepherd, 
Came to Rescue His Wander­
ing Sheep Lost on the Bleak 
and 
Barren 
Mountains of 
Sin, and Restore It to the 
Safety and Life of the Fold.
Therefore a new set of terms appears. Here are the leading 
expressions and their cognates. Note them individually, with 
illustrative texts, and observe their inescapable collective force 
and intent. The selections differ slightly from other lists, but 
the witness is the same. Here are fourteen leading words:
(1) Analisko—to consume, destroy (2 Thess. 2:8).
(2) Apoleia—death, especially by violence, loss of things, ruin, waste 
(Phil. 3:19; 1 Tim. 6:9).
(3) Apollumi—to destroy utterly (23 times), come to an end, ruin, 
to lose utterly, to be utterly and finally ruined and destroyed, cause to 
perish—stronger form of ollumi, to end life, put to death, cause to perish 
(33 times), bring to nought (Matt. 10:28; 21:41; 22:7; Luke 17:27, 29;
489
John 3:16; Rom. 2:12; 2 Cor. 4:3). In all the New Testament there is 
no word that is more distinctly fixed than that of apollumi*
(4) Apothnesko—die out, expire, cease (John 11:16, 26; Rom. 8:13, 
34; Rev. 9:6; 16:3).
(5) Diaphtheird—to spoil throughout, corrupt utterly (Rev. 11:18).
(6) Exolothreud—to destroy utterly, slay wholly, dissolve. In the 
Septuagint it is some eighty limes rendered karath, "cut off” (Acts 3:23; 
cf. Gen. 17:14; Ex. 30:33; 31:14).
(7) Katakaio—to burn up, or burn down (Matt. 3:12; Luke 3:17).
(8) Katanaliskd—to consume wholly or thoroughly 
(intensive of 
analisko, 2 Thess. 2:8) (Heb. 12:39).
(9) Katargeo—to render inactive, idle, bring to nought, make void, 
abolish (2 Thess. 2:8). When the unquenchable fire burns out, and the 
undying worm ceases, death itself is destroyed (katargeo) (1 Cor. 15:26).
(10) Kolasis—punishment, cut off. A result, not a process (cf. Matt. 
3:10; Luke 3:17).
(11) Olethros (olothreutes)—death, ruin, that which causes death 
(2 Thess. 1:9).
(12) Phtheird 
(kataphtheiro)—to 
deprave, 
mar, 
spoil, 
corrupt 
(1 Cor. 3:17).
(13) Phlhora (diaphthora)—corruption, spoiling, destruction (Acts 
2:27, 31; Gal. 6:8).
(14) Thanatos—extinction of life, death by judgment of court, or 
judgment of God against sin (the second death, Rev. 20:6, 14; 21:8) 
(Rom. 6:21, 23).
These Greek words—the main terms and their cognates 
—involving penal punishing to a greater or less degree, and 
for a longer or shorter period, always connote the ultimate 
loss of life, final and complete termination of being. They 
all mean to end life or to take life, to cause to cease to be.
2. 
Not One in List Implies Eternal T
or
ment.—Death, 
destruction, perishing, perdition, are thus seen to be virtually 
interchangeable terms. These terrible words are used frequently 
by both Paul and John. But not one term in this entire tabula­
tion implies the idea of eternal torment. The most frequently 
used words for “destroy” and “destruction” are the verb 
apollumi and the noun apoleia. John uses the verb in the 
pre-eminent “John 3:16” (“should not perish”) verse. Paul
* Dr. R. F. Weymouth, _ previously mentioned Greek authority, 
in a statement in 
1870 to the editor of the English Independent, declared: 
“We maintain that its meaning 
[that of apollumi] is always to destroy, to cause to perish, and in the middle voice to perish, 
to cease to be.”—From author’s authorized release to Dr. E. Petavel, in The Problem of 
Immortality (1892), supplement No. XIV, p. 489. (Italics in original.)
490 
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
FINAL DISPOSITION OF THE WICKED
491
uses the noun in Philippians 3:19—“whose end is destruction.” 
And the same Greek word is translated “perdition” in Philip­
pians 1:28. Thus “perdition” is equivalent to “destruction,” 
and these in turn are equated with “perishing” and being “lost” 
(2 Cor. 4:3).
The end of the wicked is sufficiently terrible without 
adding, from pagan sources, what God has not included. “The 
wages of sin is death” (Rom. 6:23), and the end of sin and 
incorrigible man is utter and final destruction. An illumi­
nating confirmation of this appears in John 11, in Caiaphas’ 
statement: “It is expedient for us, that one man should die 
[apothnesko, “expire,” “die out”] for the people, and that 
the whole nation perish [apollumi, “be utterly destroyed”] not” 
(John 11:50).
In John’s mind the term “die” bore the same meaning 
as to “perish” or suffer “destruction” (apollumi).1’ That is the 
over-all witness of the Greek. But let us note the leading terms 
in greater detail.
III. Weymouth’s Devastating Charge of Manipulated Meanings
After more closely examining the full force of six of 
the strongest Greek terms, all signifying ultimate and total 
destruction, the significance of the classic charge of Greek 
authority Dr. Richard F. Weymouth—appearing at the close 
—will become apparent. But first let us probe into six of the 
strongest words:
(1) 
“Apoleia”: 
Utter Loss 
of 
Existence.—As to the 
fate of the wicked, no other expression is more common or 
emphatic than apoleia—the sentence pronounced upon all who, 
having heard the summons to repentance and faith in Christ, 
have resisted in defiance. Christ said, “Broad is the way, that
6 See, for example, Dr. R. F. Weymouth’s “Philological Study of the Meaning of 
the Greek Verb ApollumiI,” appearing by authorization of the author in Petavel’s The Prob­
lem of Immortality (1892), pp. 489-495.
492
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
leadeth to destruction [apoleian]” 
(Matt. 7:13). And Paul 
speaks similarly of “vessels of wrath fitted to destruction 
[apoleian]” (Rom. 9:22). This is the destruction forever of 
“body and soul”—utter and final ruin, which will never be 
reversed. It is the second death, from which there is no return.
No word in the Greek tongue is more significant of the 
utter loss of existence than apbleia. This various lexicons 
attest. Thus Peter, in rebuking the perfidy of Simon Magus, 
who sought to purchase the power of God with money, was 
met by Peter’s declaration, “Thy money perish [apoleian] 
with thee” (Acts 8:20)—literally, “Thy money go with thee 
to destruction.” Such will be the end of the wicked.
(2) 
“Apollumi”: Destroy Utterly, Kill, Slay.—Along­
side the Greek noun {apoleia) is the verb apollumi, used to 
signify the punishment God will inflict upon wicked men and 
demons. It is to destroy utterly, cause to perish, kill, slay, be 
undone. The fundamental thought is loss, ruin, perish, to 
come to an end. Apollumi is five times applied in Matthew 
to persons: When Herod attempted to take the life of the 
infant Jesus 
(Matt. 2:13); when the Pharisees plotted to 
deprive Jesus of life when He had grown to manhood (Matt. 
12:14); when the lord of the vineyard decreed death to 
the unfaithful husbandman 
(Matt. 21:41); when the king 
punished with death the slaying of his servants (Matt. 22:7); 
when Christ solemnly declared that God can “destroy both 
soul and body in hell” (Matt. 10:28). (Cf. Mark 9:22; John 
10:10.)
The same verb is used seven times in Luke: (a) To take 
away life from man (Luke 6:9; 9:56); (b) the universal death 
produced by the Flood (Luke 17:27, 29); (c) the plots of 
the enemies of Christ against His life (Luke 19:47); (d) the 
decree of death to the unfaithful husbandmen (Luke 20:16); 
(e) the wicked spirits, meeting with Christ, filled with terror 
lest He should have come, before they anticipated, to destroy 
them (Luke 4:34). (Cf. 1 Cor. 15:18; 2 Peter 3:6.)
FINAL DISPOSITION OF THE WICKED 
493
In ten of these passages reference is to loss of existence 
here; in the other two it is loss of the eternal hereafter. For 
this second loss of life, the second and eternal coming death, 
Hell 
(Gehenna), has been provided. The lost will there suffer 
complete destruction. There the devils will also be visited 
with the loss of the existence to which they desperately cling. 
Such utter blotting out is a fearful thought to these fallen 
angels—an obliteration they know to be their inevitable doom.
(3) “Aphanizo”: Disappear, Vanish Out of Existence.— 
Brief mention must be made of three other Greek terms relative 
to future punishment. The first is aphanizo. Thus Paul, warn­
ing Jewish hearers at Antioch, says, “Behold, ye despisers, and 
wonder, and perish [aphanizo]” (Acts 13:41)—meaning disap­
pear, vanish utterly, to be heard of no more. This is the term 
used by James when speaking of the transitoriness of this pres­
ent life (James 4:14), and also by Paul to describe the consum­
mation of retribution, when the wicked rise from their graves 
to see what they have rejected, and marvel at their folly 
(Luke 13:27-29), and then, like a “vapour” that “vanisheth 
away [aphanizo],” pass out of existence, disappear (James 4:14).
(4) “Phtheiro”: Destroy by Depriving of Existence.— 
Another is phtheiro—destroy, corrupt, defile, used to express 
future punishment, in two senses, to deprave and corrupt, and 
to destroy by depriving of existence. “If any man defile 
[phtheiro] 
the temple of God, 
him shall 
God 
destroy 
[phtheiro]”—the same Greek word 
(1 
Cor. 
3:17). 
The 
first is the sinner’s guilty act; the second is God’s punishment 
hereafter by destruction.
(5) 
“Diaphtheiro”: 
Intensified 
Form 
of 
Destroy 
Utterly.—In its composite form (diaphtheiro) this verb com­
bines the same two senses and intensifies their force. It signifies, 
“to destroy utterly,” and “kill,” as well as lead astray and cor­
rupt. In the Apocalypse it is used to describe the future punish­
ment where John says that God will “destroy [diaphtheiro]
494
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
them which destroy the earth” (Rev. 11:18)—the same verb 
in both cases. (See also 2 Peter 2:12.)
(6) 
“Ex
o
l
o
t
h
r
eu
o”: 
U
t
t
er 
D
est
r
uct
ion 
by 
D
ea
t
h.—
 
Another Greek verb and noun for “destroy” and “destruction,” 
exolothreud, and olethros, signify utter destruction by death. 
Thus, “Every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be 
destroyed [exolothreud] from among the people” (Acts 3:23), 
and the wicked “shall be punished with everlasting destruc­
tion [olethros] from the presence of the Lord” (2 Thess. 1:9; 
1 Thess. 5:3; 1 Tim. 6:9).
That is a cross section of the basic testimony of the Greek. 
Little wonder that the illustrious Dr. Weymouth, of Mill Hill, 
master of the Greek text of the New Testament, editor of The 
Resultant Greek Testament, and translator of The New 
Testament in Modern Speech, strikingly declared in an author­
ized published statement:
“My mind fails to conceive a grosser misinterpretation of language 
than when the five or six strongest words which the Greek tongue pos­
sesses, signifying ‘destroy/ or ‘destruction/ are explained to mean main­
taining an everlasting but wretched existence. To translate black as 
white is nothing to this.” *
IV. Succinct Summary of Over-all Evidence
We now tersely summarize our findings:
(1) 
There is no principle in Scripture that demands the 
perpetual existence of the damned or the indestructibility of 
the individual incapable of becoming eternally holy and 
happy. Eternal, conscious suffering not only is repugnant to 
the moral sense of man but is utterly opposed to the revealed 
portrayal of the love and justice of God. Moreover, there 
would have to be indestructible life for the endurance of end­
less torments. But as the wicked do not possess such life, 
there could not automatically be endless torments for them. 
And the Infinite Power which can and did create also can 
and will discreate.
a Quoted in Edward White’s Life in Christ (3d ed., 1878), p. 365.
HARRY ANDERSON, ARTIST 
© 1950 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
The Saviour Points the Way to Life. He Does Not Want Any to Die. He Is the
Complete Saviour.
(2) 
The punishment of the wicked is irremedial and de­
finitive, and in that sense eternal. But the expressions “eternal 
punishment,” “unquenchable fire,” et cetera, mean, basically, 
that there will be no deliverance, no revival or ultimate res­
toration of the wicked. They will absolutely cease to be. The
495
496
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
point is not the nature of the fire but of what is in the fire. 
The “first death” does not shut out the hope of being brought 
to life again, but the “second,” or “eternal, death” does. The 
“lake of fire,” which is the “second death” (Rev. 20:14, 15), 
puts the period at the end to the dying life of the obstinate 
sinner. It marks the final suppression of all life. It is the point 
of no return.
(3) Ordinary fire might be quenched before it has en­
tirely consumed what it is reducing to ashes. “Unquenchable 
fire” cannot be put out before it destroys utterly. But the fire 
does not continue on after having burned out, and the victim 
does not escape, since he is destroyed. Such fire is thus the sym­
bol of total destruction. Far from indicating eternal torments, 
it sets forth inextinguishable destruction.
(4) There will, of course, be accompanying suffering, 
proportionate to the demands of the just judgment of God— 
then eternal cessation of being, in obedience to the requisites 
of divine justice and righteous law. The suffering is but a pre­
liminary phase of the total punishment.
(5) By the word “annihilation” (played up by antago­
nists of Conditionalism), if used, is simply meant the extinction 
of the conscious life or personality and the termination of all 
of its faculties. Death always designates destruction. The sin­
ner leads a hopelessly dying life, ending finally in the “second 
death,” which is complete and determinative. When the ruin 
is complete it puts an end to the existence of the sinner. 
Therein is the blended mercy and justice of God. The punish­
ment of the wicked involves not only death but loss of eternal 
life and denial of Immortality. The punishment is not merely 
negative, a failure to receive the reward of life; it is positive, 
a punishment for sin and deprivation of life.
(6) The elimination of evil and evildoers by way of ex­
tinction is thus seen to be in conformity with the declarations 
of Scripture, the dictates of reason, and the demands of equity. 
And the very nature and integrity of God, as immaculate holi­
ness and the personification of almighty infinite power, imply
FINAL DISPOSITION OF THE WICKED
497
that He will not tolerate evil in His universe forever. That 
He has plainly disclosed.
Note this cumulative documented series and its climax. 
Satan and his cohorts will be destroyed (Rom. 16:20; Heb. 
2:14, 15; cf. Gen. 3:15). The “lawless one” will be brought to 
nought (2 Thess. 2:8). The great rebellion will be suppressed 
(Rev. 19:20; cf. Dan. 7:11, 26). There will be no more curse 
(Rev. 22:3). Death will be abolished (2 Tim. 1:10; 1 Cor. 15: 
26; Rev. 21:4; cf. Isa. 25:8). Death will forever lose its sting 
(1 Cor. 15:55, 56). Death and Hades join Satan in the abyss 
of destruction—the “lake of fire and brimstone” (Rev. 20:14). 
Sinners are no more. That is the ultimate faith of the irrecon- 
cilables.
But God will be all in all to those who survive the scru­
tiny of the final judgment (1 Cor. 15:28), and the redeemed 
will live on in glorious triumph forevermore (Matt. 25:46). 
Evil will then have disappeared, and grace will “much more” 
abound (Rom. 5:20). It is the end of sin. There will thus be 
a clean universe forever.
CHAPTER 
TWENTY-EIGHT
Summing Up the Case for 
Biblical Conditionalism
I. Conditionalism Accentuated and Enforced in New Testament
1. 
Complete H
armony Betw
een T
estaments.—Immor­
tality, set forth as conditional in the Old Testament, is even 
more conspicuously declared to be conditional in the New. 
The later innovation of the inherent continuity and inde­
structibility of the human soul, introduced into the Christian 
Church in a time of developing apostasy, finds no support in 
Christ’s personal teaching or in the subsequent apostolic the­
ology set forth in the New Testament.
On the contrary, the New Testament completely sustains 
the uniform position of Moses and the prophets, giving it 
precision, amplification, finality, and majesty. And it is of 
more than passing interest that, in so doing, the New Testa­
ment often borrows the terms employed in the Septuagint 
translation to bring over into the Greek the corresponding 
words and intent of the original Hebrew, as pertains to this 
issue. It thus forms an invaluable connecting link between the 
Old and the New in this specific field.
Like the Old Testament, the New proclaims the eternity 
of God but has nothing to say of any innate, inalienable Im­
mortality possessed by man. Neither the term nor the thought 
can be found between Matthew 1 and Revelation 22. Immor­
tality results from personal faith in the personal power and 
provision of Almighty God, who has purposed and provided 
Immortality for man as a gift through Christ—but on clearly
498
enunciated conditions. The redeemed, righteous, and obedi­
ent shall live; the ungodly, obstinate sinners shall be com­
pletely destroyed (2 Thess. 1:9; cf. Ps. 92:9). That is the gist 
of Conditionalism.
2. 
Immortalization Accentuated and Amplified in New 
Testament.—This important addition, however, is to be noted. 
In the New Testament the horizons are definitely widened and 
the foundations more firmly buttressed and expanded. The path 
to the grave becomes brighter and more luminous as the gos­
pel day begins to dawn. Eternity of life for the one, and eter­
nity of ultimate nonexistence for the other, outlined in the 
Old Testament, is more fully revealed and accentuated in the 
New.
Jesus, supreme Authority and Witness of all time, as con­
cerns man, not only upholds but intensifies and delimits the 
conditions of immortalization. Man becomes immortal only 
by grace, assured through faith in Christ and His righteous­
ness, which is first imputed and then imparted to the believer. 
Then, upon Christ’s return, comes glorification and realized 
immortalization for the righteous.
This is the uniqueness of the gospel—that Jesus offers in 
and through His own person the sole means whereby a man 
may obtain righteousness and then Immortality. It is not 
man’s inherently. Christ’s expiatory death gives assurance of 
divine pardon, and the pledge of imperishable life becomes 
the portion of all who unite themselves to the risen, trium­
phant Christ by faith. Such is the fundamental offer of the 
New Testament and the declared aim of the gospel. This was 
the message still proclaimed by Christ after His resurrection, 
shortly before His parting commission and ascension. Here is 
John’s record: “These are written, that ye might believe that 
Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye 
might have life through his name” (John 20:31).
There it is, compressed into a single sentence. In this cli­
mactic passage, life is used in its full sense and force—life at 
the highest level, life that is to be never ending and all em­
SUMMING UP THE CASE FOR BIBLICAL CONDITIONALISM 499
500
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
bracing; life that will be imperishable, life based on belief in, 
and acceptance of, Christ’s offer of eternal life. That again is 
the essence of Conditionalism.
3. Immortality an Acquisition, Not Inherent Posses­
sion.—“Life” in the New Testament means actual life, anu 
“death” means the diametric opposite of life—the depriva­
tion of all life, the end of all activity, the cessation of all indi­
vidual faculties. Death, without any escape or resuscitation— 
absolute death, four times called the “second death”—termi­
nates in the complete cessation of being of the wicked. It is the 
end of the recalcitrant human entity. Christ came that “who­
soever believeth in him should not perish [apollumi, “be ut­
terly and finally destroyed,” “brought to nought”], but have 
everlasting life” (John 3:16). That is the matchless provision 
of the gospel.
If one can “perish,” obviously he is not by nature immor­
tal. And if he is not by nature immortal, there is nothing in­
consistent in saying, in conformity with Scripture, that Christ 
must confer Immortality upon man if he is to live forever. 
Consequently all New Testament texts that directly or indi­
rectly state that Christ is our life, and confers eternal life, such 
as John 3:16, confirm the Conditional-Immortality postulate. 
This signifies that true believers, escaping the total destruc­
tion that awaits the impenitent sinner, acquire an imperish­
able and perpetual life through Christ alone. Immortality is 
therefore an acquisition, not an inherent possession. That, 
once more, is the essence of Conditionalism.
4. Contrasting Positions Succinctly Set Forth.—Con- 
ditionalists do not differ from Immortal-Soulists over the fact 
of a future life, but over the nature and source of that life 
and the time of receiving it. “Immortality” has been overlaid 
and loaded down with philosophical speculations and devious 
traditions. Immortal-Soulists insist that death is not an inter­
ruption or cessation of the natural life of man, but is simply 
entrance upon a new and glorified stage in that life. That,
SUMMING UP THE CASE FOR BIBLICAL CONDITIONALISM 501
they insist, was the ancient belief of the nations of antiquity.1
They hold that, instead of terminating at death, the real 
life of man simply intensifies and enlarges into a new sphere 
of activity, either in holiness and happiness, or sin and misery, 
and that man will continue to live on forever by virtue of the 
innate essence of life within him, being sustained by some in­
defeasible power, so as to suffer forever, if incorrigibly wicked.
On the contrary Conditionalists hold that since the Fall 
death terminates the natural life of man, and that the life 
hereafter is not natural, inherited from Adam, but supernat­
ural, received from God. They hold, furthermore, that only 
through the vicarious death and triumphant resurrection of 
Christ is there any resurrection or life whatever for man here­
after—for “if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet 
in your sins. Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are 
perished” (1 Cor. 15:17, 18).
Immortality has thus by Christ been brought within 
reach of rebellious creatures otherwise destined to absolute 
death. In fact, He came to reveal and proclaim the secret of 
immortalization. That is Heaven’s glad tidings for man. When 
once this majestic truth is grasped, it throws a floodlight upon 
all other saving truths. That again is Conditionalism.
5. 
Immortal-Soulism Is Immortality Without a Sav­
iour.—Conditionalists believe in the supernatural resurrec­
tion of the dead, in a general judgment, and in the absolute 
finality of that judgment. They believe in the “second death” 
for the wicked, and thus in the finality of their doom. In con­
trast they believe in the “life everlasting” of the righteous, 
raised through Christ—and that this is the highest and most 
glorious of all possible life, eternal life, the impartation of 
God’s own pure and blessed immortal life, based upon en­
i Presumptive evidence of the Innate Immortality of the soul is often put forth on 
the basis of its general belief among the nations of antiquity. But an appeal to a consensus 
sentium does not constitute proof, any more than does the argument of man’s inner aspira­
tions. The fact that the vast majority once believed the world to be flat did not make it so. 
Universal hunger for Immortality is implanted by God as an incentive to seeking and 
finding immortality. But it must be in God’s way and upon His terms.
502
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
trance into the proffered new and living relationship to Jesus 
Christ.
This, then, is the basic issue—whether we are immortal­
ized by Christ, through the preparatory new birth and subse­
quent resurrection, or whether we are immortal by our own 
natural birth from Adam. In other words, it is whether Im­
mortality, as the “gift of God,” is “eternal life through Jesus 
Christ our Lord” (Rom. 6:23), or whether there is inherent 
Immortality without a Saviour, and His atoning death and 
saving life.
And it should here be stressed (as will be seen in Part 
IV) that the earliest, or Apostolic, Church Fathers maintained 
this Conditionalist position. The doctrinal deviation of one 
segment of the later Fathers was caused by the infiltration and 
acceptance of the Platonic philosophy, received into an in­
creasingly confused and vacillating church. And, at the same 
time, the Platonized philosophy of the Alexandrian Jews 
added the pressure of its divergent weight upon the faltering 
theology of the Fathers. There was thus a dual pressure that 
proved overwhelming to a growing majority. A large segment 
of Christianity succumbed, and Conditionalism went into vir­
tual eclipse for centuries.
6. 
Conditionalism 
Is Positive, 
Not N
egative.—Again, 
Conditionalism is a positive, not a negative, position and pro­
vision. It is to be emphasized that Conditionalists hold Im­
mortality for the good alone to be a fundamental proviso of 
the gospel. Thus the apostle John says, “He that doeth the 
will of God abideth for ever” (1 John 2:17). This gives the 
basis of distinction and the assurance of the permanence of 
the obedient. Sin, on the contrary, leads to disintegration and 
ruin, while sowing to the Spirit leads to the reaping of “life 
everlasting” (Gal. 6:8).
To view Conditionalism as largely a question of the final 
future punishment of the wicked is to miss its real significance. 
That is merely looking at the reverse side of the pattern. The 
glorious provision of the more abundant life is its central con­
SUMMING UP THE CASE FOR BIBLICAL CONDITIONALISM 503
cept, its positive motivating principle. That is the heart of 
Conditionalism.
7. More Gained Through Christ Than Lost Through 
Adam.—There is yet another angle that must not be missed— 
the justice of God, blended with His goodness and mercy, im­
plicit in Conditionalism. The trial of our first parents in Eden 
could not have been made under conditions more favorable to 
a successful outcome. They were swayed by no sinful tenden­
cies, had no compelling habits, and possessed no bent toward 
evil.
But the tragic results of the Edenic test proved that the 
human race was not yet fit for Immortality. If God had not 
purposed to provide eternal life through another probation, 
mankind’s case would have been hopeless. But we came under 
the operation of a marvelous system, a divine provision of 
grace, by which eternal life is offered to us again by a new 
birth, effected through a Second Adam, the reception of the 
righteousness of Christ, and a subsequent resurrection from 
the dead. That was the divine provision and process.
“And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul 
[or being]; the last Adam was made a quickening [life-giving] spirit. 
Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural 
[psuchikon, "possessing animal life”]; and afterward that which is spiritual 
[pneumatikon, belonging to the Spirit]. The first man [Adam] is of the 
earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven. . . . And as we 
have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of 
the heavenly. Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit 
the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption” 
(1 Cor. 15:45-50).
The same eminent apostle adds, “That which thou sow- 
est is not quickened, except it die” (v. 36). Death, as ex­
plained by Inspiration, is a somber but inevitable part of 
this world’s mottled picture. It is therefore plain, from the 
gospel, that we gain infinitely more in Christ than we lost in 
Adam. What we lost in Adam was an earthly Paradise, but 
what we gain through the Second Adam is a celestial Paradise 
forevermore. Christ came not simply to repair the ruin of the
504
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Fall and to bring mankind back in penitence to God but to 
raise lost but ransomed man to a state infinitely higher than 
that of Adam in his first innocency in Eden.
The first Adam had but a potential, contingent life, which 
he forfeited for himself and his posterity under the tempta­
tion and the Fall. But the Second Adam proved Himself su­
perior to the seductions of the great deceiver. He possesses 
absolute sinlessness and righteousness in His own right. And 
this righteousness, along with eternal life, He bestows upon 
His own through the supernatural second birth and a resur­
rection from among the dead. It is first imputed, then actually 
imparted. And this bestowal the great adversary can never 
again take away. Thus Christ said:
“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" (John 10:27, 28).
“Because I live, ye shall live also” (John 14:19).
“I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, 
though he were dead, yet shall he live: and whosoever liveth and believ­
eth in me shall never die” (John 11:25, 26).
That is the glory and the triumph of the gospel. That is 
the gift of God through Jesus Christ. And that is the process 
and the principle of Conditional Immortality.
II. Issues Illuminated Through Significant Series of “Two’s”
Within the New Testament a significant series of “two’s” 
stands forth, augmenting and amplifying the basic teachings 
begun in the Old Testament. These complete the unique testi­
mony of the Word on the two worlds, two Adams, two progeni­
tors, two births, two covenants, two classes, two kingdoms, two 
advents, two lives, two deaths, two resurrections, two ways, 
and two eternal destinies—the irrevocable endings of these 
divergent ways.
Comparisons and contrasts are introduced by Christ and 
His apostles that throw a floodlight of understanding on this 
question of the origin, nature, and destiny of man. A
SUMMING UP THE CASE FOR BIBLICAL CONDITIONALISM 505
survey of the inevitable implications of this series is de­
sirable, because the traditional concept of the continuing per­
sistence of a single, unending life—an innately, indefeasibly 
immortal life for all men—has tragically blurred or made 
void those distinctions so sharply drawn in Holy Writ that 
otherwise would have remained transparently clear.
It seems to have been the studied aim of human philoso­
phy to ignore or obscure these distinctions or to mystify and 
confound them. And the medieval papal church and the 
Protestant churches that followed in her footsteps here, have 
so molded their creeds and fashioned their theologies as to 
perpetuate this confusion. It is therefore incumbent upon us 
to re-examine this provocative series given to guide us.
This additional factor should, however, be noted at the 
outset. The divine intimations of restoration, early given to 
man to keep the race from utter demoralization and discour­
agement, in time became distorted by darkened minds into 
perverted postulates regarding the soul. These were thence­
forth passed on by tradition from generation to generation. 
This is obviously the origin of those twisted notions of the fu­
ture state that came to prevail throughout the ancient pagan 
world.
Finally they brought division and ruin to the faith of the 
Jewish church through their adoption. This occurred shortly 
before the proclamation of the gospel of Christ began, which 
was designed to restore the purity of revealed truth and the 
radiance of inspired light and to put the darkness of perver­
sion to flight. Pressured by hopes and fears, men had given 
free rein to their imaginations, thus distorting the divine 
provisions into fanciful notions and fallacious theories con­
cerning the soul, both here and hereafter. Now note this 
Biblical series of two’s:
1. 
Two W
orlds: 
T
emporal 
and 
Eternal.—As to the 
two worlds, the first one is graphically described in Genesis 1 
and 2. Upon creation it was pronounced “very good” (Gen. 1: 
31), in accordance with its nature. But its nature, cursed be­
506
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
cause of the fall and sin of man, became dominantly material 
and earthly. Death and decay came to characterize this present 
order.
Then progressively, first in the Old Testament and next 
in the New, there is revealed a better, more glorious world to 
come—eternal in nature and structure, under the divine order, 
and fitted to continue forever (Heb. 13:14). It is specifically 
called the “world to come” (Mark 10:30; Luke 18:30; Heb. 
2:5; 6:5). It is the “better country,” the “better land,” de­
sired by the patriarchs of old (Heb. 11:16).
And it is here tied in inseparably with “eternal life,” or 
“life everlasting,” for its ransomed citizens. Thus, “The things 
which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not 
seen are eternal” (2 Cor. 4:18).
The forecast and nature of this “world to come” were but 
gradually unfolded in the Old Testament. Isaiah prophesied of 
the new earth that God had promised to create (Isa. 65:17). 
It would supersede the old, and remain forever (Isa. 66:22). 
But in the New Testament, Peter tells more explicitly of the 
coming “new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness” (2 Peter 
3:13).
The glories of the second Paradise, of which the Edenic 
first was a type, are still more fully and clearly unfolded by 
the seer of Patmos. Here in the Revelation, John portrays the 
establishment of this “new earth,” to come after the present 
earth has “passed away” (Rev. 21:1)—a new earth reserved 
exclusively for the immortally redeemed, with its essential 
tree and water of life (Rev. 22). And this “better country,” 
with its immortalized inhabitants, remains forever.
2. 
Two Adams: 
T
he N
atural, T
hen 
the Spir
itua
l.— 
Next are the two Adams. The first man was formed out of the 
“dust of the ground” (Gen. 2:7). He was the highest and no­
blest of all earthly creatures. Yet he was essentially earthly— 
as he soon proved himself to be, and as his very name, “Adam,” 
indicates. He “became a living soul” (v. 7), endowed with 
life like the animals beneath him. But he differed from the
SUMMING UP THE CASE FOR BIBLICAL CONDITIONALISM 507
brute creation in that he was endowed with a capacity for a 
higher life—the unending life of the spiritual world beyond, 
as intended for him by his Creator.
But this could only be secured by becoming established 
in holiness, without which he could neither retain Paradise 
nor enjoy it. Tested, and failing through sin, and thus prov­
ing unworthy of the boon prepared for him, he sank to the 
condition of a perishable earthly creature. And as such he be­
came the progenitor of an earthly mortal posterity. “That was 
not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and 
afterward that which is spiritual” (1 Cor. 15:46). Another 
Progenitor was needed.
Then came the Second, or Last, Adam (1 Cor. 15:45-47), 
born of a woman, yet begotten of God. He was the Son of man, 
yet was the Son of God. He was both divine and human— 
Heaven’s provided link between this lower world of darkness 
and death and that higher world of light and life, of which 
He is the designated Lord. “In all points tempted like as we 
are, yet without sin” (Heb. 4:15), He overcame where Adam 
fell, dying as a member of the human family for the redemp­
tion of man, yet possessed of absolute, original Immortality 
in His own right, which could not be lost, and being made 
perfect through suffering, “he became the author of eternal 
salvation unto all them that obey him” (Heb. 5:9).
And to “as many as received him,” He gives “power to 
become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his 
name” (John 1:12). That is God’s provision for the redemp­
tion of man and the restoration of his forfeited life.
3. 
Second Adam: Progenitor of Immortal Race.—As 
noted, the first Adam was the progenitor of a race fallen like 
himself—earthly, carnal, sinful, mortal. It is incontestably 
clear that Adam’s descendants could not therefore inherit 
from him an Immortality which he did not himself possess, 
and which because of his fall he failed to secure for himself. 
But the Second Adam is the progenitor of a race who, trans­
formed into His likeness, are pure in heart and spiritual in
508
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
nature, and who are to inherit from Him His own Immortal 
Life at His second advent. Though now subject to physical 
death, they will, in due time, enter upon that “inheritance 
incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, re­
served in heaven for you, who are kept by the power of God 
through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last 
time” (1 Peter 1:4, 5).
He, then, is our spiritual progenitor.
4. Two Bir
ths: 
First 
Fleshly, 
Second Spir
itual 
and 
Eternal.—There are thus two births, or begettings. No child 
of Adam can inherit eternal life except he be born (begotten) 
“again” (anóthen, “by divine power”) from “above,” from 
Heaven (cf. John 3:3).
“That which is born [begotten] of the flesh is flesh; and 
that which is born [begotten] of the Spirit is spirit. ... Ye 
must be born again” (vs. 6, 7).
From Adam we inherited a mortal, transitory life. For a 
life beyond, we must have a life ingenerated by the Holy 
Spirit—the life provided from Christ. This is the life uni­
formly and repeatedly spoken of by our Lord as “the life 
everlasting”—a life directly from Him, who alone can make 
us “meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in 
light” (Col. 1:12).
5. Two Covenants: First of W
orks, Second 
of Fa
ith. 
—The dispensation of grace brings us under a new covenant, 
or ministration. The first covenant was a covenant of works. 
“This do, and thou shalt live.” It was legal. Its rewards, penal­
ties, and motives were earthly, though elevated. It could 
“never . . . make the comers thereunto perfect” (Heb. 10:1) 
—that is, complete. “For if that first covenant had been fault­
less, then should no place have been sought for the second” 
(Heb. 8:7).
The second, or new, covenant is a covenant of faith. “Be­
lieve on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved” (Acts 
16:31; cf. 13:39). This requires an implicit trust in an omnipo-
SUMMING UP THE CASE FOR BIBLICAL CONDITIONALISM 509
tent Saviour. That was necessary that we might receive end­
less life. The new covenant’s appeals are to the higher nature, 
now begotten within the new man by the Spirit of God. Its 
motives and rewards are spiritual, heavenly, eternal (Hebrews 
7; 8; 9). And it all centers about restoration of the lost life.
6. Two Classes: Carnal and Perishing, H
eavenly 
and 
Abiding.—Mankind is divided into two classes—those destined 
for life and Immortality, and those headed for death and de­
struction. These two classes are always placed in juxtaposi­
tion, comparison being made by contrast. The most familiar 
categories are:
Sinners and saints
Wicked and righteous
Unbelievers and believers
Reprobates and heirs
Enemies of God and friends of God
Foolish and wise
Tares and wheat
Dross and gold
Children of this world and children of the kingdom 
Children of the wicked one (or wrath) and children of God (or 
the Highest)
Those who live after the flesh, and those who live after the Spirit 
The first class is carnally-minded. They live after the 
flesh, are controlled by worldly motives, seek for worldly gain, 
and pursue the things that perish with the using. And when 
the world is finally destroyed, at the last day, they must perish 
with it, along with their treasures, for they have no portion or 
inheritance beyond.
The second class is spiritually-minded, and led by the 
Spirit of God. Through the Spirit they mortify the deeds of 
the flesh (Rom. 8:13). They are controlled by spiritual influ­
ences, seek those things which are above, that are pure and 
eternal. Their choice is the “better part,” which shall never 
be taken away (Luke 10:42). They, and they alone, will have 
eternal life.
7. Two Kingdoms: 
Of God 
and 
of Satan.—There are 
likewise two kingdoms. Briefly, one is of this world, over
510
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
which the great enemy of God and man bears rule, as prince 
of this world (John 12:31; 14:30; 16:11). It is a kingdom of 
evil, disorder, sorrow, darkness, sin, and death. It is a kingdom 
doomed to overthrow, and to utter and irremedial ruin and 
destruction.
The other kingdom is the kingdom of God, of Heaven, 
of our Lord, the Prince of life (Acts 3:15). It is a kingdom of 
light and glory and power. It is a kingdom of righteousness 
and peace and joy in the Holy Ghost (Rom. 14:17); which, 
established by the Son of God as His everlasting kingdom, 
shall endure forever. It is “not of this world” (John 18:36). 
The immortalized saints will possess it (Dan. 7:27).
8. Two 
Advents: 
In 
the 
Flesh, 
and 
in 
Power 
and 
Glory.—The establishment of this kingdom involves two ad­
vents. First, the Son of God came in the flesh, as a babe in 
Bethlehem, at the appointed time, as the Son of man, to live 
among men “made under the law” (Gal. 4:4), to suffer and 
die. And then, victorious over the power of death, He rose 
and ascended on high leading “captivity [aixmaldsian, “body of 
captives,” “multitude of captives,” margin, Eph. 4:8] captive.” 2
Christ gave His own assurance that He will come again at 
the appointed time to gather the fruits of His victory, to raise 
the dead, and execute judgment upon the world, destroying all 
that is vile and sinful and destructible. Then He will make 
all things new. “And unto them that look for him shall he ap­
pear the second time without sin [apart from sin] unto salva­
tion” (Heb. 9:28). And in that “new heavens and a new 
earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness,” Christ shall reign as 
King over His redeemed people forever. So two comings of 
one Saviour and Lord are necessitated.
9. Two 
Resurrections: To 
“Life” 
and 
to 
“Damna­
t
ion.”—Concurrent with the Second Advent comes the resur­
rection of the righteous dead, or sleeping saints (1 Thess. 4:16,
*Cf. Matt. 27:52, 53; Rom. 1:4.
SUMMING UP THE CASE FOR BIBLICAL CONDITIONALISM 511
17; 1 Cor. 15:52). The resurrection is in two installments. 
“They that are Christ’s [come forth] at his coming” (1 Cor. 
15:23). This is given pre-eminence. It is called the “first,” 
the “better,” resurrection, the resurrection unto “life.” This is 
the “hope ... of the dead” in Christ (Acts 23:6).
The “rest of the dead” (the wicked) are not called forth 
until the close of the thousand years (Rev. 20:5). They will 
then come forth to hear the just decision of the judgment as it 
affects them and to perish under the execution of that judg­
ment (v. 13).
So all will “hear the voice of the Son of God,” and all 
who “hear” will live again (John 5:25)—“they that have done 
good” are brought forth unto the “resurrection of life; and 
they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation” 
(v. 29). The latter are consigned to the second death, from 
which there is no recall. Christ will lose none of the trophies 
of His redemptive grace and work (chap. 6:39), but will raise 
each one who believes in Him to “everlasting life”—“raise 
him up at the last day” (v. 44; cf. 11:24, 25).
Paul concurs by declaring that there shall be a resurrec­
tion both of the “just,” and of the “unjust” (Acts 24:15). And 
those who rise to everlasting life will have glorified, incorrupt­
ible, immortalized bodies (1 Cor. 15:42-44, 52-55)—bodies 
changed into the immortal likeness of Christ’s glorious body 
(Phil. 3:21). In dismal contrast will be those brought forth 
to hear their sentence of doom, then to pass, after due punish­
ment, into complete cessation of being.
10. 
Finality 
of Separation Occurs at Second Advent. 
—The final separation of all mankind into the two classes is 
made manifest and actually takes place at Christ’s second com­
ing in transcendent glory. Then the righteous only are resur­
rected from the dead, while the wicked (“the rest of the 
dead”—Rev. 20:5) await their later resurrection turn and 
summons (1 Cor. 15:23). The righteous living will be caught 
up to meet the Lord in the air, at His return (1 Thess. 4:17),
512
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
while the living wicked will be smitten down by death through 
the brightness of His coming (2 Thess. 2:8). Thus, under the 
impressive figure of the “sheep” and the “goats,” so well 
known at that time “he [Christ] shall separate them one 
from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: 
and he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on 
the left” (Matt. 25:32, 33).
Those on the left will, at the appointed time, “go away 
into everlasting punishment: but the righteous [on the right] 
into life eternal” (v. 46), to “inherit the kingdom prepared” 
for them “from the foundation of the world” (v. 34).
Mark it well: These final endings do not represent simply 
two types and conditions of perpetual life (of everlasting hap­
piness, or of eternal misery), but everlasting life on the one 
hand, in contradistinction to everlasting punishment by the 
second death, on the other, from which there is no resurrec­
tion. The first death cuts off from temporal life; the second 
death cuts off from eternal life. It ends all hope of further life 
forever.
11. 
Two Deaths: 
First Death 
for All, Second O
nly 
for 
W
icked.—There are thus the first and second deaths. 
These are given great prominence in the Biblical depiction. 
But confusion and misunderstanding arose from imbibing the 
principles of the Platonic philosophy, which denies the actual­
ity of the first death by assuming that man is an immortal be­
ing. Consequently, for such there is no place for a second 
death.
The natural, or first, death is in consequence of the sin of 
the race rather than as punishment of personal transgressions. 
All die, good and bad alike. To put it another way, we die 
the first time primarily because of Adam’s generic sin. The 
punishment for personal sins is the “second death” (Rev. 20: 
6, 14; 21:8). Or to put it still another way: The portion of the 
saved will be the second life, eternal life, immortal life, while 
the portion of the lost will be the second death of utter de­
struction.
According to the uniform testimony of the Word, the sec­
ond death itself is the final end of the sinner’s career. “Sin, 
when it is finished, bringeth forth death” 
(James 1:15). 
Furthermore, if there be no actual death in the first “death,” 
there can, perforce, be no actual resurrection from the “dead.”
Consequently, all the awe-inspiring depictions of the Sec­
ond Advent—the power and glory, the hosts of resplendent 
attending angels, the opening of the graves, the dead coming 
forth, and the glad reunions for the righteous forevermore— 
are looked upon as simply Oriental figures of speech. They 
are construed to mean nothing more than the emergence of 
the spirit from its encumbering body-prison, released like a 
balloon when the cord is cut that ties it to earth, so that it can 
soar above to the realms of bliss. That is the fanciful picture 
inherited from pagan philosophy and Christian deviation.
12. 
Second 
Death 
Follows 
Second 
Resurrection.— 
The "second death”—named only in the Apocalypse, but re­
ferred to in principle many times elsewhere—is not merely 
the natural death that comes upon all men at the close of this 
life, but is a death coming after the resurrection, restricted to 
those who are adjudged unworthy of eternal life. Four times 
this term “second death” is employed—and invariably placed 
in contrast with life everlasting, 
which is given to the right­
eous. Note them again:
“Be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life. 
. . . He that overcometh shall not be hurt of the second death" (Rev. 
2:10, 11).
“Blessed and holy is he that hath 
part in the first resurrection: on
such the second death hath no power” (Rev. 
20:6).
“And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from 
whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found 
no place for them. And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before 
God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which 
is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which 
were written in the books, according to their works. And the sea gave 
up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead 
which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their 
works. And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the
SUMMING UP THE CASE FOR BIBLICAL CONDITIONALISM 513
17
514
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of 
life was cast into the lake of fire” (vs. 11-15).
Then, after a glowing description of the glories of the 
heavenly Paradise, when God shall “wipe away all tears from 
their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, 
nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the for­
mer things are passed away”—the revelator declares:
“But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and mur­
derers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, 
shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brim­
stone: which is the second death” (Rev. 21:8).
13. 
Second Death 
for Irreclaimably W
icked Only.— 
Now it is undeniable that there can be no second death with­
out a first death. And the second must be an actual death, like 
the first, otherwise there could be no propriety in employing 
the term “secondAs stated, the first death is the death to 
which all earthly creatures are subject. Man alone has a resur­
rection, and another life offered by an omnipotent Saviour 
through a resurrection from the dead. So the first death is the 
common lot of all men from Adam onward, irrespective of 
character or conduct as individuals. But “as in Adam all die, 
even so in Christ shall all be made alive” (1 Cor. 15:22).
The "second death” is the destiny only of those who “neg­
lect so great salvation” (Heb. 2:3), offered through Christ. 
Consequently, the second death is solely for the irreclaimably 
wicked. We who live in the present life are all born to die 
once. But we must be born again, by a heavenly spiritual 
birth, if we are to avoid the second death, and thus live for­
ever. As the first death puts an end to man’s earthly life, and 
he reverts to the dust from which he was formed, so the second 
death precludes entrance upon the life beyond, and remands 
all who fall under its doom of destruction, both “soul and 
body” (Matt. 10:28), to the nonexistence from which they 
were first called.
Whether the process of destruction be longer or shorter, 
according to the just mandates of the judgment, the end of 
the process is death. As Paul says, “whose end [of the “enemies
of the cross,” Phil. 3:18] is destruction” (v. 19), and “the end 
of those things is death” (Rom. 6:21; cf. 1:32). Death is 
therefore the final end of sin, the final issue of the conflict 
between Christ and Satan, the final consummation of the 
cruel experiment of sin, so vividly pictured in the Revelation. 
For the righteous the first death lasts only until the first resur­
rection. For the wicked, the second death, following the second 
resurrection, lasts forever.
14. 
T
he Two W
ays: W
ay of Life, and W
ay of Dea
th. 
—Two opposite “ways” are set forth in Scripture, along with 
the fact that all men tread one or the other. Moses of old was 
called upon to declare to God’s ancient people: “I call heaven 
and earth to record this day against you, that I [the Lord] 
have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: 
therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live” 
(Deut. 30:19).
In verse 15 “life and good” and “death and evil” are tied 
inseparably together in the contrasting couplets. Later, Jere­
miah repeated the same solemn dictum, broadening each into 
a “way”: “Thus saith the Lord; Behold, I set before you the 
way of life, and the way of death” (Jer. 21:8).
But how, it might be asked, could the way of holiness be 
called the “way everlasting,” as the psalmist puts it, in con­
trast with the “wicked way” (Ps. 139:24), if both ways are 
everlasting—one with everlasting holiness and happiness, the 
other everlasting sin and misery? Then the wise man warns, 
“There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end 
thereof are the ways of death” (Prov. 14:12; 16:25). It has 
one end. Next, Ezekiel throws these ways into vivid contrast, 
declaring that “the soul that sinneth, it shall die” (Eze. 18:20), 
but the repentant righteous shall “save his soul alive” (v. 27). 
And he declares: “I have no pleasure in the death of him that 
dieth, saith the Lord God: wherefore turn yourselves, and 
live ye” (v. 32).
Christ Himself picks up and presses this theme of the 
two “ways”:
SUMMING UP THE CASE FOR BIBLICAL CONDITIONALISM 515
516
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
“Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is 
the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in 
thereat: because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth 
unto life, and few there be that find it” (Matt. 7:13, 14).
And as might be expected, Paul likewise stresses the end 
of the two ways:
“For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the 
Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live” (Rom. 8:13).
“Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man sow- 
eth, that shall he also reap. For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the 
flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the 
Spirit reap life everlasting” (Gal. 6:7, 8).
15. 
Destined 
Endings 
of 
the 
T
w
o 
W
ays.—Summariz­
ing: After His resurrection Christ was received up into Heaven 
as a pledge of the coming restoration of humanity, and as 
proof of the eternal union now established between God and 
redeemed man. When Christ appears again, the second time, 
He will raise the sleeping saints and translate the living ones 
(1 Cor. 15:21-24, 51-57). And when the appointed hour shall 
come, the wicked dead—whose names have been blotted out 
of the book of life—will be brought forth from their graves to 
receive sentence and to be consumed by the second death, 
which involves utter destruction of body and soul, along with 
the obliteration of Satan, the malign author of sin, ruin, and 
death (Matt. 25:31, 32, 41, 46)—and all his evil cohorts with 
him.
He and his evil minions and all men and demons who 
follow him will perish utterly in the lake of fire and brim­
stone (Rev. 20:5-15). And all this because of choosing the evil 
and rejecting the good. This involves the extinction of all 
life, the utter end of the individual human personality. Noth­
ing remains but the elements of which it was composed. And 
these disintegrate, and the person becomes as though he had 
not been.
The promised new heaven and new earth will replace 
this age-old, sin-scarred battleground, and a clean universe 
will be brought into being—without sin, sinners, or Satan to
SUMMING UP THE CASE FOR BIBLICAL CONDITIONALISM 517
mar (Rev. 21; 22). The righteous will have all received Im­
mortality and incorruption. Then it is that they will “shine 
forth as the sun” (Matt. 13:43), and “as the stars for ever and 
ever” (Dan. 12:3). Then God will be “all in all,” and the 
glory of the Lord will fill the earth forever (Hab. 2:14; cf. Isa. 
11:9). Those are the ultimate issues, the outcome of the two 
ways of Life and Death.
III. Fundamental Fallacy of Immortal-Soulist Concept
Before closing this chapter let us face this incontestable 
fact frankly: Something happened long ago in the theological 
world. The radical distinction between the natural and the 
supernatural, as pertains to the nature and destiny of man, 
came to be confused and flouted, along with a denial of the 
gulf that is fixed in Scripture between the physical, earthly, 
and transitory, and that which is spiritual, heavenly, and eter­
nal—a distinction explicitly spelled out by Inspiration.
An unwarranted, mystical, allegorical interpretation has 
been imposed upon the pivotal words of Scripture, such as 
“soul,” “death,” “resurrection,” “destruction.” This whole 
area of doctrine has been arbitrarily brought under a specious 
system of allegorization, or spiritualization, borrowed from 
Philo the Jew and Origen the Neoplatonic Christian philoso­
pher. “Death,” instead of being recognized as an unconscious 
sleep, is considered by multiplied millions to be the mystic 
door by which the righteous enter forever upon that higher 
state of existence for which they have been preparing here be­
low.
And as for the irreparably wicked, “death” is likewise 
conceived to be the inexorable door by which the wicked enter 
upon a hopeless state of paralleling eternal life, only in sin 
and misery. To such, “death” is still eternal existence. So to 
the Immortal-Soulist, the “second” death is simply unending 
life in ceaseless sin and irremediable torment. Such contenders 
are completely baffled in attempting to explain the “second
518
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
death” aspect—merely making it unalterable continuance for­
ever, instead of a penalized ending, and thus missing the funda­
mental point of the comparison.
Beyond question, the notion of Innate Immortality 
started somewhere, some time. And history attests that it stems 
back through Protestantism to the older Catholicism, and 
thence back to the early Christian and Jewish apostasies, and 
prior to that back to pagan philosophy—and, before all these, 
back to the original lie of Satan, uttered within the gates of 
Eden. Such is the indelible trail of this delusive fiction that 
has insinuated itself into the teachings of Christianity and has 
established itself as a preponderant belief of both Catholicism 
and Protestantism. But such a lineage is the reason we do not 
hesitate to challenge its validity and to urge its repudiation.
1. 
Dualism Not Part of Divine Plan of the Ages.— 
There is also a related involvement in the Eternal Torment 
dogma. If Satan and his demonic and human followers are not 
to be and cannot be destroyed, then Christ cannot become 
“Lord of all,” nor His kingdom a universal kingdom. In such 
an event, a special segment of His kingdom would have to be 
portioned off, for all eternity, as a special habitation for ene­
mies that He cannot conquer and destroy. He can torment 
them and isolate them, but they can still blaspheme His name 
and defy His power to harm them further—and that forever- 
more. So they say.
Picture the scene: Raging hosts below, with groans and 
blasphemies, living on forever under a pagan dualism spawned 
in Persia of old. But the dualistic concept of Persian Zoroas­
trianism was based on the contention that there are two eternal 
principles (Ormuzd and Ahriman), one eternally good and 
the other everlastingly evil; that these were both without be­
ginning and both without end, and so continue on in eternal, 
unending conflict with each other.
On the contrary, Christian theologians who are propo­
nents of Immortal-Soulism, while holding that there are two 
such opposing principles, and principals, now at war with each
SUMMING UP THE CASE FOR BIBLICAL CONDITIONALISM 519
other, say that only the Godhead had no beginning and was 
eternally existent throughout the eternity of the past. They 
recognize that evil, stemming from Satan as author, is an in­
novation and had a beginning. But they illogically hold that 
now, having begun to be, it must forever remain in being, 
endlessly marring and challenging God’s once perfect uni­
verse. More than that, they maintain, or concede, that God 
Himself cannot put an end to its existence.
That is a tremendously serious charge to make, and one 
that is completely at variance with the Sacred Word, which 
declares that God will finally extirpate all evil from the uni­
verse. What He has created He can destroy. The truth is that 
evil is but a tragic episode—a temporary interlude—in the 
divine, eternal plan of the ages. And as it had a beginning in 
time, so will it end within the confines of time, before the 
aeons of the eternity of the future begin to unroll. Sin is rela­
tively incidental and passing, not integral and perpetual. The 
time will come when it will end. The “lake of fire” will mark 
the exodus of sin and death forever.
Thus the subtle, delusive, dual fiction of Innate Immortality 
and Endless Torment obscures the glory of the gospel and 
weakens its power and appeal (1) by denying to Christ His 
chief glory—the bestowal of life eternal upon the righteous, 
and (2) by denying His ultimate triumph in the destruction 
of all His foes. That is why we stand upon the Bible platform 
of Conditionalism. That is why we are Conditionalists.
PART III
Historical Development of Innate- 
Immortality Concept 
(900 B.C. to the Time of Christ)
Rise of Platonic Postulate and Penetration 
Into Jewry
IMPACT OF GREEK PHILOSOPHY ON EARLY CHRISTIAN CHURCH
(Covering Descriptions for Pictorial Chart I)
1. Threefold 
Origin 
of 
Immortal-Soulist 
Concept.—Pictorial Chart I 
on the following pages affords a compact panoramic view of the battle of the 
centuries over the origin, nature, and destiny of man, extending from 900 b.c. to 
a.d. 600. With rootage in the ethnic religious concepts of India, Persia, and 
Egypt, and embracing Immortal-Soulism with a decidedly pantheistic tinge— 
and involving emanation from the All-Soul, pre-existence, reincarnation, trans­
migration, reabsorption, and Persian Dualism—these concepts penetrated the 
earliest Greek cults and mysteries (Dionysiac, Orphic, and Eleusinian), which 
followed the Greek poets Homer and Hesiod, who also held to the continuing 
persistence of the soul, believed imprisoned in human bodies.
Then follows a series of conflicting schools of Greek speculative philosophy— 
the Ionic, Pythagorian, Eleatic, et cetera—between 640 and 550 B.C., each having 
Immortal-Soulism as the common denominator but infused with varying degrees 
of pantheism, emanation, pre-existence, reincarnation, and Dualism.
2. Platonism—Summit 
of 
Human 
Reasoning.—Next, in reaction, the 
Sophists with their skepticism and the Atomists with their materialism well-nigh 
halted this speculative philosophy. Nevertheless, under Plato, Greek systematic 
philosophy reached the summit of human reasoning on human destiny, yet re­
tained the previous notions of pre-existence and successive incarnations of the 
immortal and indestructible soul, but now with eternal persistence of personality, 
as well as punishment for the wicked.
However, a second reaction set in, spearheaded by Aristotle, who denied the 
theory of pre-existence and reincarnation and decried the persistence of the 
personal or individual immortality concept—with further repudiations by the 
Stoics, Epicureans, and Skeptics. Greek philosophy was thus thrown into a con­
fusion that persisted throughout the Roman writers. It became marked by 
pathetic despair and was eventually recast through eclectic selection and re­
organization into the powerful Neoplatonic School of Philosophy.
3. Penetrates Jewry During Inter-Testament Period.—Meantime, in the 
inter-Testament period two groups of Jewish Apocryphal and pseudepigraphical 
writers appeared, during the last two centuries B.C. and the first century a.d. 
The earlier writers maintained the Conditionalist position of their forefathers— 
and this line culminated in the Conditionalist witness of the Dead Sea scrolls.
The second paralleling group, but appearing fifty years later, reflected the 
Greek survival-of-the-soul concept, prayers for the dead, outright immortality 
of the soul, and denial of the resurrection. This Immortal-Soulist group came to 
climax with the powerful Philo of Alexandria, who allegorized the Old Testa­
ment to bring it into essential accord with Platonic Greek philosophy, with its 
emanationism, pre-existence, reincarnation, unbodied souls, and eternal punish­
ment. And Philo (d. c. a.d. 47) was clearly the precursor of the Neoplatonism 
of the early Christian Era.
4. Christ Implants Conditionalism in Apostolic Ranks.—At that very time 
Christ and the apostles appeared in Palestine, confirming, clarifying, and en­
larging the Conditionalist teaching of the Old Testament, with immortality 
through Christ for the righteous only, bestowed as a gift at the resurrection, and 
with unrepentant sinners to be ultimately destroyed.
Thus there is essential Conditionalist unity and continuity between the Old 
Testament and the New. This view continued intact throughout all the Apostolic 
Fathers, and in a conspicuous line of Ante-Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (Justin, 
Irenaeus, Novatian, Arnobius, Lactantius, et cetera).
5. Innate Immortality Belatedly Infiltrates Church.—Not until c. a.d. 
180 did Athenagoras become the first Christian writer to claim the soul to be 
innately immortal, which Platonic term and concept Tertullian developed into
(Continued on page 528)
523
-1—
900
H—
800
700
AGE-OLD CONFLICT OVER
A BATTLEGROUND OF THE CENTURIES
A THEOLOGICAL TRILEMMA
DEVELOPMENTand PENETRATION 
of IMMORTALITY POSTULATE
Innate Immwtal'Hi
EGYPTIAN SOuLlSnn
Tré ns vmg rJ+ »on
DIONYSIAC .
(Transmigration)
HOMER
HESIOD 
0RPH,C MYSTERIES
(Separate Survival 
( pantf'etsm ini Reincarnation)
of Soul )
ELEUSINIAN MYSTERIES 
ç
(Reincarnation ■ BoJm ?r''S»n) 
^
THEOLOGICAL TRI LEMMA
O CONDITIONAL!ST 
© ETERNAL TORMENTIST 
© UNIVERSAL RESTORATIONIST
o
Designed by Le Roy E. Froom, 19 64
THE HEBREW SCRIPTURES
THE LAW-THE PROPHETS - TH
900
800
700
H-
60G
H—
500
400
-t—
300
H— 
200
MANS NATURE and DESTINY
SCHOOLS OF 
3REEK PHILOSOPHY / 
REACTION
Greek Philosophy's Four Problems
1. Origin of the World 
3. Existence of God 
Z. Na+ure of +He Soul 
4*. Cri+erla of Truth
LYRIC POETS
AESCHYLUS
EURIPIDES
Pindar (incarnation)
SOPHISTS ,
(Haiti Speculative Philosophy)
HALES (Water) 
NAXIMANDER (infinite) 
MAXIMENES (Air) 
ERACLITUS (Fire)
G*ORGI AS 
(De9¿ Ôeeome l:*hmeh)
REACTION
ZENO of CITIUM (MaierialisKc Panlkeism)
SYSTEMATIC philosophy
SOCRATES
STOICS
t°
(Soul as emanated spark)
PYTHAGOREANS
PYTHAGORAS (Pre-existence) 
PHERECYDES (Pantheism)
ELEATICS
XENOPHANES (Pantheism ^ Reincarnation)
PARMENIDES (Pantheism)
ZENO (Preexistence)
ATOM I STS
LEUCIPPUS (Dualism)
DEMOCRITUS (Materialism)
COMPROMISERS
EMPEDOCLES (Dualism ^ TranSmiyratien) 
ANAXAGORAS (Dualism) 
IAMBLICHUS
PLATO
CLEANTHES
CHRYSIPPUS
fte- existence 
Successive Incarnations 
Soul Immortaliti) I} Indestructible 
Recollection et Former Existence
EPlCUREANS(Ett,icil)
“^^EPICURUS
■'»«. (R&rman«nt Cessation)
SKEPTICS
ARISTOTLE
(peripatetics)
PYRRHO
p,
ECLECTICS«.'¿c
ABANOONS:
Personal Imkoatality ¡ 
DENIES i 
PleexiiTencs 
. Reincarnation
JEWISH
C.42S
0
INNATISTS
(Alexandrian Jews)
INTER-TESTAMENT
WRITINGS 
WRITERS CONDITIONALISTo
' • -k * ma 
TOBIT
(WickoJ Annihilai
(OLD TESTAMENT 
CANON CLOSES)
SIRACH
(Unconscious)
 
; 
_
TWO SCHOOLS DEVELOP
400
-I-
300
—I—
200
-4—
IOC)
BC. AD
lOO
200
THEOLOGICAL
TRILEMMA
O
CONDITIONALISM
0
ETERNAL
TORMENTISM
©
UNIVERSAL
RESTORATIONISM
NEW TESTAMENT CANON
A CONDITIONAL
IMMORTALITY
CHRISTIAN
CHURCH
APOSTOLIC FATHERS
CHRIST
ANO THE
APOSTLES
CLEMENT of ROME (u*»orUihja6ift)
IGNATIUS (Sleep)
BARNABAS (Bierna\ Death) 
HERMAS (Wicked Consumed) 
POLYCARP (Resurrection Sole Qoestio 
010 GN ETUS (Terminated) 
DIOACHE
ATHENAGOR
FATAL GAP 
^
 
ONE CENTURY LATE
FROM PLATO 
'
RADICAL DEPARTURES 
FROM APOSTOLIC 
PLATFORM
1« USE Of IMMORTAL SOU
(immortalSad Imponi 
^PSeUDO-CLEMfiKTI
to
P*>L0-
UNIVERSAL
INNATE
IMMORTALITY
RECASTING AND REGROUPING (Eclectic)
To Plato 
(indefeasible Immortalit-g Centers in North Africa
ROMAN 
WRITERS
LUCRETIUS (Eternal Sleep) 
EPICTETUS (Refusion) 
VE RGI L 
(World Sool) 
TACITUS (Fatalism)
CLEMEN
of AUtAHO 
(Rest orati
 
■- 
HORACE (Eternal Sleep) PLINY (fentheism)
MANI LIUS (fWheism) 
OVID (DivineSpork) MARCUS AURELIUS
( Re-absorption) JSB 
(Everlasting Sleep)
CATULLUS(H*mal Night) SENECA (stoic) PLUTARCH
CICERO (Pre existence) 
CATO(0eeth Utter End) JUVENAL(ESlMp)^ 
PAGAN
/ NEO-PLATONI
PATHETIC DESPAIR
PREPONDERANT /
JUBILEES
[ MACCABEES ( PrjH*rs 'for fke'beai')
WISDOM
(Confrad
(
5ooi Survives) 
^
 _ 
ResurrAction AL**<ion««j)
JUDITH
SIBYLLINES
(Man Mortal) 
[.Wicketto takes)
ETHIOPIC ENOCH 
(Wicked to Ashes)
- 
SCHOOL
LUCIUS APULEIUS (WorldSoul) 
NUMENSIUS (Incarnation Puwsl
AMMON I US SACCAS
(hleo-Piston ism)
PLOTINUS
(Emanation Dualism
DEAD SEA SCROLLS j^ck^°c^»^Er*ys*r] 
PORPHY
—- 
r
n
r

 tn
 
iVMronn Disa
ALLEGORIZED O.T.
(tmansTion)
(Pre-existence) 
(Incarnations)
WMACCABEES J0SEPHU5 
‘fcwrKSU
PHILO
__ pp nri in 
u»*ronn Disappears Forever]
SLAVONIC ENOCH 1L tbUKAb 
(Sleepers Called Fortk ¡Wicked Extinguished)
SYRIAC BARUCH (Righteous Sleep ¡ Punishment Terminates)
(IMMORTAL-SOULISM BECOMES PREPONDERANT)
100 
-t—
BC AD 
 
1-----
100 
—I—
200 
—t—
rly Collections 170, General Acceplance 503-397)
TE-NICENE FATHERS 
TRUE 
ESCHATOLOGICAL
OUTLINE
(only occasional voices) o
JSTIN ivrjmär'i POST- NICENE FATHERS
d
'
M
d
l
lactantius (I«w
«-SH). .....
if.i i I 
j v m7r:,.r ra;t
ATIAN 
THEOPHILUS 
NEMESIUS
’OLYCRATES (Life Bestowed)
NOVATIAN
ARNOBIUS
AMBROSE
1PPOLYTUS 
CYPRIAN 
IlNUCfUS FELIX
¡M
im
CHRYSOSTOM
JEROME
ENDLESS 
TORMENT 
of WICKED
FALSE ESCHATOLOGY
^Apostolic Concept Completely Abandoned)
(Fir* Never Consumes, 
Eternal Killing)
AUGUSTINE
THREE
COMPETING-
SYSTEMS
OF
ESCHAT0L06Y
PREVALENT
FROM
NOW
ON
(Inherent Immortality tor All Men 
Conscious Torment- Forever)
BECOMES PREDOMINANT FAITH 
OF DOMINANT CHURCH 
FOR CENTURIES
(Involve* Forced Salvation)
CHOOL
S 
ori gen’s princple
P0OSTRA 
OF ALLEGORIZATION
(Spiritual Resurrection 
-‘“US 
3ml Fi(tura^ive AJvenf)
RESTORATION IS 
CONDEMNED
RETAINED BY 
CATHOLIC CHURCH
OtOYMUS
QREeOHY
.AST STANO OF
PAGAN PHILOSOPHY
FALSE ESCHATOLO&Y
THEODORE of MOPSUESTIA
JUSTINIAN PROSCRIBES RESTORATWMiSM S4A
JULI AN (Apostate) 
(Suppresses Christianity)
1AMBLICHUS (Necromancy)
THE TRILEMMA
( Emanation ; Reabsor|>tion ] 
(Mysticism Union ; Orientalism J
Academy Closed
PAGAN PHILOSOPHY FORBIDDEN BY JUSTINIAN 
529
THREE CONFLICTING SCHOOLS NOW ESTABLISHED
OCONDITIONALISM© ETERNAL TORMENTISM© UNIV. RESTORATION ISM
300
—I—
400 
—I—
500 
—I—
600 
—I---
528
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
a system based on universal Innate Immortality for sinners as well as saints, and 
thus involving Eternal Torment for the incorrigibly wicked—which doctrine is 
simply the continuation of Persian Dualism.
But, in protesting against this dogma of eternal torture (with a fire that 
renews but does not consume as it bums), Origen, the Christian Neoplatonic 
philosopher of Alexandria, while holding the identical universal Innate-Immor- 
tality postulate—derived directly from Plato and indirectly through Philo— 
and now allegorizing the New Testament truths of the resurrection and the 
Second Advent, developed the rival school of the ultimate Universal Restoration 
of all the wicked, which involved the enforced final salvation of all sinners, 
including the devil himself.
6. Eternal-Torment Dogma Ascendant by a.d. 600.—However, it was Ter- 
tullianism, with its Eternal-Torment corollary, that spread relentlessly, later aug­
mented by the powerful pen of Augustine, until it became the dominant position 
on the soul and its destiny. And proportionately Restorationism declined, while 
Conditionalism was now narrowed to a thin line of occasional voices. So by
a.d. 600 the three rival "systems,” or schools, had become established.
But the Conditionalist line, with its fidelity to the Word and its true escha- 
tology, was largely in eclipse until the Protestant Reformation, as was also 
Restorationism (or Universalism) until post-Reformation times. Meanwhile, 
Tertullian-Augustinianism, boldly established on the Platonic (and Philonic) 
platform, prevailed for a thousand years, until the reaction and revival of 
Conditionalism came under the Protestant Reformation.
7. Truth Enters Twilight Shadows.—Such is the significance of this chart. 
Immortal-Soulism was thus clearly conceived and brought forth by pagan philos­
ophy, and adopted first by the Alexandrian Jews, and then accepted by Christians 
in Northern Africa—chiefly Tertullian of Carthage, Origen of Alexandria, and 
Augustine of Hippo, and their respective followers. This subsequently developed 
and continued on into the predominant medieval Roman Catholic position on 
the nature and destiny of the soul. No other conclusion can rightly be drawn 
that accords with the sum total of the facts of history.
Such was the situation as we enter the shadows of the Dark Ages when 
truth was largely silenced for centuries. The emergence is presented in volume 
2, and pictured in Pictorial Chart II.
CHAPTER 
TWENTY-NINE
Greek Philosophy Reaches Summit 
of Pagan Thinking
I. Greek Thinking Exhausts Uninspired Speculative Reasoning
Centuries before the dawn of the Christian Era the Greeks 
developed a civilization surpassing all previous cultures. Their 
language was perfected into the most adequate vehicle ever 
devised for conveying human thought. Their religion, however, 
was a polytheistic personification of the powers of nature, based 
on a semipantheistic concept of the world. Their many gods 
embodied the baser, as well as the nobler, passions of the human 
soul. And there was little concept of God as a personality or of 
sin as an offense against a holy God and involving guilt.
From about 600 b.c. onward philosophy occupied an in­
creasingly dominant place in Greek life, and began to under­
mine credence in the crude polytheism of the past. Such think­
ers as Pythagoras, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, and Zeno well-nigh 
exhausted the realm of uninspired speculative reasoning. The 
philosophy of the fourth century was dominated by Socr
a
tes 
(c. 470-399 B.C.); nevertheless he was executed by the Athenians 
for his “atheism.” His greatest pupil, Pla
to (427-347 B.C.), 
founded the Older Academy. And A
r
ist
ot
l
e (384-322 B.C.), 
pupil of Plato and teacher of Alexander the Great, founded the 
Peripatetic (walking around) School, or Lyceum, in the grove 
of Lycus. These men personified the summit of pagan philoso­
phy. Under them speculative thought provided the loftiest 
pagan philosophy of immortality to appear in all past time.
1. 
Im
pr
in
t
ed 
Im
m
o
r
t
a
l-Sou
l
ism 
on 
W
or
ld 
T
h
o
u
g
h
t.
529
At the Very Zenith of Greece’s Glory, Greek Thinkers Well-nigh Exhausted the 
Realm of Uninspired Speculative Reasoning.
—That the Greeks left their impact upon the world of thought 
—as pertains to the nature, origin, and destiny of man—as no 
other people of the past have ever done, is beyond controversy. 
Both their ideas and their terminology have been heavily 
drafted upon by the makers of early North African Christian 
theology, and prior to that by Philo of the Jews, likewise of 
Alexandria. It should be borne in mind that when Christ came, 
Hellenic thought ruled the world, and that world was a Roman 
world. Its influence has persisted through the succeeding cen­
turies. Such is the larger background.
The doctrine of the Innate Immortality of soul both in 
thought and in phrase, in teaching and in terminology, is thus 
derived directly from Greek philosophy. Never should it be 
forgotten that it was in Greece that the highest pagan develop­
ment of the Immortal-Soulism concept took place. While the 
thought, but not the phrase, was found among the Egyptians, 
both the Platonic Greek teaching and the terminology reap­
peared in Judaism, before, as well as after, the appearance of 
Christ, and even more conspicuously among Christians from 
the second century onward.
530
GREEK PHILOSOPHY REACHES SUMMIT 
531
2. 
Fir
st 
Co
n
fin
ed 
t
o 
Poets 
and 
Ph
il
o
so
ph
er
s; 
N
ever 
G
ener
a
l
l
y H
el
d.—The concept of innate, indefeasible Immor­
tality was the product of the poetry, mythology, and philosophy 
of Greece, however, rather than of its religion. It came through 
its bards and sages, not its priests and prophets. So while such 
speculative thought projected the theory of Immortal-Soulism, 
it never became general or popular, the masses holding to the 
old mythologies. They feared a fatal dissolution, either upon 
death or later. The philosophic presentation was too complex 
and too speculative for popular understanding or acceptance.
3. Ea
r
ly 
T
ea
chin
g 
Portrays 
Joyless 
Aft
er
w
o
r
l
d.—
 
The prevailing attitude was devoid of personal hope. The early 
Hellenic teaching was dim, fragmentary, uncertain, inconsist­
ent. It affirmed a joyless afterworld wrapped in gloom, a dark 
shadow of this world, where men continued to exist as wretched 
shades of their former selves. The issue was, Is death a state of 
utter unconsciousness, or annihilation, or a migration to a bet­
ter world? The ancient Greeks did not think of body and soul 
as did the Egyptians—with continuance of the latter as depend­
ent upon the former.
The separate existence of the soul was the most primitive 
Greek conception. Vague in the time of Homer 
(ninth 
century B.C.), this conception was intensified under Aeschylus 
and Pindar (fifth century). The later doctrine of the transmi­
gration of souls, widely held by other peoples, had no part in 
the concepts of the early Greeks, under Homer and Hesiod. 
The primitive concept of the soul, or ghost, defined it as a sort 
of fine matter, like smoke, which according to Homer separates 
itself from the body at death. The notions of immortality were 
vague, as were those of future rewards and punishments—a 
murky abyss with “gates of iron and floors of brass,” as one, 
phrased it. Their search for immortal life after death was pa­
thetic.
4. Five Stages in Ph
il
o
so
ph
ica
l D
ev
el
o
pm
en
t.—Philos­
ophy in Greece passed through several periods, or stages: (1)
Chart A
Pagan Greek Philosophers on the Immortality Issue
Time Sequence, School of Thought, and Major Position 
on Origin, Nature, and Destiny of Man
1. Preliminary Stage—
Poets, Cults, and Mysteries
Homer (c. 850 B.C.), epic poet—separate survival of depersonalized soul 
Hesiod (8th cent.), epic poet—conscious activity of soul 
Dionysiac cult (transmigration introduced)
Orphic mysteries (pantheism and reincarnation)
Eleusinian mysteries (souls must be released from body-prison)
2. The Ionics (or Milesians)
Thales (c. 640-546 B.C.), founder—"water," first principle 
Anaximander (c. 611-547 B.C.)—"infinite," first principle 
Anaximenes of Miletus (c. 500-c. 428 B.C.)—"air," first principle 
Heraclitus (c. 544-c. 484 B.C.)—"eternal fire," soul an emanated spark
3. The Pythagoreans
Pythagoras (c. 582-496 B.C.)—pre-existence and transmigration 
Pherecydes (6th cent. B.C.)—eternal souls and pantheism
4. The Eleatics (Unity and Continuity); and Heraclitus (in Opposition)
Xenophanes (c. 570-c. 475 B.C.), founder—pantheism and reincarna­
tion
Parmenides (c. 540-c. 470 B.C.)—pantheistic concept 
Zeno of Elea (5th cent.)—pre-existence and alternating life
5. Tragic and Lyric Poets
Aeschylus (525-456 B.C.), tragic poet—judgment 
Euripides (c. 480-406 B.C.), tragic poet—uncertainty 
Pindar (c. 522-443 B.C.), greatest lyric poet—successive incarnations; 
interchangeable immortality
6. Compromise Philosophical Systems (5th cent.)
Empedocles (c. 500-430 B.C.)—dualism, purgation, transmigration 
Anaxagoras (c. 500-428 B.C.)—dualism, dissolution of soul 
lamblichus (d. c. 333 B.C.)
7. The Atomists
Leucippus (fl. 500 B.C.)—philosophical materialism
Democritus (460-355 B.C.)—conscious existence disappears at death
8. The Sophists (halt speculative philosophy)
Gorgias (c. 485-c. 380 B.C.) and Protagoras (5th cent.)—dead may 
become nothing
9. The Systematic Philosophers
Socrates (c. 470-399 B.C.), founder, Socratic method 
Plato (c. 427-347 B.C.), founder, Older Academy 
Aristotle (384-322 B.C.), founder, Peripatetics
10. The Stoics
Zeno of Citium (c. 355-c. 263 B.C.), founder, Stoic School (materialistic 
pantheism)
Cleanthes (c. 304/03-c. 233/32 B.C.), successor 
Chrysippus (281/77-208/04 B.C.)
11. The Epicureans—
Ethical Period
Epicurus (c. 342-270 B.C.), founder—permanent cessation of life
12. The Skeptics
Pyrrho (c. 365-c. 275 B.C.), founder—undermines Immortal-Soulism 
Plutarch (c. A.D. 46-c. 120), biographer and moralist
13. The Eclectics (and the Cynics)
14. The Neoplatonists
Plotinus (c. A.D. 205-270)
532
GREEK PHILOSOPHY REACHES SUMMIT 
533
The Scientific Period, with Heraclitus and Pythagoras (c. 510 
B.C.); 
(2) the Period of Enlightenment, with transition to the 
study of man, under the Sophists (fifth century), and Socrates;
(3) 
the Systematic Philosophers, with Plato and the Academy, 
with Aristotle and his Peripatetics; (4) the later Ethical Period, 
with Zeno of Citium (d. c. 263 b.c.) and the Stoics, Epicurus 
(d. 270 b.c.) and the Epicureans, Pyrrho (third century) and 
the Skeptics, and the Eclectics, with Philo (d. c. a.d. 47); and
(5) finally Neoplatonism, beginning under Philo but developed 
largely under Plotinus (c. a.d. 205-270), and climaxing in the 
Alexandrian Philosophical School of the Church Fathers. We 
will trace these progressively or chronologically. (The accom­
panying Chart A on the opposite page will aid in following 
the sequence and grasping relationships.)
5. 
This Chapter Based on Recognized Authorities.— 
Scholars of note with no position to sustain and no cause to 
advocate (and not holding personally to Conditionalism) have 
thoroughly compassed the teachings of Greek philosophy and 
have come independently to similar conclusions, agreeing that 
the origin, nature, and destiny of man was one of Greek philoso­
phy’s primary concerns. This teaching was interwoven as a 
distinctive thread all through the pattern of their thought. And 
these scholars have left their lifelong studies and analyses on 
record. With characteristic thoroughness such men as Rohde, 
Zeller, Ritter, Preller, Fairbairn, Draper, Charles, Grube, and 
others have written whole books, sets of books, or chapters deal­
ing with this aspect of Greek thought.
Heidelberg University’s Dr. Erwin Rohde’s exhaustive 
study Psyche—The Cult of Souls and Belief in Immortality 
Among the Greeks ran through eight German editions. It is 
priceless as a reference. Berlin University’s Dr. Eduard Zeller’s 
two-volume A History of Greek Philosophy had four German 
editions.1 And his Outlines of the History of Greek Philosophy
1 Dr. Eduard Zeller produced a whole series of volumes—A History of Greek Philosophy 
(two volumes); The Pre-Socratic Philosophy; Socrates and the Socratic Schools; Plato and the 
Older Academy; A History of the Eclecticism in Greek Philosophy; Aristotle and the Early 
Peripatetics (two volumes); The Stoics, Epicureans and Sceptics—which attest the scope of 
this great scholar’s researches.
534
CONDITIONAL!ST FAITH
had thirteen German editions and at least seven American 
printings.
Several chapters in Dr. Andrew Fairbairn’s Studies in the 
Philosophy of Religion and History (including two on “Belief 
in Immortality”), and Oxford’s great scholar, Dr. R. H. Charles, 
in his A Critical History of the Doctrine of a Future Life, with 
its section “Doctrine of the Soul and the Future Life Among 
the Greeks,” are both highly valuable. Mention should also be 
made of sections in Alger, Salmond, and Hudson. Such is the 
cumulative expert evidence available.
For example, according to the penetrating analysis of John 
W. Draper,2 in History of the Intellectual Development of 
Europe, Greek philosophy is tersely summarized as revolving 
around “four Problems: (1) Origin of the World; (2) Nature 
of the Soul; (3) Existence of God; (4) Criterion of Truth.” * 
Such an analysis indicates the necessity of a preliminary survey 
of the various schools of philosophy leading up to Plato, who 
established the synthesized pattern that so profoundly influ­
enced the Christian Church from the second and third centuries 
onward. These scholarly treatises of the past form the basis of 
this chapter. The positions here surveyed are therefore amply 
documented and cross-checked.
In view of the findings of the vast multiple research of these 
great Christian scholars, it is time that consideration be given 
to the impact that Plato and the antecedent Greek philosophers 
exerted upon the thinking and beliefs of the early, medieval, 
and modern Christian Church.
II. Preliminary Stage—Initiated by Poets, Cults, and Mysteries
1. 
Homer: Persistence of Life Beyond Death.—About 
the earliest expression of belief in the persistence of life be­
a Dr. Draper, long of the university of the City of New York, was a scientific historian, 
educator, and author of texts. He produced his analytical history of philosophy in 1863.
3 John W. Draper, History of the Intellectual Development of Europe, vol. 1, pp. viii, 207.
GREEK PHILOSOPHY REACHES SUMMIT 
535
yond death appears in Homer and the Homeric poems (c. 850 
B.C.). Apart from the question of their precise origin and author­
ship, and whether they sprang from earlier bards/ these poems 
are a witness to the belief of the time. Though they contain con­
flicting statements, death was not believed to be the end of 
man; something was believed to survive. Death was not extinc­
tion, but continuance of existence. As noted, the soul is con­
ceived to be airy and breathlike, a kind of misty double of 
the physical body, and superior thereto. It is all very hazy 
and ethereal.
Homer held that life after death was a shadowy counter­
part of full-blooded bodily life on earth, a form without sub­
stance (Iliad 23; Odyssey 11), the souls fleeing to the house 
of Hades, gathering place for the departed. They cannot speak 
until a draught of living blood has restored life to them. There 
was nothing spiritual about Homer’s souls. Dr. S. D. F. Sal- 
mond records that the Greek afterworld was—
“a joyless land, wrapt in murky gloom, the dark shadow and spent copy 
of the world, in which men continue to exist as the wretched images of 
their former selves.”6
In Homer only one part of man’s composite nature survives 
death. It was a sort of soul-substance—something possessing 
faculties that characterize conscious life. The soul, he taught, 
enjoys an independent and secret existence in the body, and 
upon the death of the body independently withdraws itself. It 
exercises no function of the human spirit (thought, will, emo­
tion), which belong to the mind. And all functions of the body 
disappear with its dissolution into the original elements. Upon 
the death of the body, and entrance into Hades,8 the soul loses 
consciousness and thought (Iliad xxiii, 103, 104; 75, 76). It 
knows nothing of the upper world, and cannot return thither. 
And its personality does not persist.
* Some, such as A. M. Fairbairn, believe Homer and Hesiod are “mythical collections” 
(Studies in the Philosophy of Religion and History, p. 152).
B Stewart D. F. Salmond, lhe Christian Doctrine of Immortality, p. 129.
6 Cf. R. H. Charles, A Critical History of the Doctrine of a Future Life; Erwin Rohde,
Psyche; Zeller, History of Greek Philosophy (2 vols.); Lewis Campbell, Religion of Green
Literature; Fairbairn, op. cit.
536
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Parts of the Odyssey (x, xi) do suggest an occasional return 
of consciousness. But if immortality were vouchsafed to any 
individual it must be given when living, through translation 
to the Elysian fields. And as noted, it was the poets who were 
the earliest heralds of a possible immortality for man. The 
masses were unmoved by this sentiment, and lived and died 
under the terrors of a cruel fatalism.
However, according to Hesiod (eighth century), survivals 
of animism appear. In Works and Days 
(a.d. 109-201) death 
came to men of the golden race like a sleep, making them like 
gods and partakers in immortality. After death they became 
watchers over mankind, and exercised large powers. Men of the 
silver race had their abode under the earth, but were blessed in 
the underworld. Those of the bronze race became phantoms in 
Hades. Such were the mythical concepts of conscious and inde­
pendent activity of souls after death that helped to form the 
early Greek doctrine of immortality.
2. 
Transmigration Theory Introduced 
by Dionysiac 
Cult.—According to R. H. Charles, Oxford authority, the first 
advance step toward a developed Immortal-Soulism in Greece, 
of which we have knowledge, came through the Dionysiac cult1 
of Thrace. This was based on the presupposition of the original 
kinship of the gods and man. The Dionysiacs taught that souls 
retain consciousness after death, and that through certain rites, 
ceremonies, and ecstasies man becomes one with the gods.
“Immortality” and “divinity” were used as interchangeable 
terms. At death the soul bursts the fetters of the body. The soul 
has a real existence and continuance, and returns to earth for 
other incarnations. Thus the doctrine of transmigration of souls, 
later to appear again and again, came to be adopted, with the 
soul passing through successive incarnations.8 So the concept of 
the future life began to be transformed by the Dionysiacs, a 
secret eschatological cult.8
7 Dionysiac pertains to the festivals of the Eleusinian Mysteries, in honor of the 
Olympian god, Dionysus, later called Bacchus.
8 See Rohde, op. cit., pp. 253-266; Charles, The Doctrine of a Future Life, p. 146; 
Fairbaim, op. cit., pp. 186-188.
* Fairbaim, op. cit., p. 179.
Hesiod, Another Early Poet, Likewise 
Poets Like Homer Were the Earliest
Taught the Conscious and Independent 
Greek Proponents of the Persistence of
Activity of the Soul After Death. 
the Soul Beyond Death.
3. 
O
r
ph
ics: 
Per
m
ea
t
ed W
it
h Pa
n
t
h
eism 
and R
einca
r- 
n
a
t
io
n
ism.—Soon new elements were brought in from the 
Orphic Mysteries (secret rites for the initiated from the mythi­
cal prophet and musician, Orpheus of Thrace) and from the 
Eleusinian Mysteries, coming from Eleusis in ancient Attica. 
The Orphic Mysteries differed from the Eleusinian in their 
foreign origin and distinctly pantheistic basis.10 They buttressed 
this new notion of the future life by insisting that the soul is 
divine. Hence the concept of the soul as the highest, or divine, 
part of man was imported into Greece by these mystic Orphic 
teachers, whose doctrines originally came from the East.
The immortality they taught was not a pale reflection of 
the earthly life, but a release, or deliverance, of the soul from 
the body—the body being considered a prison or tomb.u And
10 Pantheism—from the Greek pan (all) and Theos (God), or ‘‘all God”—the belief 
or theory that God and the universe are identical. Pantheistic systems go back to earliest 
times, especially in Hinduism. Pantheism interprets the universe in terms of God, or God 
in terms of the universe, and is accordingly religious or materialistic in emphasis.
11 G. M. A. Grube, Plato’s Thought, p. 121; Charles, The Doctrine of the Future Life, 
pp. 146, 147; Fairbanks, A Handbook of Greek Religion, pp. 244-246.
537
538
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
the chain of rebirths involved must be broken if the soul is to 
find freedom with the gods.
The essence of Orphic emphasis was that the initiate might, 
by pure life and asceticism and mystical ceremonies, achieve 
mystic identification with the divine nature, and thus perfect 
his immortal character—not as the Dionysiacs, who often sought 
to develop this immortality through orgiastic ecstasy. More than 
that, in Orphic teaching transmigration (metempsychosis) “ 
comes to be not merely a means of preserving the vitality of 
the soul but also a punishment and discipline for the soul.
However, it is alleged that the soul does not attain its 
highest freedom until freed from this cycle of rebirths, and 
lives eternally in God.18 After many incarnations it rises to 
perfection and is absorbed, or reabsorbed, into the divine. By 
this time there is a well-defined doctrine of the origin, essence, 
and destiny of the soul. The Eastern tinge is unmistakable.
As indicated, under the Orphics there came in an “indis­
soluble connection” between guilt and expiation. The soul 
meets with retributive judgment in the “lower world.” Hades 
becomes the intermediate abode of the soul, where it is puri­
fied, until time for its return to the upper life. Then at last, 
when “fully cleansed” through its “cycle of rebirths,” “it ascends 
. . . to enjoy a never-ending existence with God.” Thus the 
soul, pure or impure, is held to be not only immortal but 
eternal—and consequently without beginning or end.
According to the exhaustive researches of Erwin Rohde, 
the Orphic poems and theogony combined transmigration 
with the divinity of the soul, and stressed the migration of 
the soul through many mortal bodies. It is essential to note 
that the soul is portrayed as part of the all-embracing Divine 
Essence, with recurring incarnations—traversing a great “Circle 
of Necessity” in the “Wheel of Birth.” 14 It is a cycle of “becom­
ing” and “perishing,” perpetually repeated.
u Metempsychosis, or transmigration—the jpassing of the soul at death into another 
body, the migration from one body to another until complete purification has been achieved.
13 Cf. Rohde, op. cit., pp. 344-347; Charles, The Doctrine of a Future Life, pp. 146, 147.
14 Rohde, op. rtf., pp. 342-347.
GREEK PHILOSOPHY REACHES SUMMIT 
539
There is alternating pollution and purification for these 
deathless souls. The soul is imprisoned in a “cell” (body), 
from which it is periodically set free—only soon to be impris­
oned again. So it is successively fettered and unfettered. As 
the soul is immortal, even the wicked cannot perish entirely. 
But no Eternal Torment in hell was taught, only repeated 
transmigrations. Such is the pagan foundation.
And Dr. Eduard Zeller, former professor of philosophy 
in the universities of Berlin and Heidelberg, points out the 
fact that in Greek literature pantheism first clearly appears in 
a fragment of these Orphic poems, and that the pantheistic 
strain runs through the whole Orphic cosmogony, or theory 
of the origin of the world. And he cites Herodotus as declar­
ing that the Orphics obtained the transmigration concept from 
Egypt—or more accurately, from Egypt and India. So it came 
to pass that in due time these concepts passed from the mysteries 
to Greek philosophy.15
Furthermore, according to Fairbaim,1* the Orphic theos­
ophy 1T was a “speculation amalgam” of Greek, Oriental, and 
Egyptian elements, its speculative elements taking on this 
crude pantheism. The universe, they held—the earth, starry 
heavens, sun, and man—issued from Zeus. And the gen­
eration principle of the universe embraces the generated, or 
universe. Orphic pantheism was thus a distinctive develop­
ment, with its characteristic phraseology. And pantheism 
always involved metempsychosis.
While there are new forms, the being is held to be always 
the same. So man, emanating from the Supreme One, has a 
cycle of appearances. The spirit, or soul, is to be separated 
from the body-prison in which it is confined because of past 
sins. Then at death the soul enters Hades to be rewarded or
“ Zeller, History of Greek Philosophy, vol. 1, pp. 64-74, 101. 
i« Fairbairn, op. cit., pp. 174-183.
17 Theosophy—the intuitive knowledge of the Divine by mystical insight and philo­
sophical speculation, and covering such religious and philosophical systems as pantheism and 
natural mysticism. It thus includes the teachings of Buddha, Plotinus, and the Gnostics. 
Theosophists deny both the personality of God and the continuing personal, or individual, 
immortality of man.
540
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
punished, and returned to earth. Absolutions and rites purify 
the soul.
Summarizing then: In the Orphics, the Innate-Immortal- 
ity concept is entered upon as a new stage of development, 
the soul being to man what God is to the world. Moreover, 
death destroys only the prison. While there is continuance, 
the individual is, as Fairbairn puts it, “only an emanation 
from a deified universe, revolving in a cycle of necessity.” 18
III. Philosophical Developments—Ionic, Eleatic, and 
Pythagorean Positions
1. 
Ionia
n Sc
h
o
o
l: 
“A
ir,” 
“W
a
t
er,” “Fir
e,” 
“In
fin
it
e.” 
—As stated, Greek philosophy, which developed from the Greek 
poets, began as an attempt to find natural causes for the phe­
nomena of the world and the universe. The earliest school of 
Greek philosophy was founded at Miletus, the Ionian capital. 
It is therefore called both the Milesian and the Ionian School. 
The Ionian view was materialistic, in that it sought to reduce 
the baffling cause of all things to one underlying substance with 
mathematical ratios and proportions.
T
ha
les (c. 640-546 B.C.), the first Greek philosopher and 
one of the “seven sages,” 18 was the first to attempt a scientific 
explanation of the world by seeking the unifying principle of 
existence.” Believing the world to be a unit, and beginning 
with physical speculation (possibly influenced by Egypt and 
its fertilizing Nile), Thales sought in water the source of life 
and the first principle of all things. To him “soul” was the 
synonym of life and the cause of motion.41
But three rival views soon proposed other solutions. 
Anaximenes (c. 500-c. 428 b.c.) asserted that the human soul 
consists of atmospheric “air” (airlike), and material life con­
sists of inhaling and exhaling it. When that process stops,
«Ibid., p. 182.
19 Zeller, Outline of the History of Greek Philosophy, pp. 35, 42, 43.
20 Fairbairn, op. cit., p. 183.
21 Draper, op. cit., vol. 1, pp. 95, 96.
GREEK PHILOSOPHY REACHES SUMMIT 
541
death comes. He also held that “air” is the “soul” of the world, 
and the Universal Being was identified with the air we breathe. 
But Anaxim
ander 
(c. 611-547 b.c.), of Miletus, held that all 
things arose by separation from a universal mixture of all, 
which basic substance he called “The Infinite,” characterized 
by internal energy and absolute unchangeability.22 On the 
contrary, H
eraclitus 
(c. 544-c. 484 B.C.), of Ephesus, held the 
first principle to be “fire.”
With some the “soul” took on new meaning, being com­
pletely identified with the mind, the human powers of thought 
and will. Its individual existence after death was inconceiv­
able. With such, the soul was merely a function of the various 
elements of the body—a transient individualism that termi­
nated at death. These are all speculative philosophies.
2. 
El
ea
t
ic Sch
o
o
l: Ph
il
o
so
ph
y Becomes Pa
n
t
h
eist
ic.—
 
The polemic of the Eleatic School (named from Elea), and 
founded by Xenophanes and Parmenides, with Zeno, was 
against the popular polytheism. It was ostensibly searching 
for the permanent and indestructible amid the perishable 
and evanescent. The Eleatics taught that all things were a 
unit, and that unit was God—and so the view was definitely 
pantheistic. They stressed the unity and continuity of the 
world, as touching God and man. They held to eternal and 
changeless reality of being and the unreality of change—change 
being only apparent and delusive. Everything that is exists; 
therefore “being” is indestructible. Souls go from light to 
darkness and back again.23 But the pantheistic concepts of this 
school left “no room for the future individual existence of 
the soul.” 24
X
eno
ph
a
n
es (c. 570-475 b.c.) put his doctrines into practical 
forms, differing from Homer and Hesiod. He proclaimed God 
an all-powerful Being, existing from eternity. Yet his was not 
a monotheistic position. His was a philosophical pantheistic
22 Ibid., pp. 98, 99, 104-106.
23 Fairbaim, op. cit., pp. 186, 187.
24 Charles, The Doctrine of a Future Life, p. 148.
542
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
god. The one principle, or power, was the same as the one 
immutable, material universe, the substance of which, having 
existed from eternity, must be identical with God—otherwise 
there would be two Omnipresents.
To him, God was the world of nature, underived and 
imperishable. Thus he abandoned the pursuit of visible na­
ture and turned to an investigation of “Being” and of God.5“ 
Zeller observes, “Xenophanes is the first philosophical repre­
sentative of the pantheism, which also underlies the system 
of Heracleitus.” 28
Parmenides (c. 540-c. 470 B.C.), stressing unity and perma­
nence of “Being,” taught the pre-existence of the soul and its 
survival after the death of the body27—a holdover from the 
Orphic and Pythagorean schools. His pantheism appears in 
the declaration that the All of the cosmos is thought and intel­
ligence. And by placing “thought” and “being” in parallelism 
with each other, and contending that it is for the sake of being 
that thought exists, he sets them forth as one.28
He also associates light with “Being,” and night with “Non- 
Being,” and seems to have conceived the beginning of the 
human race as a development from primitive slime, brought 
about by the heat of the sun. And he insistently derived the 
life of the soul from the mixture of substances in the body.20 
Such were his curious concepts.
Zeno of Elea (fifth century) boldly defended his predeces­
sors’ doctrine of the “motionless All-One.” And in dealing 
with the origin and nature of the soul he too held it to be 
the “resultant of a material mixture,” not an “independent 
substance.” Nevertheless, the Eleatics inconsistently held that 
the “deity that rules the world ‘at one time sends it [the “pre­
existent”] out of the Invisible into the Visible, and at another 
time back again.’ ” (By “Visible” is meant the life in the body.)
25 Draper, op. cit., vol. 1, pp. 120, 121.
20 Zeller, History of Greek Philosophy, vol. 2, p. 106.
27 Charles, Doctrine of a Future Life, p. 148.
28 Draper, op. cit., vol. 1. p. 121.
28 Zeller, History of Greek Philosophy, vol. 1, pp. 594, 602.
Heraclitus Held the Soul to Be an 
Emanation From the Universal Soul 
Which Comprises Everything and Is 
Imperishable.
And this process, it is added, is “several times repeated, in those 
two worlds”—an alternating life. That too, of course, is straight 
“Orphic-Pythagorean theosophy.” 30
3. 
Heraclitus: Soul Is Immortal Spark From Eternal 
Fire.—Opposing Thales’ position on “air” as the unifying 
principle of existence, Heraclitus (c. 544-c. 484 b.c.) held ever- 
living, divine “fire” to be the animating principle of the uni­
verse. And of this infinite fire the soul is a spark or portion 31 
—and the purer the fire, the more perfect the soul. Conse­
quently, the perishable body was despised. The soul of man 
is an emanation from the universal fire, or soul, which com­
prises everything and sustains all, and is imperishable. Thus 
man and the gods are said to be akin. “The very birth of man 
is ... a birth into death,” but the soul lives on.
Ritter cites Heraclitus as saying that “death is in our life, 
and life in our death.” Again, “Men are mortal gods, the gods 
immortal men, living in man’s death, and dying in man’s life.” 
The heaven of the Ionic was “reabsorption into the divine 
reason.” 32
30 Rohde, op. cit., p. 373.
31 Fairbairn, op. cit., pp. 187, 188.
32 Ritter, The History of Ancient Philosophy, vol. 1, pp. 250, 251.
543
544
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
In opposition to the Eleatics, Heraclitus denied that per­
manence exists. He insisted on the changeability of all things, 
everything being in a state of “continual flux,” of movement 
and flow, with continuing growth and decay and balance in 
these changes. Zeller stresses Heraclitus' belief in the pre­
existence of the soul and its continuance after death. While 
there are periodic conflagrations of the world, the soul survives 
them all. Life is preserved by the renewal of the divine fire. 
Souls enter bodies because they require a change. They become 
weary of the same state. And the universal soul is simply this 
“divine animating fire.” Souls enter the human body from a 
higher existence.33
Here are key expressions from Rohde’s highly documented, 
masterful survey: “Living is becoming, changing, becoming 
something different without cessation.” “Fire and psyche [soul] 
are interchangeable terms.” 34 “A portion of his [god’s] universal 
wisdom is living in the soul of man.” The soul is “a portion 
of the universal Fire.” “It absorbs fresh fire from the living 
Fire of the universe that surrounds it.” Moreover, the soul 
does not “maintain itself as a single person,” but “is in reality 
a series of souls and personalities, one taking the place of an­
other and ousting and being ousted in turn.” 36
“There is no such thing as death in the absolute sense— 
an end followed by no beginning.” For man, death is “only 
a point where one condition of things gives way to another 
. . . involving death for one but simultaneously bringing birth 
and life for another.” 36 And finally, “The soul of man has a 
claim to immortality only as an emanation of the universal 
Reason, and shares the immortality which belongs to it.” 37
That is the gross pagan concept held by Heraclitus, derived 
from the Mysteries, with rank pantheism, emanation, trans­
migration, and reabsorption with its loss of continuing per­
sonality.
33 Zeller, History of Greek Philosophy, vol. 2, pp. 1-114, especially pp. 79-87.
34 Rohde, op. cit., p. 367.
33 Ibid., pp. 368, 369.
Pythagoras 
Likewise 
Taught 
the 
Eternity of the Soul and Successive 
Transmigrations.
4. 
Pythagoras: Eternity of Soul and Successive Trans­
m
igrations.—The teaching of Pythagoras 
(c. 582-496 B.C.), 
founder of the Pythagorean society, or brotherhood, was char­
acterized by a pronounced metempsychosis, derived from the 
Orphics. In fact, Pythagoras simply philosophized the Orphic 
theosophy. Pythagoras taught that God was the great fountain, 
or immortal mind, whence the minds or souls of all intelligent 
beings emanated; that the soul existed as an entity before it 
animated the body; that it will transmigrate successively through 
different bodies until it returns to God, its original source, 
and is reabsorbed into His essence. He held the soul to be 
material, not pure spirit.
Souls are said to be confined to bodies because of previous 
sins, and are released through the death of the body. Pythagoras 
thus affirmed the continued “being” of the soul,38 each soul 
returning to an earthly life.38 Thus the soul is an “imperishable 
essence,” as no real entity is ever either made or destroyed.
Pythagoras emphasized the harmony of the spheres, with 
mathematics as the basis of his speculative system. Numbers 
were the substance of things, and the harmony of the celestial
38 Fairbairn. op. cit., pp. 184-186.
38 Zeller, History of Greek Philosophy, vol. 1, p. 486.
18 
545
546
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
spheres was based on the assumption that they were separated 
by intervals, corresponding to various lengths of instrumental 
strings, and thus produced harmony. The universe is in an 
“eternal flux,” with persons, as well as events, repeated in 
“regular cycles.” The Pythagoreans laid much stress on oppo­
sites, a concept likewise found in contemporary Gnosticism. 
Embracing these tenets, aristocratic secret societies, or brother­
hoods, were formed, adhering to a rigorous code.
According to Rohde’s researches, Pythagoras taught that 
the soul of man is the “double” of the physical body, cast 
down from the heights for punishment, and thus confined to 
“custody” of a body. But a soul has no real or necessary con­
nection with the particular body in which it dwells, but may 
possess any body. When death separates the soul from the body 
there is first a period of purification in Hades, and then a 
return to earth, to be reborn into another body. This is re­
peated many times. Finally, after a sequence of transmigra­
tions it is released from its earthly pilgrimage and is restored 
to a divine existence.
The Pythagorean goal of the soul was this ultimate restora­
tion to the divine state with the gods—an “emancipated exist­
ence as a bodiless spirit.” 40 Thus the chain of deaths and rebirths 
is broken, with escape from the cycle as the ultimate benefit." 
That was the sole hope of escape.
To put it another way, Pythagoras held that “number is 
the essence or first principle of things”—“All comes from one,” 
and “God embraces all and actuates all, and is but one.” This, 
of course, is sheer pantheism, doubtless derived from Egypt and 
India.43 “So long as the soul is in the body it requires the body 
. . . ; separated from the body it leads an incorporeal life in 
the higher world”43—a view later embraced by Plato. Pythagoras 
likewise held the theory of the “music of the spheres,” and the 
soul as the harmony of the body, like the melody of a lyre.
40 Rohde, op. cit., pp. 376, 398, note 50.
« Ibid., pp. 375. 376, 399, note 50.
42 Draper, op. cit., vol. 1, pp. 111-115.
43 Zeller, History of Greek Philosophy, vol. 1, p. 483.
CHAPTER 
THIRTY
Sophists React Against Conflicting 
Speculative Schools
In order for us to sense the significance of the later 
postulates of Platonism that ultimately became dominant, it 
is essential to have a panoramic view of the developing philos­
ophy of ancient Greece as concerns the soul and its fate. In 
spots it may seem a bit tedious and trivial. But such a survey 
is necessary if we are realistically to trace the rise of Platonism 
to its pre-eminence.
I. Paralleling Tragic and Lyric Poets Buttress Positions
1. 
Tides of Poetic Opinion Ebb and Flow.—The lyric 
poets kept within the Homeric framework, and the dramas 
of Aeschylus 
(525-456 B.C.), greatest of Greek tragic poets, 
likewise mirrored the faith of the populace, unmodified by 
alien influences. But these are the “princely dead,” not the 
common run. They reproduced the old Homeric conceptions 
of Hades and the soul—the soul not being a shadow, but a 
real, actual being. But its state was cold and dreary. Their 
only light was commingled with darkness. The underworlds 
and afterworlds were retributive, but the penalties of guilt 
overshadowed the rewards of righteousness. Souls continue 
semiconsciously after death, their forms resembling their 
earthly state.1
To give life to the personages in his dramas, Aeschylus
1 A. M. Fairbaim, Studies in the Philosophy of Religion, pp. 194, 195.
547
548
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
took the legends of the past, adjusting them to current thought, 
and put them in the setting of his own convictions. Sometimes 
there is a twilight existence, as in Homer. But speculation on 
the soul after death did not interest him.8 However, there is 
a judgment beyond death, in Hades. But this judgment only 
completed the retribution generally executed on earth.
Euripides 
(c. 480-406 b.c.), another Athenian tragic dram­
atist, sounds no clear note. His dramas likewise reflect the 
popular view as well as the variant conflicting views of the 
Orphics, philosophers, and Sophists—sometimes doubting, 
sometimes affirming, the possibilities of the other world. They 
sway to and fro, the whole question of the afterlife being left 
unanswered. At death the soul returns to the air, its creative 
element, parting with its independent existence. Man is 
nothing, and sinks into nothingness.3
2. Pindar: 
Soul Is “Image of Eternity.” While philos­
ophers represented the personal views of a few elite, the paral­
lelling tragic and lyric poets were more national in their 
portrayals, largely repeating the mythology of former times. 
Pindar 
(c. 522-443 B.C.), pre-eminent lyric poet of Thebes, 
drew upon both the old Orphic theosophy and the newborn 
philosophy for his portrayals of the soul and afterlife.
Two distinct, irreconcilable views are presented. Some­
times they are Homeric, with Hades as the everlasting abode 
of the shades; in others the Orphic type prevails. Thus the 
soul is the “invisible double” of the man, largely dormant 
during earth’s activities—an “image of eternity.” It springs 
from the gods {Frag. 131), and what survives in the other 
world is the soul itself, not a shadow-image.
There are moral awards, the good going to dwell among 
the gods, with descent into a body being the result of some 
ancient guilt. After death retributive judgment follows in 
Hades to atone for past offenses, and the condemned are 
plunged into Tartarus. The soul must be embodied at least
2 Rohde, Psyche, pp. 421-425.
3 Salmond, Christian Doctrine, p. 139.
SOPHISTS REACT AGAINST SPECULATIVE SCHOOLS 549
three times before it can hope for an end of its earthly course. 
The past life determines the conditions of the present, and 
the present fixes those of the future. After a period of years in 
Hades the purified soul can ascend and enter the “Isles of 
the Blest” (Ol. ii, 57-60, 69-75).* In Pindar this course of the 
soul appears, one ode telling of the mythical interchangeable 
immortality, alternately in Heaven and Hades (10th Nemean 
Ode).
The soul, descending from the gods, remains alive after 
the death of the body. If it does not find a suitable resting 
place, it must live again in another earthly body until a third 
faultless life ends its earthly course. Thrice tried by birth and 
death, the soul, if it keeps free from sin, ascends to the upper 
world to live in the “Islands of the Blest.” 8 That, of course, 
is out-and-out transmigrationism simply in Greek form. As 
Zeller puts it, punishment thus gives opportunity for happiness 
in the hereafter, which concept was acquired from the Orphics.*
According to Rohde’s minute examination, Pindar teaches 
that, “after its separation from the body, the soul disappears in 
the underworld.” This other life, which is “everlasting and 
immortal,” dwells for a time in a mortal body because of “an­
cient guilt.” Hades, with its dark rivers of inky blackness in 
Tartarus, awaits the impious after death. Rohde summarizes 
Pindar’s position as a divine origin for the soul, wanderings 
through several bodies (incarnations), judgment in Hades, 
assignments to the upper or lower worlds, and at last escape 
from the constricting circle of births, to become a “god.” 7 Such, 
he avers, is Pindar’s doctrine of the soul.
II. Inevitable Reaction Under Compromisers, Atomists, 
and Sophists
1. 
Empedocles: Doomed by Sin to Transmigrations.—
1 See Charles, The Doctrine of a Future Life, pp. 150, 151; Salmond, op. cit., pp. 139- 
142; William R. Alger, The Destiny of the Soul. A Critical History of the Doctrine of a Future 
Life. pp. 182-184.
5 Fairbairn, op. cit., pp. 192, 193.
8 Zeller, History of Greek Philosophy, vol. 1, p. 71.
7 Rohde, op. cit., pp. 414-418.
550
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
The first philosopher to introduce the conception of the four 
elements—fire, air, water, and earth—as divine, eternal forces 
was Empedocles (c. 500-430 b.c.), of Sicily. To these he added 
the two primary principles of love and hate—love the creative 
power, hate the destroyer. Between these there is unremitting 
strife. But in his mystic theology Empedocles was definitely 
allied with the Orphic-Pythagorean positions.8 He did not found 
a school but, like Pythagoras and Heraclitus, held to the literal 
transmigration of human souls through the bodies of animals 
and men, and the subsequent return of the purified souls to 
the gods, from which they originally came. And Empedocles 
held to the “immutable decree” of Fate, including the banish­
ment of the demons for “30,000 seasons from among the 
Blessed.” 9
Empedocles presented a singular dualistic view—a Dualism 
of the inner life detected in Homer. The office of the soul 
is neither perception nor thought, both of which, he held, are 
merely functions of the body. Perception attests divine exist­
ence in the past. Thought, existing side by side with the soul 
in man, perishes with the body. But the soul, if not immortal, is 
at least long-lived. The postulate of transmigration naturally 
formed a part of his system. But between its various incorpora­
tions the soul does not descend into an underground Hades, as 
in Orphic and Pythagorean belief. And when all elements 
return to their original unity, all souls—and even the gods— 
are reunited in the divine universal spirit, to appear in a newly 
restored world.10
Empedocles held, further, that nothing can begin which 
formerly was not, and nothing that exists can perish. Man’s 
original state was sinless. But man fell, and he too “was doomed 
to wander thrice ten thousand years apart from the blessed”— 
a “fugitive from the gods, and an outcast” dwelling in perpetual 
strife. As hate dominates, motion is ceaseless and rest is im-
8 Zeller, History of Greek Philosophy, vol. 2, pp. 117-184; Outlines of the History of 
Greek Philosophy, pp. 72-75; Draper, History of the Intellectual Development of Europe, vol. 1, 
pp. 123, 124.
8 Zeller, History of Greek Philosophy, vol. 2, p. 172.
10 See Charles, The Doctrine of a Future Life, pp. 149, 150.
SOPHISTS REACT AGAINST SPECULATIVE SCHOOLS 
551
possible. But in the coexisting sphere of love, when the pious 
die they become “deathless gods,” and no longer mortals.11 
Thus, “man is a fallen god condemned to wander on earth, 
sky-aspiring but sense-clouded.” Purged by penance, he returns 
to his former godlike experience.
Empedocles held that reality is “Many,” not “One.” And 
permanence belongs to the principal elements which change to 
their shifting relations. Earlier it was felt that matter is alive, 
but Parmenides removed that conception. And now Empedocles 
added these two agencies, love and hate, as controlling the four 
elements. The history of the universe is, he held, oscillation to 
and fro between complete accord and total disharmony. So while 
not belonging organizationally to the Pythagorean School, 
Empedocles adopted its teachings on the soul. Death would free 
the soul from its “last corporeal envelope.” It never again 
would enter a body, but “live for ever in freedom and divin­
ity.” 12 Such was the Immortal-Soulism support given by Em­
pedocles.
2. 
Anaxagoras: Dualism and D
issolution of the Soul.—
 
Fifty years after Pythagoras, his successor, Anaxagoras, of Ionia 
(c. 500-428 B.C.), visited Egypt, which visit was not without its 
effects upon his thinking. The fundamental principle of his 
philosophy was the unchangeability of the universe as a whole, 
or in other words, the eternity of matter. As he expressed it:
“Wrongly do the Greeks suppose that aught begins or ceases to be, 
for nothing comes into being or is destroyed, but all is an aggregation 
or secretion of pre-existent things, so that all becoming might more 
correctly be 
called 
becoming-mixed, and 
all corruption 
becoming- 
separate.” 13
Anaxagoras also became persuaded that “mind” is com­
pletely detached from matter, and acts upon matter with intel­
ligence and design in the formation of the universe.14 The initial
11 Fairbairn, op. cit., pp. 188, 189. Cf. Ritter, History of Ancient Philosophy, vol. 1,
p. 501.
12 Rohde, op. cit., pp. 379. 380.
13 Draper, op. cit., vol. 1, p. 108. (Italics supplied.) See also Fairbairn, op. cit., pp. 
189, 190.
14 William Enfield, The History of Philosophy From the Earliest Periods, book 2, chap. 3,
p. 87.
552
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
moving force, which brought order out of chaos, he designated 
as “Intellect” (Nous), or “all-pervading Mind.” Rejecting the 
fate concept, he imputed it to reason. “Mind” is infinite and 
absolute, and Anaxagoras made no distinction between “mind” 
and “soul.” He also held to a Dualism, as indicated by the 
“moving force” and the “moved mass.”
And he stressed the opposition between the intellectual 
and the physical. Reason, he said, was the prime mover, employ­
ing air, water, and fire as agents. Such was Anaxagoras’ cos­
mogony. Compounds were not formation, but arrangements. 
Thus all parts of the animal body pre-exist in food, and are 
merely collected therefrom. In fact, all the phenomena of life 
are explained in his Magian doctrine of Dualism between mind 
and matter.16
Rohde calls him “the first decisive and conscious dualist 
among Greek philosophers.” 14 He sets “mind” and “matter” 
over against each other, and mind is power of thought and force 
of will. Self-existent mind influences matter without itself 
being moved by it. Now, as animated beings spring from the 
“World-Mind,” individual souls are therefore not self-existent 
after the dissolution of the “united.” Thus “the view is defi­
nitely ascribed to him that separation from the body is also 'the 
souls death.’ ” He did not, however, teach “the indestructibility 
of the individual spirit.” 17 It was all speculative.
Dr. R. H. Charles adds that the continued personal immor­
tality of the soul was—
“inconceivable from Anaxagoras’ principle of an all-pervading mind. 
For though this mind individualized itself in certain material combina­
tions, it retired into itself on the dissolution of these.”w
Because of his theistic teachings, Anaxagoras was accused 
of atheism and impiety, as he claimed the sun to be a red-hot 
stone, not a divine being. And because of this and other teach­
ings, such as his Persian Dualism, he was cast into prison and
15 Rohde, op. cit., pp. 386-388.
“ Ibid., p. 386.
17 Ibid., p. 388. (Italics supplied.)
18 Charles, The Doctrine of a Future Life, p. 150.
SOPHISTS REACT AGAINST SPECULATIVE SCHOOLS 
553
condemned to death. But he escaped and ended his days in 
exile. It should be noted that popular revolt was developing 
against the erratic speculations of philosophy, several philos­
ophers having had to flee and some having suffered death.1®
3. 
Atomists: Conscious Existence Disappears at Death. 
—At this juncture the Atomist School was founded in revolt 
against current philosophical contentions. It was established by 
Leucippus (fl. 500 b.c.) and his greater pupil Democritus (460- 
355 b.c.). Experts agree that Leucippus gave the first clear state­
ment of philosophical materialism. Contemporary mythical cos­
mogony was rejected in favor of a mechanical explanation. The 
Atomists held that matter itself contains all that is necessary for 
an understanding of the world structure. And the soul, they 
said, is no exception. It is corporeal, composed of fire and soul- 
atoms, the finest and most active of all, effecting the movement 
of living things.
Moreover, as they exist, these atoms are endowed with sen­
sation only as they come together in certain relationships, as 
in the case of the human body. So the Atomists likewise main­
tained that consciousness disappears with the dissolution of the 
body, from which the soul-atoms were completely separated. 
And so separated, it is impossible that they should ever return 
to it.20 The body is the vessel of the soul, which is the divine 
in things. But the “soul, distributed throughout the universe, 
is the Deity”—the “World-Soul and Reason.” 21
Starting with atoms and the void, the Atomists, with the 
physical bases of their system, held that “all things are com­
posed of invisible, intangible, and individual particles or atoms, 
which by reason of variation in their configuration, combina­
tion, or position, give rise to the varieties of forms.” But to the 
atom itself they imputed self-existence and eternal duration. 
That is how the many can arise from one.
And this general formative principle of nature they regarded
19 Draper, op. cit., p. 111.
20 Zeller, History of Greek Philosophy, vol. 2, pp. 256-261.
21 Ibid., pp. 262-264.
554
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
as the law of destiny, or fate. Thus production of new things 
is only new aggregations. And contrariwise, the decay of the 
old is simply separations. And the soul is a finely constituted 
form fitted into a grosser bodily frame. Skeptical Atomists even 
went so far as to assert that the world is an illusive phantasm, 
and that there is no God.“
Concerning man, they hold that breathing draws in fresh 
“soul stuff” from the air, supplying it to the body. Hence, 
when breathing ceases, death ensues, because of an insufficient 
supply of the animating atoms. Thus at death the unified soul 
ceases to exist. Rohde states their contention thus:
“The continued existence of the soul after death, an immortality 
in whatever manner the thing may be conceived, is here for the first time 
in the history of Greek thought, expressly denied ” 43
That was fifth-century philosophical materialism as it per­
tained to the soul and immortality. It was a confusing picture.
4. 
Sophists: Bring Speculative Philosophy to a Stand­
still.—In philosophy the conflict of unity against multiplicity 
was resolved by the atomist theory advanced by Empedocles 
and Anaxagoras on mind, or nous, and before that by Leucip­
pus. However, philosophy turned from physics to ethics, and 
soon the Sophists (fifth century b.c.) became the teachers of 
Greece, and advocates of the subjectivity of standards.
As already noted, the starting point of Grecian philosophy 
was the physical. The earth was considered the center of all. So 
an explanation of the origin and destiny of the world and of 
man was undertaken. Intention and design were apparent. But 
the heliocentric concept of the planetary system was introduced, 
and the earth reduced to a subordinate position. And as we have 
seen, pantheistic notions of the nature of the world became 
pronounced, and the inevitable postulates of emanation, trans­
migration, and absorption were introduced. Then the idea 
that matter, motion, and time are phantoms of the imagination 
came to the fore—that atoms and space alone exist.
22 Draper, op. cit., pp. 124-126.
23 Rohde, op. cit., p. 386. (Italics supplied.)
SOPHISTS REACT AGAINST SPECULATIVE SCHOOLS 
555
And now the Sophists, teachers of practical wisdom, appear 
—the outgrowth of peculiar conditions and the time—playing 
up the speculations of one school against those of another and 
representing them all as of little or no value. Protagoras (fifth 
century b.c.) was one of the first. So it was that speculative 
physical philosophy was brought to a standstill, with no con­
structive alternative.*4 The fate of the soul came to the fore­
front of discussion. Rohde states Protagoras’ position thus:
“Death, and whatever may reveal itself after death, is beyond the 
experience of any man. It may be that complete disappearance into 
nothingness follows death; that the dead man becomes simply nothing.” 58
So it was that the Sophists, assailing the leading philo­
sophical contentions of the day, personalized the growth of 
critical inquiry. Observing the conflicting philosophical schools 
and their contradictory conceptions, they adroitly and “sophisti- 
cally” contended that there is no established truth, no real 
religion, no sure justice, no unassailable virtue—that the only 
object in life is rational physical and intellectual enjoyment. 
So the soul, some even held, is simply the aggregate of the 
different moments of thinking. Thus they ended in bleak skep­
ticism, if not stark atheism. That was the crisis at this juncture.2®
Thus the Sophists of the fifth and fourth centuries were not 
so much a sect as a profession. They professed knowledge or 
skill as teachers. They differed so much in ability, character, and 
emphasis that Aristotle defined a Sophist as “a man who makes 
money by sham wisdom.” Thus the word came to connote 
“sophistry.” But Grotto denies this—they might be compared 
to Voltaire, Diderot, and Rousseau in the French Revolution.
The Sophists included leading teachers like Gorgias and 
Protagoras, made famous by Plato. But the foundation of their 
teaching was laid in skepticism. Gorgias, for example, expressed 
his nihilism in three propositions: (1) Nothing exists; (2) if 
anything existed it could not be known; and (3) if anything
24 Draper, op. cit., pp. 141, 142. 
26 Rohde, op. cit., p. 438.
M Draper, op. cit., pp. 137, 138.
556
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
existed and were knowable, that knowledge could not be com­
municated to others. Protagoras held that knowledge is so 
variable that all truth is but relative. Nothing exists at any time, 
but everything is always in a state of becoming. Even the exist­
ence of the gods is uncertain. So the leading Sophists sought to 
annihilate both existence and knowledge. In this they were 
opposed by Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle.
5. 
Such a Survey Justifiable and Essential.—A weird, 
conflicting, and oft-confusing panorama has thus unfolded be­
fore us. Proposition and counterproposition, action and re­
action, advance and recession, swinging to and fro, like a vast 
surging tide in its inexorable advance. Crudities and puerilities 
that offend the senses have intermingled with majestic out- 
reaches after better understandings. Even briefly to follow these 
developments would be profitless and wearisome were they not 
vitally connected with the great Platonic positions that eventu­
ated therefrom, and which so mightily influenced the centuries 
that follow. That is the justification for their tracement here. 
The source and origin of many of Plato’s concepts unmistakably 
stem from these earlier philosophers and poets we have just 
surveyed—and back to their spawning ground in Egypt and the 
Orient.
In the light of all this, it is therefore both justifiable and 
essential to get the import of this section of the search for 
immortality. Distasteful as this search may appear at first, as 
well as a bit wearisome and profitless, it is an unavoidable part 
of the indispensable background for our quest of the beginnings 
of the imposing Innate-Immortality-of-the-soul concept that 
well-nigh swept all before it, once it was syncretized and com­
pleted by Plato, and finally accepted by a compromising Chris­
tianity in the second and third centuries.
Plato will therefore be given special separate coverage. 
But first we pause for Aristotle, and the aftermath, before pro­
ceeding. We will shortly be in a position to recognize, under­
stand, and evaluate Plato’s syncretized positions, soon to be
SOPHISTS REACT AGAINST SPECULATIVE SCHOOLS 
557
discussed at some length, in relation to these antecedent con­
cepts of the various philosophical schools.
6. 
U
nparalleled Im
pact of Grecian Philosophy.—This 
chapter closes with the reiterating of the fact that no nation of 
antiquity ever made so great an impact on the intellectual life 
of man as did Greece, situated on a small, rock-bound Medi­
terranean peninsula. Though relatively few in number, the 
Greeks left an indelible imprint on all subsequent philosophy, 
theology, medicine, art, poetry, literature, logic, drama, law, 
science, government, mathematics, and astronomy.
But it is primarily the philosophicoreligious angle that con­
cerns our quest. The Greeks stressed the idea of man’s unique 
worth, the summit of their philosophers’ contention being the 
glory of man—his Innate Immortality and his transcendent des­
tiny. Plato was admittedly the greatest philosopher of this gifted 
people. And one of his major concerns was the origin, nature, 
and destiny of man. To this he applied himself unremittingly.
But his was the pursuit of truth without benefit of divine 
guidance, without the protective counsel of inspired prophets, 
or the surety of an inerrant Guidebook. It was sheer, unaided 
human intellect, attempting by human wisdom alone to search 
out the truth on the nature and destiny of man. His concepts 
stand without a parallel in the permanence of their impress 
upon all subsequent generations. But they were in mortal con­
flict with the Word of God.
CHAPTER 
THIRTY-ONE
Plato—Pagan Fountainhead of 
Innate-Immortality Streams
When one approaches the study of Plato’s postulates on the 
immortality of the soul, two background facts should be borne 
in mind: (1) Several Greek philosophers had preceded Plato 
in holding to Immortal-Soulism in varying forms and degrees— 
that his was a synthesis, as well as an advance; and (2) the con­
cept of Innate Immortality was not the popular or general 
view current in Greece. Rather, it was the teaching of a small 
group, chiefly of philosophers, with Plato pre-eminent.
Plato (427-347 B.C.), famous Greek philosopher of Athens, 
is generally recognized as one of the greatest thinkers of all 
antiquity. In sheer massive speculative thought and logical 
reasoning he is considered unsurpassed among all pagan phi­
losophers. Of distinguished family and the highest training, he 
was first interested in poetry, then in statecraft. But when he be­
came a pupil of Socrates the current of his life changed.
His close acquaintance with Socrates (until the latter’s 
death) brought him under the spell of philosophic teaching, 
and turned him from poetry and public life to the pinnacle of 
philosophy. And he, in turn, became the teacher of the cele­
brated Aristotle. Thus the main development of Greek philos­
ophy flows from Socrates through Plato and Aristotle. The 
sequence and overlap looks somewhat like this:
Socrates (470-399 b.c.)
PLATO (427-347 b.c.)
Aristotle (384-322 b.c.)
Plato stands without a peer among the men of genius in the 
558
From Socrates the Main De­
velopment of Greek 
Phi­
losophy Flowed On Through 
Plato and Aristotle.
philosophical world. He was the founder of the Older Academy 
at Athens, which continued without a break until dissolved 
eight centuries later, in a.d. 529, by Emperor Justinian. Indeed, 
the founding of the Academy was the turning point in Plato’s 
career and a memorable event in Western European history. 
It was the first permanent institution for the prosecution of 
scientific learning by research, with pure mathematics as the 
core of the curriculum—the progenitor of the medieval uni­
versity.
The tragic end of Socrates made a profound impression 
upon the youthful Plato. He felt a sense of destiny, driving 
him on to devote his life to the development of philosophy on 
an independent basis and to commit his teaching to writing 
for generations to come. In preparation he traveled for ten 
years, acquainting himself with the philosophies of his day. He 
studied in Egypt, Cyrene, Sicily, and greater Greece. His wide 
travels, his acquaintance with Socrates, his return to Athens, 
and his establishment of the Academy, were the preliminaries
559
560
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
of his remarkable career, with its amazing influence upon the 
thinkers of subsequent centuries.
I. Interest Centered in Origin, Nature, and Destiny of Soul
1. Supreme Attempts to Interpret Riddle of Life.— 
Like Socrates before him, Plato’s interest concerning man cen­
tered in the origin, nature, and destiny of the soul. His own 
stream had its inspiration from the Socratic fountain. But he 
could not rest until he had developed those concepts, and had 
given them life, form, and direction. He felt that he must meet 
the prevailing skepticism and unravel the secrets of the grave— 
according, of course, to his pagan concepts.
And in Plato the soul’s dignity, vitality, the independence 
of the body, the divine origin of all, propitiation, judgment, and 
moral reward for all surely reach their loftiest pagan expression. 
As a result the Platonic dialogues reveal the supreme attempt of 
sheer unaided human reason to interpret the riddle of life and 
immortality.
With Plato, however, philosophy took on a remoteness 
from practical concerns, and became absorbed in pure intel- 
lectualism, divorced from everyday life. In this he differed from 
Socrates, who was a man of the people. But Plato stood aloof 
from the world, “absorbed in transcendental dreams and ab­
stractions,” as someone has put it. He was an aristocrat, with 
disdain for the opinion of the masses. So he left the oppor­
tunities of public life that would inhibit freedom of thought 
and action.
2. Impact on Jewish and Christian Thought.—Though 
Plato was a pre-Christian pagan philosopher, beyond question 
no single man did so much to change the religious concept of 
the multitudes beyond his day, first in Jewry,1 then in time
1 Plato’s impact on Jewish thought came through Philo’s recasting of Plato’s system into 
Neoplatonism, elaborated by Plotinus (d. 270 A.D.), and becoming anti-Christian under Porphyry 
(d. c. 305 a.d.).
PLATO—FOUNTAINHEAD OF INNATE IMMORTALITY 561
in Christendom, first in Catholic circles, and finally in Protes­
tant ranks. He was more eminent than either Socrates or Aris­
totle in creating and setting the immortality pattern of the 
future and in redirecting the current of human thought con­
cerning the nature and destiny of the soul.
He was the inheritor of the old mythical concepts of 
Homer and Hesiod, and of the Orphic searchings into the 
mysteries of the universe, wherein men were considered emana­
tions of the deity. And he drafted freely upon the metaphysical 
speculations of the lyric poets. But under Plato, theogony be­
came theology, and speculation became dogma.
Plato’s writings exerted a tremendous influence not only 
upon Aristotle, the Stoics, Cicero, and Plutarch, and as noted 
on Philo and the Neoplatonists, but especially on early Church 
Fathers like Origen. He also profoundly affected Augustine. 
As a consequence, throughout the Middle Ages, Platonic con­
cepts achieved a permanent place in Latin Christianity.
The Renaissance led to a revival of interest in Plato. In 
the sixteenth century there was steady Platonic emphasis on 
religion in England, under John Colet, John Fisher, and 
Thomas More. And in the seventeenth century the Cambridge 
Platonists urged the return of theology to the Platonic philos­
ophy platform as an antidote to “controversial aridities” of 
contemporary Calvinism and the secularism of Thomas Hobbs.
Strong Platonic influences were also present among various 
English theologians of the nineteenth century, such as Benjamin 
Jowett, F. D. Maurice, and Charles Kingsley. On the other hand, 
Protestant orthodoxy on the Continent, with its distrust of 
natural reason, was generally hostile to Platonism.
It should be added that Plato’s twenty-four works range 
from 22 pages to 418, in their modern printed form. The bulk 
of his writings are in dialogue form, the Athenian mode of dis­
cussion, often setting forth Socrates as the principal spokesman, 
with various pupils or critics taking part in the discussion 3—
2 Scholars are unable to determine just how far the speeches represent the beliefs of 
Socrates and interlocutors,_ and how much they voice Plato’s own beliefs. But that they do 
represent Plato’s personal views is commonly understood.
562
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
the dialogue usually being named after a leading pupil. These 
we will examine.
3. Background and Essence of P
lato’s Im
m
ortal-Soul- 
ism.—Plato was definitely influenced by the Orphic Mysteries 
and Pythagorean and Zoroastrian concepts. These all met, and 
were fused into his complex doctrine of the immortality of the 
soul, the distinction of soul and body,3 and the identification 
of soul with mind. This placed his immortality thesis on a new 
footing.
The Platonic doctrine is first and last a doctrine of the 
persistence of the soul. According to Plato, immortality is a 
quality inherent in man, a consequence of his nature. All of 
Plato’s logic and imagination were spent in proof of this one 
postulate—at whatever cost to other concepts. He sustained it 
by arguing the soul’s desire and capacity for knowledge, its 
simple and invisible nature (then its threefold and compli­
cated nature), its essential and invisible character, the power of 
reminiscence, the “circle of nature,” and suchlike.
With this came the inevitable and inseparable dogma of 
transmigration—the existence of the soul in a particular body 
as a punishment for the sins of a previous incarnation. And the 
doom of its sins in the present body was its descent into other 
bodies and the postponement of its final deliverance. To Plato 
immortality and pre-existence were absolutely inseparable.
4. Present Life One Episode in Endless Sequence.—Since 
the soul is immortal, our present life is, he held, only one epi­
sode in its endless history. If this be so, the soul must long ago 
have learned everything, and needs only to be “put in mind” of 
something temporarily forgotten. This was his doctrine of rec­
ollection. Knowledge is recollection—remembering what the 
soul knew before birth. Thus:
“The soul, then, as being immortal, and having been born again 
many times, and having seen all things that exist, whether in this world 
or in the world below, has knowledge of them all; and it is no wonder
3 See Lewis Campbell, Religion of Greek Literature, pp. 350, 351.
PLATO—FOUNTAINHEAD OF INNATE IMMORTALITY 563
that she should be able to call to remembrance all that she ever knew 
about virtue and about everything” (81c).4
Truth, Plato averred, is eternal. And since truth exists 
only as apprehended by the mind, therefore the mind, or soul, 
must be eternal. In Meno, Plato acknowledges the immortality 
thesis as springing from poetic myth. That is attested from the 
way it is introduced by the expression “poets and priests”— 
“which is the regular way of introducing a myth.” 5
5. 
Three M
ain Arguments of Indefeasible Im
m
ortality. 
—We may summarize Plato’s three main arguments for the im­
mortality of the soul as the postulates of:
a. Rebirth—Living souls come from the dead, and the dead 
from the living. The soul born into this world is one that has 
come back from the other world to which the soul goes at 
death. The body is simply the instrument that the soul uses 
while here—so there is a double journey.
b. Recollection—Knowledge of a former stage of existence 
is retained by the soul after the death of the body in this 
cyclical recurrence. The soul was fully intelligent before it was 
embodied. Therefore the soul is something divine, and in no 
danger of dissipation. Indefeasible immortality and indestruct­
ibility (as well as pre-existence) follow as a matter of course.
c. The “Idea” concept—The keynote of Platonic philos­
ophy is this theory of “ideas,” that reality belongs not to the 
individual material thing (a tree, a man, this book), but to 
the antecedent idea of the tree, man, or book. The tangible 
things are, he held, but fleeting and perishable, mere copies of 
the “form” or “idea,” which abides in changeless unity forever. 
And to recover this is the sole object of knowledge.
But at best Plato’s contentions were only a surmise, a hope, 
a conjecture that there must be something beyond the grave 
—at least for the souls of a noble few. Dr. R. H. Charles, also 
stresses the important fact that—
4 Benjamin Jowett, Plato’s Meno, in Library of Liberal Arts, No. 12 (hereafter abbrevi­
ated to LLA), p. 37.
5 G. M. A. Grube, Plato’s Thought, p. 124, note 1.
“the immortality of the soul never became a part of the national [Greek] 
creed, but remained the peculiar property of individual theologians and 
philosophers.” 9
Generality of acceptance was to come to certain groups 
later. But it was not shared by many contemporaries. Now let 
us trace the unfolding story.
II. Complex Involvements of Plato’s Immortality Postulates
The justification and the necessity for this extensive exami­
nation of Plato’s views are, first, that only as we are acquainted 
with Plato’s basic propositions will we be in a position to recog­
nize the similarity of view and the heavy draft made upon 
Plato’s thought and terminology, first by Philo the Jew and then 
by Origen the Christian—with gravely deviating effects upon 
both faiths. And, second, the principle that faulty premises 
inevitably lead to unsound and false conclusions will become 
increasingly apparent as we proceed.7
1. 
Origin and N
ature of the Cosmos.—Plato explains 
the origin and nature of the cosmos as embracing the eternal 
“pattern,” the “materials,” and the “Demiurge,” who brings 
about in the “receptacle the nearest likeness of the pattern 
which it is possible to produce.” His Timaeus distinguishes be­
tween “ ‘that which always is and has no becoming,’ ” and “ ‘that 
which is always becoming but never is.’ ” 8
2. Conflicting R
ecitals of Creation of M
an.—Professor 
Jowett, the Plato authority, brings out the fact that two widely 
conflicting tales of the creation of the universe and of man are 
projected by Plato (47c, 69a-90d).® In the Timaeus the “Maker”
564 
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
6 Charles, The Doctrine of a Future Life, p. 156.
7 The purpose of this work is not to present a new critical translation of Plato's original 
Greek texts. Acceptable standard translations have been deliberately employed. Our objective 
is to analyze and present the recorded evidence, and to draw valid conclusions from recognized 
translations—thus 
to follow 
the 
continuing story 
unimpeded 
by 
technical 
minutiae. 
We 
are here tracing the larger over-all Platonic positions, so as to grasp their basic postulates, and 
their effects first upon Jewry and then on the Christian Church.
8 Glenn R. Morrow, Introduction to Jowett. Plato’s Timaeus, in LLA, No. 14, p. 15.
9 Jowett, Timaeus, in LLA, No. 14, pp. 29, 30, 52-73.
PLATO—FOUNTAINHEAD OF INNATE IMMORTALITY 565
first creates the universe, then delegates the creation of man and 
animals to an inferior order of gods, for the creator created 
many gods, of whom he is the “artificer and father.” They 
receive from him the divine and immortal element—that is, 
the soul—and combine it in due proportion with the material 
and perishable. Thus man came into being.
But evil was born in him by reason of his composite 
nature. Everything good and evil, he holds, originates in the 
soul and spreads to the body. If man struggles against his 
passions and desires, he can make his pilgrimage unharmed. 
If he yields to temptations he (and not the Creator) is respon­
sible for his evil state.10 That is one concept of the inception 
of evil that was projected.
On the other hand, in the Statesman (269 ff.), the riddle 
of the universe receives a different and contradictory solution. 
There was a time, the tale goes—a “Golden Age” in the distant 
past—when, according to a celebrated legend, the deity (or 
creator) presided over the revolutions of the world, and man 
lived in innocence. But, in the process of time, the divine 
pilot of the universe withdrew his hand from the controls, 
and the universe began to reverse its rotation, and the destruc­
tion of all creatures resulted.
Then, according to the myth, a new race succeeded. At 
first all was well. But gradually the evil inherent in matter 
reasserted itself, and the world was soon ready for chaos 
again. Then the deity again took control, restoring order to 
creation and making the world immortal and self-creating in 
the cosmic change. Men and animals now reproduced their 
own species, after their kinds, and civilization developed (Laws 
677 ff.). Here is Plato’s weird presentation in his own words, 
tied in with his transmigration premise:
“For when this whole order of things had come to its destined end, 
there must needs be universal change once more. For die earthborn 
race had by now become quite exhausted—each soul had run through
10 Cf. Plato, The Republic 617, in Loeb Classical Library (hereafter abbreviated to 
LCL), Plato The Republic, vol. 2, pp. 503-505.
Under Plato, One of the Greatest Thinkers of All Antiquity, Immortal-Soulism 
Reached Its Amazing Height.
its appointed number of births and had returned as seed to the earth 
as many times as had been ordained for it” (272 e).n
So a mystical haze is cast, by Plato, over the origin of evil 
and the growth of civilization among men.“
3. 
Epitome of Plato’s Concept of Soul.—Jowett, in the 
master index to his two-volume translation of The Dialogues
u J. B. Skemp, Plato’s Statesman, in LLA, No. 57. pp. 29-32.
18 Jowett, The Dialogues of Plato, vol. 2, pp. 484, 485. See also Martin Oswald, Intro­
duction to Skemp, Plato’s Statesman, in LLA, No. 57, pp. 24-27.
566
PLATO—FOUNTAINHEAD OF INNATE IMMORTALITY 567
of Plato, ably summarizes Plato’s teachings on the soul under 
several heads. This will provide an over all view of Plato’s 
curious concepts—with some unavoidable repetition:
a. The soul allegedly exists prior to the body (Timaeus 
34 e)—the body to be its servant, heeding its commands, while 
the soul ever seeks to escape from the body in which it is 
“encaged,” or “entombed,” thus to go to its home with God.
b. In the Laws there are “two souls”—a good and an evil 
(Laws 896). Such a Dualism seeks to account for the existence 
of evil. (In Timaeus, Plato “explains the wickedness of man 
by the hypothesis” of this second, or “mortal soul” as the 
“work of the inferior gods, and in which passions and desires 
have their seat.”)
c. “The division of the soul into three elements, reason, 
spirit, appetite (or desires) ... is made the means of classify­
ing the different forms of government. Virtue is the harmony 
... of these elements, when the dictates of reason are enforced 
by passion against the appetites, while vice is the anarchy or dis­
cord of the soul when passion and appetite join in rebellion 
against reason.”
d. The pre-existence of the soul is presented in Meno, 
Phaedo, and Phaedrus. In Meno (86) and Phaedo (73), “ ‘re­
membrance of a previous existence’ is made a proof of im­
mortality.” It is also alluded to in the myth of Er (Republic 
621 a). (In Phaedo doubt is expressed by Simmias and Cebes 
that the soul is immortal. They fear that although the soul 
may outlive many bodies, it may be worn out in the end, 
and at last perish and decay.)
e. The immortality of the soul is discussed chiefly in the 
Phaedo and The Republic, but it is mentioned in various other 
writings. Notice is taken of the claim that the soul resembles 
a harmony, like the music of the lyre. But this is denied 
because the soul is declared to be a cause, not an effect. It 
leads the body, whereas harmony follows the instrument. And 
it allows for discord. Life, which is the essence of the soul, 
excludes death. Death cannot be predicated of the soul.
568
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
/. The condition of the soul after death is described in sev­
eral dialogues under the form of myths. All attest that the soul, 
upon release from the body, goes to give account of itself before 
the judgment seat—the righteous being sent to the Isles of 
the Blest; the wicked to suffer punishment, not hopeless or 
eternal, but proportionate to their offenses. In Phaedo 113 e 
and Gorgias 525, a few great sinners, however, are consigned 
to Hades. “When the penalty has been paid, the soul must 
choose a new life,” with responsibility of choice resting upon 
itself. If it has learned wisdom it is given a better lot. But if it 
persists in folly, and chooses an inferior life, it assumes the 
form of a lower animal. But there is even a limit to the blessed­
ness of the righteous—when the appointed time comes, they 
too must make new choices (Phaedrus 249; Republic 619 c).
g. The doctrine of the transmigration of souls was evidently 
adopted by Plato because it comported with the concept that 
he uniformly expresses of the remedial nature of punishment. 
This was evidently derived from Oriental sources but through 
Pythagorean channels.13
Such are Plato’s leading fancies concerning the soul.
4. 
Twofold 
Souls, 
Fixed Number, and Transmigra­
tion.—Here is one of Plato’s amazing views: Holding to the 
Pythagorean doctrine of the eternity of the soul, he believed 
that the total number of souls is fixed, that it is impossible 
that there should be more than are allotted, so that “whatever 
the number of souls, all must have existed from eternity.” This 
was basic.
Another strange teaching was that the soul is twofold— 
that which is immortal being derived from the good supreme 
god, and that which is mortal being created by the inferior 
gods, and maintained by constant accretions. These are, re­
spectively, the rational and animal souls. The former is essen­
tial being, and is intrinsically good. It is immortal and cannot 
be destroyed by moral evil. In this concept of the self-subsist­
ence of the soul lay the germ of Restorationism.
13 Jowett, Dialogues of Plato, vol. 2, pp. 921-923.
PLATO—FOUNTAINHEAD OF INNATE IMMORTALITY 569
Plato also held to the successive migration of souls through 
various human and brute forms. And he held the doctrine 
of eternal punishment for some, involving deadly Dualism. 
Moreover, the divine power was limited, and the allotted pe­
riod determined by an allotted number. But the power of the 
gods was unable to bring all things to perfection, hence the 
strange doctrine of eternal vicissitude.
5. Weird Aggregation of 
Platonic Concepts.—Plato 
also had weird notions concerning the work of the Demiurge 
in the formation of souls. These included the number of souls 
equal to the stars, the place assigned to each soul in its own 
peculiar star, the relation of man’s soul to the world soul, the 
tripartite nature of the soul, its placement in the body, its 
spectral form, prowling around tombs and reverting to the 
bodies of beasts, birds, and insects, such as asses, wolves, hawks, 
kites, bees, wasps, ants. These were all an integral part of 
Plato’s reasoning, and the inseparable groundwork for his con­
clusions.
The Platonic theory of Innate Immortality therefore de­
pends for its main support upon the postulate of the pre-exist­
ence of the soul, and is inextricably bound up with the assump­
tion of metempsychosis.14
6. Mythical Tale of the Judgment Invoked.—So sure 
is Plato of his belief in immortality that he employs his argu­
ments chiefly to justify his beliefs. And there is no avoiding 
recognition of the fact that he supports his views as concerns 
the judgment by recourse to four myths,15 in his endeavor to 
bridge the chasm between the seen and the unseen world. And 
these myths have, in turn, had a very marked influence upon 
the later beliefs of others.
For example: Plato’s Republic closes with the legend of 
Er, the son of Armenius, who allegedly saw in trance the judg-
14 See Phaedo 71-82; Timaeus 42, 92; Phaedrus 246-249; and Meno 81.
18 Gorgias 523-526; Phaedo 113, 114; Phaedrus 249-257; and The Republic 614-616.
570
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
ment of the dead and the hidden glories of the unseen world, 
and who returned without drinking of the “River of Forgetful­
ness.” 16 Thus he was able to recall what he saw, which expe­
rience was not vouchsafed to the others.
In noting this, we should ever remember that Plato main­
tains the postulate of the transmigration of souls and the 
long journey of souls (after judgment) for their rebirth as 
birds or animals. The tale is briefly this: Er died in battle. 
When the corpses were gathered ten days later, Er’s body, un­
like the rest, was not decayed. Two days later, while lying on 
the funeral pyre, Er recovered and recounted what he had seen 
in the other world.
According to the tale, when his soul left his body it jour­
neyed with many others and came to a mysterious place where 
there were two openings into the earth, side by side, and two 
corresponding openings into the sky above. Between these 
openings sat judges. And according to the respective verdicts 
they ordered the souls of the righteous to go to the right, and 
ascend into the sky, and the souls of the wicked to go to the left, 
and downward into the earth. Er was told to report to mankind 
about this other world.
He declared that he saw souls come up for judgment and 
depart either by an opening into the sky or by one into the 
earth. But through the other two openings (into the sky and 
earth) Er saw souls arriving—all the stained from within the 
earth, and the stainless back from the sky. Those from the 
sky arrived as from a long journey, and departed to a meadow, 
where they greeted many friends, telling of indescribable beauty 
and pleasure in the sky. The others, with tears, told of their 
thousand-year journey and sufferings under the earth. For all 
their misdeeds they paid a tenfold penalty. The grossly wicked, 
the incurable sinners, had fearful punishment, and were cast 
into the terrors of Hell. Such were the penalties and punish­
ments and the contrasting blessings portrayed.
18 Plato, The Republic 614-621, in LCL, Plato The Republic, vol. 2, pp. 491-521.
PLATO—FOUNTAINHEAD OF INNATE IMMORTALITY 571
But that was not all. After a seven-day respite the groups 
in the meadow were obliged to proceed on their journey, 
choosing according to past incarnations, to become as birds, or 
beasts, or women—each drinking from the waters of forgetful­
ness, which blot out memory of the previous life. Then Er 
awoke. As a sequel, Socrates admonished that “the soul is im­
mortal and capable of enduring all extremes of good and evil.” 
So live, he urges, that “both here and in that journey of a 
thousand years, whereof I have told you, we shall fare well.” 
Such a crass myth was part and parcel of Plato’s portrayal of 
the destiny of the soul.
7. 
Dualism 
Involved 
in “Two” 
E
ternal 
Souls.—The 
Laws is primarily political, but in Book x stress is laid on reli­
gious beliefs. This section embodies Plato’s exposition of natural 
theology—the cosmological argument based on the belief that 
all motion requires a “good soul” as its source. The existence 
of a second maleficent world-soul, identified with “necessity,” 
is also defended (x. 896).” God is the good supreme soul, along 
with a second maleficent world-soul—which, of course, is un­
concealed Dualism.
The Laws repeats and amplifies what is said elsewhere— 
that all that has life has soul (726).18 But in Book x there is this 
new emphasis—that the soul (the self-motion) is “prior to the 
body,” and is the cause of all motion (896).19 Moreover, soul is 
the cause of all things good and bad, just and unjust. It resides 
in everything that has movement—including the heavens. It 
“directs” all things through “will.” The soul “directs all things 
in heaven, and earth, and the sea and her movements” (897). 
This is elaborated on. Evil is included, as well as good. Fur­
thermore, there are declared to be at least “two souls”—“one 
the author of good, and the other of evil” (896).20 Such is 
Plato’s Dualism.
This Dualism consequently involves two warring souls
17 Jowett, Dialogues of Plato, vol. 2, p. 638.
572
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
in Heaven. The good soul, or souls, gifted with wisdom, are 
responsible for the motions of the sun, moon, and stars, and 
are rightly called gods (899). The bad souls are the souls of 
ignorant men. Ignorance (absence of knowledge) causes some 
souls to misdirect their powers. This is to be cured by teaching 
and education. But the soul is the highest and noblest part of 
man. And the world is governed by the better of the two 
souls (897, 898).21 The implications, however, are far reach­
ing. Such is another of the strange vagaries soberly put forth by 
Plato as part of his immortal-soul thesis.
21 Ibid., pp. 639, 640. See also Grube, op. cit., p. 146.
CHAPTER 
THIRTY-TWO
Pagan Philosophy’s Basic Arguments 
for Immortal'Soulism
The Phaedo—Peak of Plato’s Teaching on the Soul
Many able scholars believe that the earliest group of Pla­
to’s dialogues includes the Phaedo, the Gorgias, and the Sympo­
sium; that in the second, or middle, period are found The Re­
public, the Phaedrus, and the Theaetetus; while in the third 
and last period are clustered the Timaeus, the Philebus, and 
the Laws—the latter recognized as Plato’s last.1 By dealing in 
depths with the Phaedo, the Phaedrus, and the Timaeus, we 
therefore touch on all three major periods in Plato’s views and 
writings. But, before beginning the survey, this general state­
ment from a specialist should be noted.
1. 
Immortal-Soulism Not Originally Held by Plato. 
—According to Oxford’s Dr. R. H. Charles, Innate Immortality 
was not originally a part of Plato’s thinking. Here is Charles’s 
statement:
“The immortality of the soul was not originally a part of Plato’s 
system. We have in the Republic the various stages through which his 
views passed before he arrived at his maturest convictions.” 2
And with that point is to be placed the commonly recog­
nized fact that the deathlessness of the soul, in endless happi­
ness or misery, was not the general belief of the Greeks. Fur-
1 This listing is based on stylometry, developed by Lewis Campbell. See also Grube, 
op. cit., pp. xi, xii.
2 Charles, The Doctrine of the Future Life, p. 152. (He cites Krohn, Pfleiderer, and 
Rohde.)
573
574
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
thermore, the Phaedo is a joint declaration of the views of 
both Socrates and Plato, or at least of Socrates through Plato’s 
mind and hand.
2. Distinctive Angles of Three Dialogues.—As noted, 
with but few exceptions, Plato’s writings are in the form of 
dialogues—often with Socrates as the principal speaker, in col­
loquy with certain critics or pupils. But it is generally recog­
nized that the various speakers are really voicing Plato’s own 
beliefs. Each of the three great dialogues here surveyed makes 
its own approach, as concerns the soul—the Timaeus, in the 
light of the soul’s divine origin; the Phaedrus, as a principle 
of motion and a prior existence; and the Phaedo, unfolding 
the grandeur of its after existence, as well as gathering together 
the various reasonings and completing the arguments.
The divine and enduring soul, destined to eternal exist­
ence, is here contrasted with the mutable, perishing human 
body. The Phaedo far surpasses all previous attainments of 
pagan Greek thought on the origin, nature, and destiny of the 
soul. Let us first analyze the evidence of the Phaedo, most 
famous of all Plato’s writings.8
3. “The Soul Is the Man.”—The major discussion of 
the nature of the soul is restricted principally to the Phaedo, 
Phaedrus, and Timaeus, but it is also involved in The Republic 
and the Laws. And it is briefly touched upon in such smaller 
works as Meno, Gorgias, Theaetetus, Philebus, Statesman, 
Sophist, Symposium, and Alcibiades i—thirteen in all. For in­
stance, in Alcibiades i (130) there is discussion of man as “one 
of three things”—“soul, body, or both together forming the 
whole.” 4 The speaker rejects the concept that the combination
3 Note: In compassing Plato’s witness on the soul, heavy draft has been made on Dr. 
G. M. A. Grube’s Plato s Thought (1935), with its highly valuable Index. Under the Dialogues 
division, ten of Plato’s separate works are listed—Laws, Meno, Phaedo, Phaedrus, Philebus, 
Politicus, Republic, Sophist, Symposium, Timaeus—the pages bearing on immortality being 
listed. Moreover, his masterful chapter four, on “The Nature of the Soul,” deals with these 
in running commentary form. His keen and comprehensive conclusions have borne out the 
witness of my own independent search of the sources, and have been used as a check for my 
own findings. (See Grube, op. cit., pages 316, 317.)
* Jowett, Dialogues of Plato, vol. 2, p. 765.
PAGAN BASIC ARGUMENTS FOR IMMORTAL-SOULISM 575
of the first two constitutes the man, and flatly says that only 
“the soul is man.”6
4. Socrates Welcomes Death as “Initiation” to After­
life.—The Phaedo is a dramatic account of the last conversa­
tions and concerns of Socrates, one of the noblest of pagan teach­
ers, during his last hours on earth. The scene, an Athenian 
prison; the time, the summer of 399 b.c. The day is spent dis­
cussing the origin, nature, and destiny of the human soul. This 
indicates the importance of the theme.
The immortality of the soul is here set forth with touch­
ing background and pathetic setting. It presents Socrates and 
his friends in the prison, the cheerfulness of the victim, the 
distress of his friends, the emotion of the jailer. Socrates, the 
philosopher, does not fear death—which he repeatedly declares 
to be the “separation of soul from body” in which it is encased 
—because he had repressed the lusts that had beset his em­
bodied soul. He felt himself prepared in his pagan way. And 
now he welcomes death as “the final step in an initiation into 
true being.” And this position was acknowledged to be in 
sharp contrast with the current belief of the masses that “the 
human soul is no more than the physical breath which death 
disperses.” 8
5. Death Declared “Final Step” Into “True Being.”— 
Because of illness Plato was not present during this dialogue 
on that fateful day. Eleven were present. Phaedo (after whom 
he named it) gave a faithful report to Plato, then twenty-eight, 
who had been with Socrates for eight years. Under Plato’s hand 
it becomes a story unmatched in the annals of ancient litera­
ture. In this colloquy on life and death Socrates, as a philoso­
pher, with imperturbable calm welcomes death as the final 
step of entrance into “true being,” holding that only after 
death does “the soul exist by herself, separate from the body” 
(67)/
5 Ibid., p. 766.
6 F. H. Anderson, Introduction to F. J. Church, Plato’s Phaedo, in LLA No. 30, p. xiii. 
Dr. Anderson is professor of philosophy, University of Toronto.
7 Church, op. cit., p. 12.
576
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
But, we repeat, the Socrates of the Phaedo expresses exactly 
the same concepts held by Plato, as attested by all his other 
writings. The voice is therefore that of Socrates-Plato, speaking 
in unison.
6. Death: 
“Separation” of Soul From “Body.”—Soc­
rates launches into his main contentions by asserting:
“I am as sure as I can be in such matters that I am going to live 
with gods who are very good masters. And therefore I am not so much 
grieved at death; I am confident that the dead have some kind of existence, 
and, as has been said of old, an existence that is far better for the good 
than for the wicked” (63).8
This concept, then, was not original with Socrates.
Declaring that he was of “good cheer,” and hoping to gain 
the “greatest good” in the “other world” (64), Socrates asks, 
“Do we believe death to be anything?” (64). Then he expressly 
defines death as the “separation of the soul from the body,” 
and asks:
“Does not death mean that the body comes to exist by itself, separated 
from the soul, and that the soul exists by herself, separated from the body? 
What is death but that?” (64).®
That is the initial premise in the Socrates-Plato reasoning.
He declares that “as long as we have this body, and an 
evil of that sort is mingled with our souls, we shall never fully 
gain what we desire.” It is asserted that we live “in slavery 
to the cares of the body.” 10 Only “after we are dead” can we 
“gain the wisdom which we desire” (66).u And why? “For 
then, and not till then, will the soul exist by herself, separate 
from the body” (67).12
Six times in the four pages of sections 64 to 67 this thought 
and the term “separation” of soul and body occur.
7. Popular View: 
Soul Perishes at Death.—One of 
Socrates’ companions, Cebes, often speaking in opposition to 
Socrates, voices the popular Greek skepticism:
* Ibid., pp. 7, 8.
0 Ibid., p. 9.
*> Ibid., p. 11.
» Ibid., p. 12.
12 Ibid.
PAGAN BASIC ARGUMENTS FOR IMMORTAL-SOULISM 577
“But men are very incredulous of what you have said of the soul. 
They fear that she will no longer exist anywhere when she has left the 
body, but that she will be destroyed and perish on the very day of death. 
They think that the moment that she is released and leaves the body, 
she will be dissolved and vanish away like breath or smoke, and thence­
forward cease to exist at all” (70).ls
It is to be noted that destroy and perish, dissolve and van­
ish, are here used as denoting complete cessation of existence.
8. Living Are Born “Only From the Dead.’’—Socrates- 
Plato—for this was their joint teaching—insist that through 
death men are “born,” or “born again,” into the “next world.” 
This thought is repeated three times in the one paragraph. A 
variant form, “generated from the dead,” likewise appears 
more than once in close proximity (71, 72).1* Here is a precise 
statement, based on an “ancient belief”:
“Let us consider whether or not the souls of men exist in the next 
world after death, thus. There is an ancient belief, which we remember, 
that on leaving this world they exist there, and that they return hither 
and are born again from the dead. But if it be true that the living are 
born from the dead, our souls must exist in the other world; otherwise 
they could not be born again. It will be a sufficient proof that this is so 
if we can really prove that the living are born only from the dead” (xv. 
70).15
9. Soul Declared “Immortal,” “Indestructible,” “In­
dissoluble.”—And now in Phaedo 73 the key phrase “soul 
immortal” first appears. This one term “immortal,” is men­
tioned about nineteen times in this seventy-four-page treatise. 
And, in addition, several variants are added—“imperishable,” 
“indestructible,” “unchanging,” “unchangeable,” “indissolu­
ble,” and “divine.” There is no escaping Plato’s intent.
10. Postulate 
of 
Soul’s 
Pre-existence 
Involved.— 
Cebes points out the logical and inevitable conclusion to this 
immortality argument in these words:
"If the doctrine which you are fond of stating, that our learning is
“ Ibid., p. 15.
« Ibid., pp. 16-18.
15 Ibid., p. 16. (Italics supplied.)
19
578
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
only a process of recollection, be true, then I suppose we must have 
learned at some former time what we recollect now. And that would be 
impossible unless our souls had existed somewhere before they came into 
human form. So that is another reason for believing the soul immortal” 
(73).“
Recollection of former existences is thus an added argu­
ment that is used.
11. 
Souls Must Have Existed Before Birth.—Socrates 
argued that knowledge is reminiscence by the soul of former 
modes of existence in other bodies—“knowledge before our 
birth” (76)." The companions of Socrates logically raised the 
question as to whether the soul’s pre-existence is really proof 
of its “survival in perpetuity.”18 Socrates insists that—
“our souls must have existed before ever we were born. But if they do 
not exist, then our reasoning will have been thrown away. Is it so? If 
these ideas exist, does it not at once follow that our souls must have 
existed before we were born, and if they do not exist, then neither did 
our souls?” (76).“
But these “ideas” bear, of course, on prior existence, rather 
than after existence.
It is to be observed that this expression, “existed before 
ever we were born,” appears five times in Phaedo 76-77,20 to­
gether with the expression “all life is generated from death” 
(77).21 Simmias states that Cebes is “perfectly convinced that 
our souls existed before we were born” (77).“ But he adds 
that he himself does “not think”—
“that you have proved that the soul will continue to exist when we are 
dead. The common fear wrhich Cebes spoke of, that she may be scattered 
to the winds at death, and that death may be the end of her existence, 
still stands in the way. Assuming that the soul is generated and comes 
together from some other elements, and exists before she ever enters 
the human body, why should she not come to an end and be destroyed, 
after she has entered into the body, when she is released from it?" (77).21
It “must also be shown,” he adds, “that our souls will con­
tinue to exist after we are dead ... if the proof is to be com-
M Ibid., p. 19. Cf. xxxvii. 88, p. 39. 
20 Ibid., pp. 25-27.
” Ibid., pp. 24, 25. 
21 Ibid., p. 26.
» Ibid., pp. 38, 39. 
22 Ibid.
» Ibid., p. 25. 
22 Ibid.
plete.” But Socrates insists that “that has been shown” (77).24
Socrates chides them for being “afraid that the wind will 
really blow the soul away and disperse her when she leaves the 
body” (77).“ He declares that the soul is not “compound and 
composite,” and that what is “uncompounded” is not liable to 
“dissolution” (78).“ To him that argument was final.
12. “Soul” Invisible, Unchangeable; 
“Body” Visible, 
Changing.—Two kinds of existence, “visible” and “invisible,” 
are next set forth by Socrates-Plato. The “invisible” is “un­
changeable” and “unchanging,” and the “visible is always 
changing.” The “body” is definitively the “visible,” whereas 
the “soul” is the “invisible” (79).” But “the soul employs the 
body,” making use of its sight, hearing, and other senses. So, 
the Phaedo concludes, the soul “goes away to the pure, and 
eternal, and immortal, and unchangeable, to which she is kin” 
(79).“ On the contrary, the body is “changeable.” Then comes 
the declaration, “The soul is like the divine, and the body is 
like the mortal” (80).2® The two are in complete antithesis.
And now comes the summarizing declaration:
“The soul is most like the divine, and the immortal, and the intel­
ligible, and the uniform, and the indissoluble, and the unchangeable; 
while the body is most like the human, and the mortal, and the unintel­
ligible, and the multiform, and the dissoluble, and the changeable” (80).®°
Words could not be more explicit.
13. Souls “Imprisoned” in Succession of Animal Bod­
ies.—The argument is next presented that “after a man is 
dead, the visible part of him”—the “body,” or “corpse”—is 
subject, in due time, to “dissolution and decomposition.” But 
the pure soul, which is “invisible,” goes to Hades (the “unseen 
world”), “to dwell with the good and wise God” (80).*1 No 
“taint of the body” adheres, but the soul goes away to the 
invisible, divine, and immortal (81).32 On the contrary, the
PAGAN BASIC ARGUMENTS FOR IMMORTAL-SOULISM 579
24 Ibid.
25 Ibid., p. 26. 
28 Ibid., p. 27.
27 Ibid., p. 28.
25 Ibid., p. 29.
20 Ibid.
a® Ibid., p. 30. 
si Ibid.
32 Ibid., p. 31.
580
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
soul that is “defiled and impure,” on its departure is “dragged 
back to the visible world,” and here “haunts” the “graves and 
tombs” (81).33 Socrates describes them as “imprisoned” souls:
“These are not the souls of the good, but of the evil, which are com­
pelled to wander in such places as a punishment for the wicked lives 
that they have lived; and their wanderings continue until, from the 
desire for the corporeal [a body] that clings to them, they are again im­
prisoned in a body.
“And, he continued, they are imprisoned, probably, in the bodies 
of animals with habits similar to the habits which were theirs in their 
lifetime” (81).84
This reincarnation in the bodies of animals includes “asses 
and suchlike animals”—if one has been gluttonous, or per­
chance, if one has been tyrannous, in “the bodies of wolves, 
and hawks, and kites.” “In short, . . . each enters an animal 
with habits like its own” (82).“
This thought of the soul’s being “imprisoned” in a body, 
and bound in her “prison house, the body,” is repeated several 
times.” Reference is also made to the soul’s being “bound” and 
“fastened,” and the condition is called a “captivity,” from 
which the soul must be “released” (82; 83).” A soul is “de­
filed with the body when she leaves it, and cannot be pure 
when she reaches the other world; and so she soon falls back 
into another body and takes root in it, like seed that is sown” 
(83).” But the “philosopher or lover of knowledge” goes to the 
“race of the gods.” 39 Philosophy “strives to release” the soul 
“from her captivity” (83).40 So death is a special boon to the 
thinker. These and other features constitute the Socrates-Plato 
Immortal-Soulism in all its baldness.
14. 
Soul “Wears Out” Succession of “Many Bodies.” 
—The Phaedo contends that the soul passes through a succes­
sion of bodies. In fact, it is declared that “each soul wears out 
many bodies” (87). The soul is “wholly indestructible and
33 ibid.
31 Ibid., p. 32.
33 Ibid.
38 Ibid., pp. 32, 33.
37 Ibid., pp. 33, 34.
38 Ibid., p. 34.
38 Ibid., p. 32.
PAGAN BASIC ARGUMENTS FOR IMMORTAL-SOULISM 581
immortal,” not dying when the body dies.41 Then Socrates re­
peats the questions raised by Simmias and Cebes:
“Simmias, I think, has fears and misgivings that the soul, being of 
the nature of a harmony, may perish before the body, though she is 
more divine and nobler than the body. Cebes, if I am not mistaken, 
conceded that the soul is more enduring than the body; but he said 
that no one could tell whether the soul, after wearing out many bodies 
many times, did not herself perish on leaving her last body, and whether 
death be not precisely this—the destruction of the soul; for the destruc­
tion of the body is unceasing” (91)/2
15. 
Soul as Instrumental “Harmony” Argument Dis­
missed.—Simmias presents the harmony counter-theory of the 
soul—that the soul is as beautiful music from a musical in­
strument, but perishes with the destruction of the “mortal” 
body, or “corporeal” instrument. The soul therefore is a re­
sultant “mixture and harmony of the elements by which our 
body is . . . held together. It may perish before the body” 
(86).43 Socrates argued that “our souls must necessarily have 
existed somewhere else, before they were imprisoned in our 
bodies” (92).“ Here is Cebes’ summarizing argument:
“Our souls existed in the period before we were born, but also that 
there is no reason why some of them should not continue to exist in the 
future, and often come into being, and die again, after we are dead; for 
the soul is strong enough by nature to endure coming into being many 
times. He might grant that, without conceding that she suffers no harm 
in all these births, or that she is not at last wholly destroyed at one of 
the deaths; and he might say that no man knows when this death and 
dissolution of the body which brings destruction to the soul, will be, 
for it is impossible for any man to find out that. But if this is true, a 
man’s confidence about death must be an irrational confidence, unless 
he can prove that the soul is wholly indestructible and immortal. Other­
wise everyone who is dying must fear that his soul will perish utterly 
this time in her separation from the body” (88).4B
The pre-existence and transmigration and reincorporation 
of souls is thus the bedrock foundation upon which the whole 
superstructure of the Platonic immortality of the soul is 
built.
« Ibid., pp. 38, 39.
42 Ibid., p. 43.
13 Ibid., pp. 36, 37.
44 Ibid., p. 43.
45 Ibid., p. 39.
582
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
This argument quashed the harmony contention with Soc­
rates’ companions. The harmony obviously could not exist be­
fore the instrument (92).“
16. Soul’s Immortality Connotes Indestructibility.— 
Socrates’ (and Plato’s) closing argument is this: Since “the 
soul is immortal” (106), it is therefore “imperishable.”47 
This brought the candid admission from Cebes: “Beyond all 
question the soul is immortal and imperishable, and our souls 
will indeed exist in the other world” (107).48
Then comes the admonition, but based on an “if”:
"If it be true that the soul is immortal, we have to take care of her, 
not merely on account of the time which we call life, but also on account 
of all time [futurity]. Now we can see how terrible is the danger of 
neglect. For if death had been a release from all things, it would have 
been a godsend to the wicked; for when they died they would have 
been released with their souls from the body and from their own 
wickedness. But now we have found that the soul is immortal, and so 
her only refuge and salvation from evil is to become as perfect and wise 
as possible. For she takes nothing with her to the other world but her 
education and culture; and these, it is said, are of the greatest service 
or of the greatest injury to the dead man at the very beginning of his 
journey thither” (107).“
17. Fancied Fate of Incorrigibly Wicked.—Not only 
does the Phaedo assert a future life, it avows a retributive order 
of that life. It declares a judgment after death for all souls, ac­
cording to the deeds done in the body—with a Heaven for the 
pure and a Hell for the vile, and a gradation of rewards and pun­
ishments. And it affirms a correspondence between sin and 
reality. After describing the earth and the dwelling place of 
the gods, Socrates touches upon Tartarus, with its never-fail­
ing, turbid underground rivers of water and fire and surging 
“liquid mud,” like a “lava stream,” and of earth’s great 
“chasms,” one of which is Tartarus (111-114).“ As authority 
he quotes Homer and other poets.61
« Ibid., pp. 43, 44. 
« Ibid., pp. 62, 63.
47 Ibid., pp. 61, 62. 
» ibid 
pp 66.69.
« Ibid., p. 62.
31 The part that pagan myths played in Plato’s presentations is also seen in the Gorgias 
description of the judgment and retribution in Tartarus, which is confessedly based on a myth,
L. DAVID, ARTIST 
BETTMANN ARCHIVE
Socrates, Propounding the Soul’s Immortality, Was Condemned to Death and 
Compelled to Drink the Poisoned Hemlock.
Four rivers are described—Oceanus, Acheron, Pyriphleg- 
ethon, and Cocytus—all falling into Tartarus 
(112, 113). 
When the dead come, “sentence is first passed on them accord­
ing as their lives.” Some are punished for their crimes, 
and “purified and absolved,” and rewarded according to their 
“deserts.” The incurably wicked are “hurled down to Tarta­
rus” as their fate—eternal imprisonment—“whence they never 
come forth again.” Those that are not irremedial are like­
wise cast into Tartarus for a limited time. After a year, if they 
repent, they are cast forth, and their sufferings cease. Other­
wise sentence to Tartarus is passed (113, 114).82
But the righteous “are set free and released from this 
world, as from a prison.” These thenceforth dwell in a “pure 
habitation” on the “earth’s surface.” But those who have “puri­
fied themselves with philosophy,” thenceforth, “without bod­
ies,” proceed to indescribably fair dwellings. And Socrates 
adds, “Noble is the prize, and great the hope.” Socrates-Plato, 
it must be added, did not claim that the soul’s future would be
but which Plato nevertheless regarded as a “true story,” and as “strict truth” (523) (Plato’s 
Gorgtas, in LLA, No. 20, p. 102).
52 Church, Plato’s Phaedo, in LLA, No. 30, p. 69.
583
584
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
exactly as here pictured, but rather that if the soul is immortal, 
something of the kind must be before it (114).53
18. 
Drinks the Hemlock and Faces “Journey.”—Then 
comes the dramatic moment, when Socrates must drink the 
hemlock, and await his “journey to the other world.” He in­
dulges in a pleasantry when he replies to Crito’s question, 
“How shall we bury you?” He answers, “He thinks that I am 
the body which he will presently see as a corpse, and he asks 
how he is to bury me. . . . Say that you are burying my body; 
and you may bury it as you please” (115, 116).**
After bathing himself and sending away his family, Socra­
tes calls for the cup of poison, and says, “But I suppose that 
I may, and must, pray to the gods that my journey hence may 
be prosperous” (117).M Then calmly, without change of color 
or feature, he drains the cup. His legs become heavy, under 
the effects of the hemlock, and he lies down, as the coldness 
and stiffness of death spread over his body. His eyes and lips 
are closed. The end has come.
63 Ibid., pp. 69, 70. See also Republic 614 ff. for more detailed account of the rewards 
and punishments of the next world.
64 Church, Plato’s Phaedo, p. 71.
»Ibid., p. 73.
CHAPTER 
THIRTY-THREE
Immortal Human Souls Part of 
World'Soul
I. Phaedrus—Mythical Flights of Composite Winged Souls
Plato’s Phaedrus, another late work, has a section bring­
ing out further points on the alleged nature of the soul (245)1 
that bear directly on Innate Immortality. Part of this discus­
sion parallels the argument appearing in Laws 893-896.a But in 
Phaedrus the soul is set forth as a mystical composite, having 
higher and lower elements, whereas in the Phaedo it appears 
as one and indivisible.
1. Crucial Conflicts Between “Parts” 
of Soul.—As 
intimated, there are allegedly three parts of the same soul 
(253).3 The conflict portrayed here is within the soul, rather 
than between soul and body, as in the Phaedo. And in the 
Gorgias there is consistent reference to “that part of the soul 
where the desires are located, the unprincipled part” (493).4 
In Phaedrus, in the good life the passions are obedient to the in­
tellect, which is the charioteer, controlling the life and produc­
ing a state of harmony (253).' Thus there are variations and 
discrepancies between the different dialogues.
2. Tripartite Division 
of Soul Built 
on 
“Myth.”— 
Here in the Phaedrus, Plato soberly presents the astonishing
1W. C. Helmbold and W. G. Rabinowitz, Plato’s Phaedrus, in LLA, No. 40, p. 27.
2 Jowett, Dialogues of Plato, vol. 2, pp. 634-638.
3 Helmbold and Rabinowitz, op. cit., p. 38.
4 W. C. Helmbold, Plato’s Gorgias, in LLA, No. 20, p. 63.
E Helmbold and Rabinowitz, loc. cit. 
»
585
586
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
myth of the three-part form of the immortal soul, covering 
not only human beings but the gods, as well. We must now 
follow the amazing reasoning that leads to his conclusions. The 
poetical figure of a tripart composite of the soul is unabashedly 
presented, in the likening of the soul to a winged group in the 
form of a pair of horses (one, white and good; the other, black 
and evil), with “intellect” as the charioteer—but all three 
forming a unit (246-248).° Because of the contrariness of one 
of the horses the driving is difficult, and grave difficulties de­
velop.
On the contrary, in the case of the gods, both steeds and 
driver are “entirely noble.” However, with man they are mixed 
—the charioteer having difficulty with his steeds (246).7 W. C. 
Helmbold, of the University of California, summarizes in his 
Introduction the outcome of the clash between the plunging 
horses. It is the story of descent from the heavens to the earth 
in this curious way:
“The soul loses feathers from its wings; it drops to earth 
and takes a home, that is, a body which is governed by the 
composite soul.” 8
Such is the fantastic tale, with its poetic imagery, invoked 
to enforce Plato’s argument.
3. 
“Fault” in “Wings” and “Black Steed.”—Dr. Helm- 
bold outlines the cause—a fault in the wings. So the soul, “in­
tended to soar through the heavens,” drops instead to earth. 
But fault also attaches to the unruly black steed. As a result of 
the plunging of the black horse, and the consequent crush and 
confusion, the soul becomes “lame, or breaks its wings,” and 
is deprived of recapturing on earth the “beatific vision” 
glimpsed before birth. Thus the soul is tied in inseparably 
with the concept of reincarnation. Strangely enough, only the 
soul of the philosopher retains its wings, because he has “com­
munion through memory with those ideas, the communion 
with which causes a god to be divine.” 9 Happiness depends
IMMORTAL HUMAN SOULS PART OF WORLD-SOUL 
587
upon self-control. If this is complete, “their beatitude is as­
sured for eternity.” 10
4. Soul Not “Derived,” Hence Not “Destructible.”— 
In “Socrates Second Speech,” Plato has Socrates say that “we 
must discover the truth about the nature of the soul, both the 
divine and the human.” And he offers as proof the contention 
that “every soul is immortal, for that which moves itself is im­
mortal”—that is, motion that is not derived from something 
else, and hence never ceases.
He explains that “a first principle” “cannot be derived 
from anything at all,” for, if “derived from something else, it 
would lose its nature” in the “process of derivation.” Then he 
adds, as a consequence, “And since it [the soul] does not come 
into being, it must also be imperishable.. . . It is capable neither 
of destruction nor derivation (245).u It cannot “come into 
being” or go out of being. That is the Phaedrus’ conten­
tion and the gist of its argument as to immortality.
5. “Two Souls”: One “Good,” One “Evil.”—But it is 
not that simple. As Plato states in Laws (896): “Soul” is “the 
motion which can move itself.” It is the “first origin and mov­
ing power of all that is, or has become, or will be.” Thus “the 
soul is prior to the body”; “the body is second and comes after­
wards, and is born to obey the soul.” Now, to this, Plato adds, 
“The soul is the cause of good and evil, base and honorable, 
just and unjust, and of all other opposites, if we suppose her to 
be the cause of all things.”
Since “the soul orders and inhabits all things that move,” 
it therefore “orders also the heavens.” Then comes the star­
tling declaration that there are not less than two souls—“one 
the author of good, and the other of evil.” 12 Thus we are again 
led back to stark Dualism, with all its fearsome implications, 
as noted elsewhere.
10 Ibid., p. xi.
11 Ibid., p. 27. Note 9 gives alternate reading, “What is ever in motion is immortal.”
12 Jewett, Dialogues of Plato, vol. 2, p. 638.
588
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
6. “Self-motion” Is “Essence” of Soul.—Then, in the 
Phaedrus, a “definition of the soul” as “self-motion” follows 
in these explicit words:
“Since that which is moved by itself has been shown to be immortal, 
we shall not be disgraced if we declare that this self-motion is the essence, 
the very definition of the soul. For every body that is moved from without 
is soulless; and every body that derives its motion from within itself 
has a soul, since that is indeed the soul’s nature. But if this is so, that 
what really moves itself is not the body and is nothing else but the soul, 
then soul must necessarily be uncreated and immortal 
(245, 246).1S
That is unequivocal—the soul is “uncreated.” And the 
Phaedrus immediately concludes, “As for the soul’s immortal­
ity, enough has been said” (246).14
Reverting to the soul’s form, “expressed more briefly and 
in human language,” Plato develops the famous winged-horses 
and charioteer-figure argument, with its poetic drapery—the 
group having grown into one:
“It is like the composite union of powers in a team of winged horses 
and their charioteer. Now all the gods’ horses and charioteers are good 
and of good descent, but those of other beings are mixed. In the case 
of the human soul, first of all, it is a pair of horses that the charioteer 
dominates; one of them is noble and handsome and of good breeding, 
while the other is the very opposite, so that our charioteer necessarily 
has a difficult and troublesome task’’ (246).15
There are, therefore, the good souls of the gods and the 
mixed souls of human beings.
7. “Immortal 
Soul” 
Plus 
“Mortal 
Body” 
Equals 
“Living Being.”—Next it is explained that a “living being is 
called both mortal and immortal”; that is, the soul is immortal, 
the body mortal. But the soul, which “traverses the entire 
heaven,” is, oddly, “sometimes in one form, sometimes in an­
other.” When the soul is “perfect and fully winged it soars on 
high.” But “if it loses its wings,” it descends “until it can fasten 
on something solid.” It takes on “an earthly body.” So “this
13 Helmbold and Rabinowitz, op. cit., pp. 27, 28. (Italics supplied.)
14 Ibid., p. 28.
» Ibid.
IMMORTAL HUMAN SOULS PART OF WORLD-SOUL 
589
composite structure of soul and body joined together is called 
a living being and is further designated as mortal” (246).19
8. Wing Their Way With 
the Gods.—The “natural 
function of a wing is to raise what is heavy, and soar with it” to 
the dwelling place of the gods (246).17 More than all else, the 
soul partakes of the divine nature. But with man there is strife 
between the good and the evil. The “horse of evil nature” pulls 
the chariot “heavily toward the earth”—if the “charioteer” has 
“not trained him well” (247).18 But when the immortal souls 
“come to the summit” they take their position in Heaven, with 
its entrancing vistas more wonderful than ever poet has en­
visioned. Such, he declares, is the truth. And such is the life of 
the gods (248) as they range through the universe, accompa­
nied by the pure souls.“
9. Vicissitudes of Disembodied Souls and Wings.—The 
myth describes the journey of the disembodied souls, in groups 
according to their characters, “lifted up by love of beauty— 
which causes their wings to grow.” The gods, above the rim of 
Heaven, spend their time in contemplation of the actual “ideal 
Forms,” and human souls follow on as best they can. Amid 
the crush and confusion they too occasionally catch a glimpse of 
the “eternal Forms,” but “lose their wings and drop back to 
earth.” Back here, through the love of beauty—which reminds 
them of the absolute beauty they saw above—the wings of the 
soul begin to grow again (254-256).20 Thus the tale is repeated 
in varying form. But Plato urges:
“At the beginning of this story of ours we divided every soul into 
three parts, two of which had the form of horses, the third that of a 
charioteer. Let us retain this. As we said, one of the horses is good, the 
other is not” (253).21
10. Time Schedule of Progressive Incarnations.—So the 
human soul “sometimes rises, sometimes sinks.” The horses are
16 Ibid. 
w Ibid.
« Ibid., p. 29. 
» Ibid., p. 30.
20 Ibid., pp. 38-42; see also Grube, Plato’s Thought, pp. 131, 132.
21 Helmbold and Rabinowitz, op. cit., pp. 37, 3o.
590
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
unruly. And as other souls also seek the heights, they “jostle 
and trample on one another.’’ As before noted, in the desper­
ate struggle many are “lamed, and many have their wings 
broken through the incompetence of their charioteers.” But 
according to the “Decree of Destiny” those souls that have 
caught sight of truth are “free from harm until the next revo­
lution.”
The soul, however, that is “unable to keep up,” grows 
“heavy.” “And in its heaviness molts its wings and falls to 
earth.” But “such a soul shall not be planted in any beast in 
its first birth.” Instead, it is “planted” in a human body—as 
in a poet, monarch, businessman, physician, priest, craftsman, 
farmer, sophist, et cetera.22
And souls are born over and over. That principle is in­
volved in the argument of the Phaedrus.
“The soul does not return to the place of its origin for 
10,000 years”—for it takes that length of time for it to “regain 
its wings.” And if a soul pursues wisdom for three incarna­
tions “in succession,” it “will become winged in the third 
period of 1000 years and so depart in the 3000th year” (248, 
249).13 Such are the wild vagaries of the Phaedrus. The basis 
of the time schedule is not disclosed.
11. 
Second Incarnation After Thousand Years.—But 
the tale continues. Some, having finished their "first life” 
are said to go to “receive judgment” in “places of chastise­
ment,” “beneath the earth.” Others are “carried aloft by Jus­
tice to some part of the heavens.” Then, after this thousand 
years, both groups “draw lots and choose their second [incar­
nated] life,” each soul choosing “as it wishes.”
A “human soul may enter the life of a beast.” So some 
animals are degraded human souls. And conversely, a “beast 
who was once human may become a man again”—for, it is 
stated, “a soul which has never seen the truth cannot pass into
this human form of ours.” Furthermore, the soul remembers 
what it “once saw as it made its journey with a god,” gazing 
upon “Reality itself.” Plato then interestingly adds at this 
point, “It is right for only the philosopher’s mind to have 
wings,” for “he alone becomes truly perfected. He separates 
himself from the busy interests of men and approaches the di­
vine” (249).24
Such are some of the astonishing vicissitudes of the “hu­
man soul” as here soberly portrayed.
12. 
Souls Become Like the Gods They Follow.—These 
periods of transition are times of agitation and despair as the 
human souls associate with various gods. Some are “not dis­
figured by this so-called body that we carry about with us, im­
prisoned in it like oysters in a shell.” Others are beset by hu­
man passions, and have pain and distress, as the stump of the 
wings begins to sprout as support for the soul—like the gums of 
a child when “cutting teeth.” But it is the “first incarnation 
upon earth” that is declared to be the crucial time. The souls 
of those who follow a good god come to “resemble that god.” 
Those following evil gods become “exactly like their god” 
(252, 253).“
Such were the “poetical figures,” or legends, soberly used 
to portray the vicissitudes of the “immortal soul” in its varied 
migrations and transmigrations across the millenniums of time. 
It must now be apparent that to intelligently and logically 
accept Plato’s conclusions on the immortality of the soul one 
must be willing to follow the actual premises from which those 
conclusions are drawn. And this inevitably necessitates a grasp 
of those premises, which have here been presented.
To reject Plato’s erratic premises while accepting his con­
clusions is obviously an inconsistent procedure. That is why 
we have candidly examined the postulates upon which Plato 
based his deductions, lest the espousal of his conclusions lead us 
into unwitting embarrassment.
IMMORTAL HUMAN SOULS PART OF WORLD-SOUL 
591
24 Ibid., p. 32.
25 Ibid., pp. 34-37. (Italics supplied.)
592
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
II. Timaeus—“Human Soul” Diluted Part of 
“World-Soul”
It is obvious that we must be acquainted with precisely 
what Plato taught and why in order to understand and evalu­
ate his arguments, and thus to determine the soundness and 
validity of his conclusions as later accepted by Philo, Origen, 
and others—even to this day. Let us therefore examine the 
heart of another of his key treatises, the important Timaeus, 
that likewise bears on the origin, nature, and destiny of man. 
First, as to the universe.
1. P
lato’s 
Theory 
of 
Universe 
and 
M
an.—The Ti­
maeus, discussing first the origin and nature of the far-flung 
universe, and then of man, was one of Plato’s latest and most 
mature productions. It was composed when he was nearing 
seventy, shortly after 360 b.c.20 Here the dialogue form gives 
way to continuous discourse. Dealing with cosmology (the 
theory of the universe) and natural science, he comes to the 
generation of the universe (denominated a living sphere com­
posed of “soul” and “body”). Plato discusses the questions of 
“being” and “becoming” and ceaseless change. And while the 
reasoning is candidly based on myth, nevertheless, according 
to Dr. Glenn Morrow, it constitutes a statement of what Plato 
actually believed.27
The Timaeus presents the visible world as a creation, 
based on a planned eternal pattern, brought about “by a cause 
working for the best,” a creation produced by the activity of 
the mythical Demiurge (“artificer,” or cosmic “craftsman”), 
bringing order out of “disorderly materials,” as far as their 
nature permits, for human souls can do wrong of their own will. 
This teleological view of the universe was unique, setting aside 
the cosmogonies of previous philosophers and of popular cur­
26 Glenn R. Morrow, Introduction to Jowett, Plato’s Timaeus, in LLA, No. 14, p. vii. 
Timaeus has been regarded as one of Plato’s most important works. It was, in’fact, almost the 
only work of Plato known to Europe in the Middle Ages (Introduction, p. xxiii).
27 Ibid., p. x. Dr. Morrow is professor of philosophy, University of Pennsylvania.
IMMORTAL HUMAN SOULS PART OF WORLD-SOUL 
593
rent mythology.28 Timaeus thus begins with the “generation of 
the world” and leads on to the “creation of man.” 29
According to the Timaeus, when the Creator formed the 
universe as a whole, and the stars therein, with their godlike 
natures, He commanded the created gods to produce mortal 
beings (41-43).30 But He Himself prepared their immortal 
part in the same “cup” in which He had fashioned the world- 
soul—the only difference being that they were less pure.
2. 
“World-Soul” 
With 
Stars 
as 
“Divine 
Souls.”— 
We should tarry long enough at this point to grasp Plato’s 
concept of the world system, the shape of which he likened to 
a globe. According to Dr. Eduard Zeller, noted German his­
torian of philosophy, and Protestant theologian and scientist, 
the earth was held by Plato to be an immovable round ball in 
the center, at the axis of the universe. The sun, moon, and 
planets circle the earth, the heaven of fixed stars forming the 
outermost circle, turning in one day around the axis of the uni­
verse. And these motions of the heavenly bodies give rise to 
time, each heavenly body having its own orbit.31 Then comes 
this significant summarizing statement by Zeller:
“Far from seeing, like Anaxagoras and Democritus, only dead masses 
in the heavenly bodies, Plato regards them as living beings, whose souls 
must be higher and diviner than human souls, in proportion as their 
bodies are brighter and fairer than ours.”32
Zeller adds that since the stars in their motion follow “pure 
mathematical laws”—
“if the soul is, generally, the moving principle, the most perfect soul must 
be where there is the most perfect motion; and if the motive power in 
the Soul is accompanied by the faculty of knowledge, the highest knowl­
edge must belong to that soul which by a perfectly regular motion of 
body evinces the highest reason.”33
Thus the cosmos, circling about itself, is “absolutely uni-
28 Ibid., p. xi.
28 Jowett, Plato’s Timaeus, in LLA, No. 14, p. 11.
30 Ibid., p. 22 ff.
31 Zeller, Plato and the Older Academy, pp. 379-384.
32 Ibid., p. 384.
33 Ibid., pp. 384, 385.
form and harmonious,” and ‘‘possesses the most divine and 
reasonable soul.” Zeller then summarizes Plato’s expanded 
statement: “The stars are therefore the noblest and most in­
telligent of all created natures; they are the created gods, as 
the universe is the one created God.” 34
Such was Plato’s deification of nature. The heavenly bod­
ies were openly regarded as visible gods.
3. 
Dualism: Evil Will Never Cease to Be.—Another 
distinctive principle that emerges in Timaeus is that of Dual­
ism. Primary (or divine) and secondary (or auxiliary) causes 
in creation are set forth. The Nous (Mind) is persuaded of ne­
cessity to bring the “greater part of created things to perfec­
tion.” 36 It will be well to bear in mind this important observa­
tion of Dr. Morrow before we proceed:
"Plato’s God is not omnipotent, as is the God of Hebrew and Chris­
tian theology. The divine craftsman frequently finds himself hampered 
by the imperfection of his materials, and by a certain incorrigibility resi­
dent in them. His aim always is to realize the good, but we are reminded 
again and again that his achievement is limited by what is possible.” 30
That is a fundamental limitation, and it involves another 
principle.
At this point frank and open Dualism appears in Plato. 
This is amplified in Plato’s important Theaetetus, which 
holds a “central position in the structure of Plato’s system of 
philosophy.” Thus:
"Evils . . . can never pass away, for there must always remain 
something which is antagonistic to good. Having no place among the 
gods in heaven, of necessity they hover around the mortal nature and 
this earthly sphere. Wherefore we ought to fly away from earth to 
heaven as quickly as we can; and to fly away is to become like God, as 
far as this is possible; and to become like him is to become holy, just, 
and wise” (176).31
In such matters it is to be borne in mind that “Plato bor-
594 
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
34 Ibid., p. 385.
38 Morrow, op. cit., p. xiii.
33 Ibid., p. xiv.
37 Jowett, Plato’s Theaetetus, in LLA, No. 13, p. 41; cf. Introduction, p. vii.
IMMORTAL HUMAN SOULS PART OF WORLD-SOUL 
595
rowed heavily from almost all of his predecessors, combining 
their insights to form a single unified theory of reality.” 38 But 
“evil,” Plato held, “is due, not to the will or design of the 
Creator, but to the character of the materials upon which he 
works,” for God is “the author only of good.” 38
4. “Soul” Is Source of All Motion.—With these three 
factors operative—the “eternal pattern,” the “materials,” and 
the 
“Demiurge”—Timaeus 
distinguishes 
between 
“that 
which,” as he graphically puts it, “always is and has no becom­
ing,” and “that which is always becoming and never is.” *° 
“Soul” is the “source of motion”—motion being something 
“capable of moving itself,” and this self-moving agency being 
“soul.” 41 So the Demiurge (or Nous) creates “soul”—first the 
“world-soul and then the soul of man.” 42 “Soul,” “moving and 
living,” was, he adds, the “created image of the eternal gods.” 
“Soul” is therefore “a moving image of eternity” (37).43
This was a new concept in philosophy, embodying far- 
reaching effects. Soul is the beginning, origin, and first princi­
ple of life. As previously noted, the world itself is allegedly a 
“living being,” endowed with soul and mind—and that soul is 
spread throughout the universe.44 That is the essence of Pla­
tonism on the soul. As Morrow says, he argues “that all motion 
eventually presupposes something that is capable of moving 
itself, and that this self-moving agency is soul.” 48
5. “Intermediate” 
Existence 
Between 
“Being” 
and 
“Becoming.”—As Morrow further observes, “The elaborate 
description of the Creation of soul (34c-36e) is difficult to 
comprehend, and has been the theme of almost endless com­
ment and controversy.” He states that the “soul” is set forth 
as “so constituted as to have a kind of existence intermediate 
between Being and Becoming.” 40 Further, “the world-soul is a
38 Ibid., pp. viii, ix. 
45 Morrow, op. cit., p. xvi.
39 Morrow, op. cit., p. xv. 
4« Jowett, Timaeus, in LLA, No. 14, p. xvii.
*°Ibid.
41 Ibid., p. xvi.
42 Ibid.
43 Jowett, Timaeus, in LLA, No. 14, p. 19.
44 See Grubc, op. cit., p. 142.
596
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
mixture of the indivisible and divisible kinds of being,” 4T what­
ever these terms imply. The three ingredients of being are de­
fined as “essence,” “sameness,” and “otherness.” 18 And the ac­
count of creation is “the story of successive actions performed 
by the Demiurge,” 49 This brings Plato’s primal principles be­
fore us.
6. 
Im
m
ortal Part of Man Fashioned by Primal Cre­
ator.—Plato then discusses a third entity, the “receptacle, or 
nurse of all generation.” “Because of its formlessness . . . the 
receptacle cannot be apprehended by sense . . . ; it can only be 
affirmed as something that must be assumed if Becoming is to 
occur” (52 c). And this receptacle, he holds, is “as eternal as 
is the pattern.” 50 Then the account of creation “culminates in 
the creation of man (41b-47c, 69a-90d).” And the next em­
phasis is upon the “bodily vehicle,” instead of the soul that 
uses it. “In the Republic, man’s soul is composite, consisting of 
a divine part (the reason), and two ‘mortal parts’ (spirit and 
appetite).” 81 But in Timaeus Plato describes how—
“the immortal part, the reason, was made by the Demiurge himself, 
and from the same ingredients as were used in the making of the world- 
soul, though much diluted. To the ‘created gods,’ acting as his agents, 
the Demiurge entrusted the making of the mortal parts of man’s soul 
and the body in which they are housed.”82
And he adds, “Thus reason is the truly divine element in 
man.” 83
Here are Plato’s words:
“Now of the divine, he himself was the creator, but the creation of 
the mortal he committed to his offspring. And they, imitating him, 
received from him the immortal principle of the soul; and around this 
they proceeded to fashion a mortal body, and made it to be the vehicle 
of the soul, and constructed within the body a soul of another nature 
which was mortal, subject to terrible and irresistible affections—first of 
all, pleasure, the greatest incitement to evil; then, pain, which deters 
from good; also rashness and fear, two foolish counselors, anger hard to
47 Ibid., p. xviij. 
_ _ 
81 Ibid., p. xx.
48 Ibid., pp. xvii, xviii. 
83 Ibid., p. xxi. (Italics supplied.)
49 Ibid., p. xx. 
83 Ibid. See also Grube, op. cit., p. 143.
80 Ibid., p. xix.
IMMORTAL HUMAN SOULS PART OF WORLD-SOUL 
597
be appeased, and hope easily led astray—these they mingled with irra­
tional sense and with all-daring love according to necessary laws, and 
so framed man” (69).M
So, he holds, man’s soul is immortal, unchangeable, im­
perishable, eternal, but his body is mortal.“
7. 
Successive Births in Scale of Transmigratory Deg­
radation.—Still another singular point is stressed in Ti- 
maeus. After describing the “soul of the universe,” Plato here 
again, as elsewhere, refers to human souls as “equal in number 
to the stars,” adding that each soul is assigned to a star.“ 
Plato declares that “according to the laws of destiny,” the “first 
birth would be one and the same for all,” so as to avoid discrim­
ination. These souls were then to be “implanted in bodies.” 
Then comes this stunning declaration:
“He who lived well during his appointed time was to return and 
dwell in his native star, and there he would have a blessed and congenial 
existence. But if he failed in attaining this, at the second birth he would 
pass into a woman, and if, when in that state of being, he did not desist 
from evil, he would continually be changed into some brute who resem­
bled him in the evil nature which he had acquired, and would not cease 
from his toils and transformations until he followed the revolution of 
the same and the like within him, and overcame by the help of reason 
the turbulent and irrational mob of later accretions made up of fire 
and air and water and earth, and returned to the form of his first and 
better state” (42).5T
So it was that the “immortal soul” was fastened in, or to, 
a body that was in a state of “perpetual influx and efflux” 
(43).“ Francis M. Cornford, former professor of philosophy at 
the University of Cambridge, summarizes Plato’s concept in 
this way:
“After the journey in their star chariots, the immortal souls are next 
sown like seed in the planets and committed to the care of the created 
gods. Only the immortal element in the soul, as the immediate creation 
of the Demiurge, is indissoluble. The subordinate divinities must add
54 Jowctt, Timaeus, in LLA, No. 14, pp. 52, 53.
58 Cf. Church, Phaedo, in LLA, No. 30, pp. 27, 28.
56 Jowctt, Timaeus, in LLA, No. 14, p. 24.
67 Ibid., pp. 24, 25. (Italics supplied.)
88 Ibid., p. 25.
598
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
the body and those mortal parts of the soul which temporary association 
with the body entails” (42 d-e).68
8. All Animated Life Included in “Living Beings.”— 
One further position is to be noted. “Soul,” Plato taught, 
“spreads from the highest to the lowest of living beings.” The 
variations and gradations are described thus:
‘‘For everything that partakes of life may be truly called a living 
being, and the animal of which we are now speaking partakes of the 
third kind of soul . . . having no part in opinion or reason or mind, 
but only in feelings of pleasure and pain and the desires which accom­
pany them” (77) .e0
9. Man’s “Immortal Soul” Declared Housed in Head. 
—We conclude by observing that Plato locates the dwelling 
place of the immortal soul of man in its mortal habitation thus:
‘‘God gave the sovereign part of the human soul to be the divinity 
of each one, being that part which, as we say, dwells at the top of the 
body [the head], and inasmuch as we are a plant not of an earthly but 
of a heavenly growth, raises us from earth to our kindred who are in 
heaven. And in this we say truly; for the divine power suspended the 
head and root of us from that place where the generation of the soul 
first began, and thus made the whole body upright” (90).81
And he adds, “Thus our original design of discoursing 
about the universe down to the creation of man is nearly com­
pleted” (90) .*2
Such are some of the astonishing postulates, utterly for­
eign to modern thought, upon which Plato built his reasoning, 
and from which he drew his basic conclusion—the Innate Im­
mortality of the human soul.
58 F. M. Comford, Plato’s Cosmology, in LLA, No. 101, p. 146. 
00 Jowett, Timaeus, in LLA, No. 14. p. 60.
61 Ibid., p. 73.
“ Ibid., p. 74.
CHAPTER 
THIRTY-FOUR
Skeptical Reactions Erupt 
Against Platonism
I. Aristotle Abandons Plato’s Postulate of 
“Personal” Immortality
A
ristotle, of Stagira (384-322 B.C.), greatest of Plato’s 
pupils—under whom he sat for twenty years—and for three 
years tutor of Alexander the Great, is regarded as one of 
the giant intellects of the ancient world. Dollinger significantly 
calls him, “Plato’s most illustrious disciple, and at the same 
time his greatest opponent.” 1
He was recognized as unsurpassed in logic and dialectics, 
and his philosophy was practical and matter of fact rather 
than mystical and speculative. He systematized formal reason­
ing and was considered the ultimate in his field, surpassing all 
before him in the natural science of his day. He was called 
“universal” doctor, for he compassed the whole circle of human 
science of his day and was the creator of logic, ethics, psychol­
ogy, and natural history.
In 335 b.c. Aristotle founded his Peripatetic School in 
Athens. His students were called Peripatetics (walking philos­
ophers), for it was his habit to deliver his lectures while 
walking. He rejected Plato’s doctrine of “ideas,” maintaining 
that ideas are not realities but merely mental abstractions. The 
idea exists in things, not apart from things. Aristotle held that 
God is an immaterial Spirit who is the First and Final Cause.
1 Johann J. I. von Dollinger, The Gentile and the Jew, vol. 1, p. 333.
599
600
CONDITIONAL!ST FAITH
Such an assumption, he said, is inescapable from the evidences 
of design in nature.
He did not, however, recognize a divine Personality. God, 
he held, is pure energy, transcending the universe—the un­
moved Mover of all things, without plurality and without 
parts. Moreover, Aristotle could not conceive of God as fram­
ing the world at any given time. The process, he thought, was 
an eternal one.
1. 
Questions 
Plato’s 
Reasoning 
on 
Immortality.— 
With Aristotle the period of the great speculative system of 
philosophy is brought to a close. Following him philosophy 
takes a new turn, for he introduces the age of reason. Greece 
had gone through her period of credulity, her era of inquiry, 
and her time of speculation. And now, in marked contrast, 
Aristotle moves from the speculative scheme of Plato to the 
scientific method.
Aristotle’s philosophical method was the reverse of that 
of Plato, whose starting point was the universal—the very 
existence of which was a matter of faith. Then, from the uni­
versal, he descended to particulars. On the contrary, Aristotle 
rose from particulars to universals, advancing by induction. 
His system was therefore called “inductive philosophy.” Plato 
had trusted to imagination, Aristotle relied on reason.
Instead of Plato’s fanciful reminiscences, or abstractions— 
from former experiences, as he thought, in other previously 
incarnated lives—Aristotle sought to substitute actual experi­
ences in this life, recalling facts and collating them and dis­
covering likenesses and differences. But, like others before 
him, Aristotle was still confused. For example, he held that 
matter has a triple form—simple substance, higher substance, 
and absolute substance, or God Himself; that the universe is 
immutable and eternal; and that the primitive force that gives 
rise to all motion and change is nature. He also held that the 
world is a living being, having a soul.2 John Draper summa-
1 Draper, History of the Intellectual Development of Europe, vol. 1, pp. 177-181.
Aristotle, 
Plato’s 
Greatest 
Pupil, 
Abandons Plato’s 
Postulate of "Personal” Im­
mortality.
rizes Aristotle’s discussion of what he believes to be the func­
tions of the human soul and body, with this simple statement: 
“It is doubtful whether Aristotle believed in the immortality of 
the soul, no decisive passage to that effect occurring in such of 
his works as are extant.” 3
That is borne out by my own investigation.
2. 
Aristotle in Sharp Contrast With Plato.—Taking 
Platonism as his basis, Aristotle sensed its contradictions and its 
gaps, and struck out into new paths. In many aspects these two 
great thinkers of antiquity are in almost complete contrast. As 
Dollinger says, Plato was the philosopher of the intellect, Aris­
totle of nature.4 As to the relation of God to the world, Plato 
set Him forth as the Master-Builder, Aristotle as the last end 
or Final Cause. The world, he held, is from eternity, and the 
entire cosmos without beginning and therefore indestructible.
= Ibid., p. 181.
4 Dollinger, op. ext., vol. 1, pp. 333, 334.
601
602
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
But, as noted, Aristotle also rejected and combated 
Plato’s doctrine of ideas and its consequences. He placed in na­
ture the forms that appear to be embodied in her. They were 
not planted by God in nature but they constitute her real 
essence. Plato’s God is intelligent power, ordering and sustain­
ing the world, or cosmos. But to Aristotle the First Cause is an 
eternal, ever-energizing substance, corresponding to Plato’s 
World-Soul rather than his creative Demiurge. To Aristotle 
there could be no plurality of gods.
3. 
Soul Is the “Principle of Life.”—Aristotle is likewise 
far from Plato in his doctrine of the soul and its immortality. 
He challenges the twin concepts of pre-existence and metemp­
sychosis. He rejects as absurd the notion that the soul could 
enter any body it liked. And he regarded Plato’s theory of rem­
iniscence as “frivolous” and “contradictory.” To Aristotle the 
soul exists primarily “as quickening the body.” It is the prin­
ciple that gives form, motion, and development to the body 
—penetrating and energizing it as the principle of life.
The body is nothing of itself, except as a medium through 
which the soul is realized.5 It cannot be imagined without the 
body, or the body without it. And Aristotle divides the soul 
into three component parts—the nutritive, the sensitive, and 
the thinking power (nous). What God is to the universe, that 
the nous is to the soul.6
4. O
nly Divine 
Reason 
Is 
Im
m
ortal.—The really hu­
man part that comes into being must also pass away. Only the 
divine reason is immortal. Here is Dollinger’s comment on 
Aristotle’s position:
“Only the divine reason is immortal; but, as the memory belongs to 
the sensitive soul, and individual thought depends on the understanding 
or passive nous only, all self-consciousness must cease with death.”7
In other words, there is no conscious continuance. Never-
SKEPTICAL REACTIONS ERUPT AGAINST PLATONISM 603
theless, in one fragment preserved by Eudemus, Aristotle seems 
to support an immortal-soul concept.
“When mind is set free from its present conditions it appears as 
just what it is and nothing more: this alone is immortal and eternal 
(we do not, however, remember its former activity because, while mind 
in this sense is impassible, mind as passive is destructible), and without it 
nothing thinks." 8
Dollinger observes that he was here obviously speaking 
“exoterically” to Eudemus, not scientifically.®
5. Separated Soul Has No “Independent Existence.”— 
Erwin Rohde maintains that in Aristotle’s discussion of the 
soul’s nature and destiny “two voices are distinctly audible,” 
first, the physicist, then the metaphysician. The living, organic, 
physical body brings the potential into existence. Independent 
life resides in the body. But the soul is “bodiless and immate­
rial,” and is the cause, not the resultant, of the merging of the 
various functions of the body, which exists for the soul’s benefit. 
“It dwells within a natural organism.” It is not to be regarded 
as “separate from the body,” any more than the vision is 
separate from the eye.10 Rohde explains Aristotle’s position in 
this way:
“When the living creature dies the matter of which it was composed 
loses its special adaptation to a purposeful organism, and this adapta­
tion was its life; without it there can be no independent Substance. . . . 
The Form, the functional power of the once-living organism, its ‘soul,’ 
has no longer any independent existence.”11
“There is nothing left that can be thought of as forming the content 
of the life and activity of the Mind in its separate existence after the 
completion of its period of life on earth. . . .
“The thought of immortality cast in this form could no longer 
possess any real value or ethical significance for man.”12
In other words, there is a loss, or submergence, of person­
ality or individuality in that continuance.
8 Aristotle, De anima, book 3, chap. 5, 23-25, in The Works of Aristotle (J. A. Smith
tr.), vol. 1, in Great Books of the Western World, vol. 8, p. 662. (italics supplied.)
0 Dollinger, op. cit., vol. 1, p. 339.
10 Rohde. Psyche, p. 493.
11 Ibid. In the documentation and notes Rohde cites scholars who affirm that Aristotle’s
words can only mean “the denial of immortality.” See pages, 512, 513, note 34.
12 Ibid., p. 496.
604
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
6. Tripartite Nature: Body, Soul, and Mind.—Aristotle 
distinguishes between “mind” and “soul,” and separates man 
into three parts—body, soul, and mind. The “mind” is “that 
in us which thinks and conceives.” 13 It enters into man at his 
creation, and is separate from the soul. In its relationship to 
the body and soul it is the ruling element over both.14 The 
mind is what the individual man is, and without mind man 
could not exist. When death occurs, the mind disappears into 
“impenetrable darkness.” “The separate existence of the mind,” 
“persisting for itself alone,” is therefore “beyond not merely 
our perception but our conceiving as well.” “
7. 
Rohde 
Summarizes 
Aristotle’s 
Position.—Rohde 
brings out the fact that in his youth Aristotle had been a com­
plete Platonist, indulging in phantasies about the “origin, na­
ture, and destiny of the soul.” Later he repudiated the concept 
of the soul as inhabiting the body.“ The “soul” was the “reali­
zation of the life of this entirely distinct and physical organism.” 
Mind, according to Aristotle, is not to be included in the soul, 
but is “coupled with the soul from without and for its limited 
period of life.” It has no compulsive urge for deliverance. Aris­
totle thus distinguishes between mind and soul. He does not 
conceive of its “separate existence after the completion of its 
period of life on earth.” 17
8. Zeller on Pre-existence, Incarnations, and “Personal 
Immortality.”—Eduard Zeller gives a similar analysis:
“In his earlier writings he [Aristotle] enunciated the Platonic doc­
trines of the pre-existence of the soul, its incarceration in the body, 
and its return at death to a higher existence. He therefore assumed 
the continued personality and self-conscious existence of the individual 
after death.” 18
But, Zeller continues, as Aristotle developed his own 
system he was “necessarily led to question these assumptions.”
i* Ibid., p. 493. 
la Ibid., p. 495.
14 Ibid., p. 494. 
17 Ibid., p. 496; cf. p. 383.
15 Ibid., pp. 494, 495.
18 Zeller, Aristotle and the Earlier Peripatetics, vol. 2, p. 130.
Aristotle considered the human soul as the “entelechy” 19 of 
the body, in whose service the whole body is enlisted. Here 
is the explanation:
“As he came to conceive of body and soul as essentially united, 
and to define the soul as the entelechy of the body, and as, further, he 
became convinced that every soul requires its own proper organ, and 
must remain wholly inoperative without it, he was necessarily led, not 
only to regard the pilgrimage of the soul in the other world as a myth, 
but also to question the doctrines of pre-existence and immortality as 
they were held by Plato. Inasmuch as the soul is dependent upon the 
body for its existence and activity, it must come into existence and 
perish with it.” 20
Zeller adds that Aristotle expressly rejects the idea that 
the dead are “happy,” but rather that death brings the loss of 
all senses. Hence—
“under these circumstances it is impossible to say that Aristotle taught 
a doctrine of personal immortality. He taught merely the continued 
existence of thinking spirit, denying to it all the attributes of personality.” 21
9. Westcott Agrees With Zeller, Rohde, and Draper. 
—Anglican Bishop B. F. Westcott22 states that Aristotle 
“examined with most elaborate care” the immortality ques­
tion, and sums it up thus:
“Sternly and pitilessly he states the last conclusion of man’s natural 
hope of immortality as tested by reason.” 23
“The judgment of Aristotle sums up the final result of Greek Philos­
ophy on the soul, as a subject of pure speculation. From his time philoso­
phy became essentially practical.” 2i
10. Other Scholars Agree in Foregoing Evaluations.— 
Emmanuel Petavel, in his classic The Problem of Immortality, 
concurs:
“Aristotle, for his part, scarcely mentions immortality;
18 Entelechy—a difficult Aristotelian term, meaning the perfected realization or com­
plete actuality, as contrasted with mere potential existence, and realized in an organized being, 
such as an individual man.
20 Ibid., pp. 130, 131; cf. pp. 8-10; also p. 120.
27 Ibid., p. 134.
22 Brooke Foss Westcott (1825-1901), Anglican bishop, Biblical scholar, and author, 
was professor of divinity at Cambridge University, canon of Westminster, and bishop of Durham. 
He was also one of the New Testament revisers.
23 B. F. Westcott, The Gospel of the Resurrection, p. 125.
21 Ibid., p. 128.
SKEPTICAL REACTIONS ERUPT AGAINST PLATONISM 605
the little that he does say about it is very much like Conditional- 
ism.”28
Dr. Stewart Salmond, professor of theology, Free Church 
College, Aberdeen, says significantly:
“Few have been satisfied by the Platonic doctrine. It made but scanty 
conquests either at the time or in later schools of Greek and Roman 
thought. It was not accepted even by Plato’s own immediate disciples. It 
does not appear to have obtained any place with Aristotle, in whose writ­
ings the whole question of the immortality of the soul is ignored; or, if 
not ignored, it is left so . . . indeterminate by the great Stagirite [Aristotle] 
that Origen [Contra Celsum, iii. 75] classes him with Epicurus in this 
matter, and modern scholars, not a few, have concluded that he did 
not believe in the soul’s after-life.” 29
And the eminent Dr. Dollinger puts Aristotle’s teaching 
in this terse way: “The really human in the soul, that which 
has come into being, must also pass away . . . ; only the divine 
reason is immortal.” 27
The contrast with Plato’s position is noteworthy.
11. 
Centuries-old Conflict Over Aristotle’s Position. 
—Because of his conflicting statements, the question as to 
whether Aristotle taught or denied the immortality of the soul 
has been the subject of innumerable debates from his day until 
now. But his main repeated position is quite clear. And it is in­
controvertible that his name has been cited by many of his ablest 
followers in every generation as authority for rejecting the 
doctrine of personal, Innate Immortality. That is why examples 
have been cited. The battle has raged over the literal versus 
the figurative, the esoteric and the popular.38 But as Prof. Hein­
rich Ritter, formerly of the University of Gottingen, wisely 
says:
“The dispute cannot be settled by any passage in his extant works. . . . 
We must, therefore, draw our conclusion . . . from the general con­
text of Aristotle’s doctrine; and from this it is clear, that he had no
606 
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
25 Emmanuel Petavel, The Problem of Immortality, p. 51; cf. p. 279 (“Aristotle . . . 
hardly ever alluded to the subject”).
28 Salmond, Christian Doctrine, pp. 151, 152.
27 Dollinger, op. cit., vol. 1, p. 339; see also pp. 338-340.
28 Alger, History of the Doctrine of a Future Life, p. 191.
SKEPTICAL REACTIONS ERUPT AGAINST PLATONISM 607
conception of the immortality of any individual rational entity, although 
he did ascribe an eternal existence in God to the universal reason.”28
II. Widespread Opposition by Stoics, Epicureans, and Skeptics
The inability of Platonic philosophy as an ethical system 
to give that rest and assurance to the soul that it professed to 
provide, and the detached devotion of the Peripatetics to 
science and history, created a distrust of all existing systems 
and a skeptical questioning of all philosophical claims and 
certainties. This gave rise to three significant movements—the 
Stoics, the Epicureans, and the Skeptics.
1. 
Stoicism: 
M
aterialistic Pantheism; 
Ultimate Loss 
of Personality.—The Stoic School was launched by Zeno of 
Citium (c. 355-c. 263 B.C.), contemporary of Aristotle, when the 
populace had grown weary of the endless bickerings between 
the conflicting schools of philosophy. Zeno’s disciples, first called 
Zenonians, received their permanent name, Stoics, from Stoa, 
the “painted porch” where they first assembled for instruction. 
And Stoicism, it is to be noted, came to exert a profound in­
fluence in both pre-Christian and early Christian times, for 
it persisted aggressively for centuries. (See Tabular Chart A, 
page 532.)
Stoicism was basically a materialistic pantheism, and was 
the direct antithesis of Platonism. It not only proclaimed the 
freedom of the human will but professed to explain all life, 
as well. In it Fate played a major role. From eternity every­
thing is “determined by an infinite chain of foregone causes.” 80
The Stoics regarded “matter” (motionless, passive, un­
formed) and “force” (active, moving, molding) as the two 
ultimate principles, yet actually one, with God as the working 
force of the universe. And according to Ritter, they regarded 
the soul, which concerns us, as—
"an emanated portion of the universal fire, or universal reason, which
29 Ritter, History of Ancient Philosophy, vol. 3, p. 256, note.
30 Dollinger, op. cit., vol. 1, p. 350.
608
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
encompasses the heaven, and rules All; and therefore it can only be pre­
served by the constantly accruing fire.”81
2. 
Periodic 
Reabsorptions 
Into Deity.—The entire 
cosmos was regarded as conscious. And consciousness was con­
sidered as synonymous with Deity. God, they held, is the World- 
Soul, and the world an organized living being. The “soul” of the 
world was therefore everywhere present—which belief, of 
course, is simply pantheism. Furthermore, all things were, the 
Stoics believed, destined to be periodically reabsorbed into the 
Deity, with the process beginning all over again after each con­
flagration.32
But the human soul, believed to be none other than the 
“warm breath” within us, was considered part of the World- 
Soul, or Deity. And though the soul survives the body, it is 
absorbed back into the World-Soul at the end of each cosmic 
period, where it is to be noted, its individuality is lost. That 
should ever be remembered. To the Stoic, therefore, immor­
tality meant extension of life, but not an absolute personal or 
individual immortality.
The Stoics considered all substances—including the human 
soul and the Deity—as “bodies,” something corporeal. What­
ever was real was material. And specifically, the soul was 
regarded as warm vapor, or “fire,” with the World-Soul hav­
ing the same relationship to the universe as the human soul 
to the body. It was believed to permeate and interpenetrate 
the whole body. And this “fire” of the soul was believed to 
be nourished by the blood. And as to its ultimate, Zeller puts 
it in this form: “After death the souls were supposed to endure 
until the end of the world, when they returned with every­
thing else to God.” 83 That was the declared end.
3. The Soul a Fragment of the Divine.—According to 
Stoicism, “the Universe is God. God is thus not only the 
matter but the form, the life and the power of the world.”
31 Ritter, op. cit., vol. 1, pp. 249, 250. See also Dollinger, op. cit., vol. 1, p. 349.
82 Cf. Dollinger, op. cit., vol. 1, p. 351.
33 Zeller, Outlines of the History of Greek Philosophy, pp. 227-248.
SKEPTICAL REACTIONS ERUPT AGAINST PLATONISM 609
Deity was considered the original matter, the “fiery breath” 
of life that maintains and changes the world. Rohde states it 
this way: “The universal deity ... is thus at once matter, 
mind, and formative principle.” But “the soul of man, . . . 
endowed with reason, is a fragment of the divine, and is 
itself divine like everything else in the world”—only in a 
purer degree.
Lower matter “degenerates progressively as it gets farther 
and farther from the divine fire.” The individual soul, though 
distinct from the body, dwells in the body. Yet it is not thereby 
completely detached from the universal life, and remains 
subject to “universal Law.” It is an emanation, the Stoics 
insisted, from the “universal Reason.” Nevertheless, the soul 
has self-determination, and is responsible for its own decisions 
and acts.34
4. 
Eternal Soul-Essence Loses Personal Individuality. 
—It is to be observed that the Stoics held the concept of a 
single and absolute Being, refusing to recognize, in contrast 
to some, a paralleling, dualistic principle of evil. They did 
believe, however, that the individual is capable of violating 
the laws of the all-embracing Deity. Rohde calls attention to 
the important fact that pure pantheism cannot postulate a 
paralleling principle of evil, through the overthrow of which 
a lost unity of God is restored.35
In common with others, they held that death is the sep­
aration of the soul from the body. This soul-essence does not, 
they taught, perish with the body. But God, the Soul of the 
world, is “eternally indestructible.” Furthermore, no under­
world was recognized by the Stoics. To them the extension of 
life was in the ethereal heavens. Thus we see that the Stoic 
doctrine of immortality never extended to personal, individual 
immortality.30 And Stoicism, it should not be forgotten, pro­
jected its weighty influence for several centuries into the 
Christian Era.
34 Rohde, op. cit., pp. 497, 498. 
20
35 Ibid., pp. 498 , 499. 
=»lbid., pp. 500, 501.
610
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
5. 
Hopelessness 
and 
Inadequacy 
of 
Stoicism.—Sum­
marizing: The soul of man is regarded as a portion and 
fragment of the divine principle of the universe. It has no 
independent existence of its own. But it is not destined to 
perish with the body. When the cycle of duration is accom­
plished, it is destined after death to reabsorption into the 
Source whence it came. Stoical philosophy held that whatever 
had a beginning must perforce have an end, and that there 
is but one real existence.
According to Zeller, the “one” remains, while the “many” 
change and pass. Deity, the active power of the universe, pro­
duces all things from himself. But, after a certain period, Deity 
draws them back into himself. Then he produces a new 
world in a new cycle—and so on forever, repeating endlessly.*7 
That was the disillusioning essence and the stark hopelessness 
of Stoicism. It has been aptly said that its materialistic divinity, 
its unspiritual humanity, and its fatalistic universe separate 
it completely from all revealed religion, Jewish or Christian. 
Such was one of the reactionary, divisive forces now operative 
against Platonism.
III. Epicureanism—Gross Materialism and Cessation of Soul
1. 
Death 
Brings 
Permanent 
Cessation 
of 
Life.—At 
approximately the same time Epicurus, of Athens (c. 342-270 
B.C.), appeared, with his reactionary Epicureans. Imitating 
Aristotle’s Peripatetics, Epicurus purchased a garden in the 
heart of Athens, and founded his school. (See Tabular Chart 
A, page 532.) He held that the senses provide the sole criteria 
of truth. And, significantly enough, among other things he 
frankly called for an abandonment of belief in survival. His 
was a form of skepticism and utter materialism. And it like­
wise flourished for several centuries, beginning before and 
continuing after Christ.
Epicurus reasserted the materialistic atoms-concept first
37 Zeller, Stoics, Epicureans and Sceptics, pp. 165-167.
SKEPTICAL REACTIONS ERUPT AGAINST PLATONISM 611
projected by Democritus. (See page 553.) Epicureanism also 
had a definite Cyreniac tinge. Epicurus did not attempt to 
deny the popular concept of the gods, but asserted that they 
had nothing to do with the affairs of the universe or of man. 
And he specifically denied any kind of immortality of the soul 
—conditional or natural. Epicurus contended that matter is 
uncreated and indestructible, and that activity is resident in 
all matter from eternity.
He taught that the primitive elements of matter are 
indivisible particles, or atoms, which are eternal and imperish­
able. These pass through various combinations, and progres­
sively assume new forms and properties. Thus the worlds, 
infinite in number and infinitely varied, came to be.
2. 
World Formations Result of Blind Chance.—These 
atoms, he believed, are constantly forming new combinations 
and undergoing periodic dissolutions. But all this, he held, is 
produced by chance/* with no controlling intelligence. As 
noted, Epicurus regarded the universe as material, infinite in 
extent and eternal in duration. In fact, he recognized two 
kinds of existence—(1) that of bodies, and (2) that of void, 
space, or vacuum. But, we repeat for emphasis, he held that 
the world was produced by chance—38 the chance coming to­
gether, with adherence of atoms of infinite number, size, and 
shape. And further, beyond our world there are innumerable 
others, similarly appearing by accident. His was indeed a “for­
tuitous concurrence” of atoms concept!
As to the soul, in all this, at the death of the body the 
soul-atoms are scattered, having no shelter and abode, and 
the soul consequently ceases to exist. This understanding, Epi­
curus held, frees one from the terrors of Hades. He argued 
that death is nothing to us, for one “only is when death is not; 
where death is, he is no longer there.” 40 Epicurus contended 
that the great evil that afflicts man is fear—fear of the gods, 
fear of death, fear of natural things, and fear of destiny. To
38 See also Dollinger, op. cit., vol. 1, p. 361.
39 Draper, op. cit., vol. 1, pp. 165-168.
40 Rohde, op. cit., p. 505.
612
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
eradicate these fears was the ultimate aim of his speculations.41
3. Pleasure Canonized Without Restraint.—Life was 
therefore set forth as without divine sanction, without human 
responsibility, without existence hereafter, and with neither 
reward nor penalty for one’s words or acts during life. There 
was no moral constraint, no domain of conscience, no real 
standards or ethics, no divine authority or superintendence 
—and, we reiterate, man was said to be without a hereafter. 
Such was the radical nature of the Epicurean reaction against 
Platonism.
In all this fanfare Epicurus disparaged “science” and the 
predominant philosophy, and depreciated logic. Rejecting all 
mythical contentions and conceptions, and denying the super­
natural he canonized pleasure, advising men to accept life 
as it comes, and enjoy pleasure while they may. His philosophy 
was therefore the art of enjoying the present life as the supreme 
end of man’s being, which he called the only “rational” attitude.
Epicurus felt no concern over death, or the power of the 
gods—holding they were only a “delusion.” The soul, which 
he taught is merely an aggregation of atoms, is resolved at 
death into its constituents. One can, of course, understand 
Epicurus’ revulsion against the crude mythical notions and 
puerilities of prior schools of philosophy. But his pendulum 
had swung to the opposite irrational extreme in denial.
4. Separated Soul Utterly Ceases.—As we have seen, 
to Epicurus there was no reality but bodily reality—corporeal 
substance. Thus the “body” of the soul consists of subtle 
particles—the finest, lightest atoms. And it dissolves instan­
taneously upon death. A soulless body, he argued, is no heavier 
than one in which there is a soul. So he insisted that when 
the “connection between soul and body is fully severed, then 
the soul can no longer exist”—its constituent atoms being 
“dispersed in a moment.” 42
41 Dollinger, op. cit., vol. 1, p. 362.
42 Zeller, Stoics, Epicureans and Sceptics, pp. 452-456.
And Rohde states it thus: “The atomist doctrine renewed 
by Epicurus demanded in the most emphatic manner of its 
adherents that they should abandon the belief in personal 
survival.” 43
5. May Reappear as Another Person.—Epicurus thus 
clearly taught that when death occurs the soul-atoms and the 
body-atoms are separated, and the body finally dissolves. Con­
sequently the separated “soul” disappears. It is blown away 
by the wind, as he put it, and disappears “like smoke” in the 
air. But the material elements are indestructible. They might, 
in fact, in the future combine, with the “life-stuff,” in another 
person.
But, he said, if so it would be as a new creature. The 
original man is obliterated by death, with no bond of con­
sciousness between the two. The living creature is therefore 
but temporary, and death no longer concerns him. This 
proposition the Epicureans never tired of hammering home. 
The terrors of eternity cast no shadow over the life. One 
devotes himself to life without repining, filling every moment 
to the full.44
6. Irreconcilable Clashes Between Stoics and Epicu­
reans.—The opposition of the Stoics to the Epicureans was 
occasioned by the extreme materialism and fortuitism of the 
latter. With Epicurus the universe was an aggregation of blind 
atoms, compacted and governed by an equally blind chance; 
with Zeno and his Stoics, it was a divine organism, vital in 
all its parts, and governed by the immutable decrees of Fate. 
With Epicurus the gods had nothing to do with human affairs, 
while with Zeno everything was controlled by superintending 
Providence.
The Stoics regarded nature as a product of design, whereas 
the Epicureans explained it as an entirely mechanical product. 
The Stoics adhered to fatalism, but saw God everywhere; the
SKEPTICAL REACTIONS ERUPT AGAINST PLATONISM 613
43 Rohde, op. cit., p. 504. Cf. Lucretius, book 3, on “Life and Mind.”
44 Rohde, op. cit., pp. 505, 506.
614
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Epicureans, as irreligious free thinkers, held the theory of 
atoms and of necessity.45 Such were the irreconcilable differ­
ences of these two reactionary groups, both antagonistic to 
Platonism.
IV. Skeptics—Pyrrho Undermines Basis of Immortal-Soulism
Just as the pre-Platonic philosophy was challenged by 
the appearance and arguments of the skeptical Sophists, so 
now the post-Platonic developments climax with the Pyrrho- 
nian Skeptics, who doubted everything. So a distrust of the 
powers of reason now followed the period of speculative ex­
cesses. The confusion and contradiction of the conflicting stand­
ard schools had resulted in the feeling that there are no 
determining criteria of truth. This induced widespread doubt.
Such was the situation when Pyrrho of Elis (c. 365-c. 275 
B.C.), founder of the Skeptics, who, capitalizing on the prin­
ciple of doubt, added to the confusion produced by the con­
tentions of the Stoics and Epicureans. Pyrrho insisted that, 
inasmuch as there is no certainty in dogmatic belief, happi­
ness consists in perfect freedom from all mental perturbation. 
(See Tabular Chart A, page 532.)
Using the weapons devised by the earlier Sophists, the 
Skeptics now directed them chiefly against ethics. The induc­
tive system, they held, is at best only a probability. Thus the 
conflicting speculations involved everything in doubt and 
uncertainty. So the Pyrrhonists, the avowed Skeptics of the 
age—who boldly questioned the distinctions between true and 
false, virtue and vice, right and wrong, and advocated eman­
cipation from any sort of moral and religious restraint—held 
that definitions and inductions add nothing to knowledge.
But in discarding definitions and inductions, they too 
struck at the heart of the philosophical method.48 Thus 
indirectly Pyrrho likewise struck at the dogma of the immor-
15 Zeller, Stoics, Epicureans and Sceptics, p. 505.
16 Draper, op. cit., vol. 1, pp. 164, 165.
tal soul, as premised upon the speculations of philosophy. 
Pyrrhonism, however, was short lived. Such skepticism was 
too negative to satisfy any save a peculiar few. But it helped 
to prick the bubble of conceit that had developed among the 
dominant philosophies, including Platonism.
The persistence of the Platonic postulate becomes evident 
when one sees how it lived on despite the combined opposi­
tion of strong reactionary groups. When the conflict of views 
subsided, Plato’s Innate Immortal-Soulism, inconsistent as it 
was, continued on, conquering and to conquer—next penetrat­
ing the ranks of the Roman conquerors. And while the form 
changed, the essence remained the same.
SKEPTICAL REACTIONS ERUPT AGAINST PLATONISM 615
Chart B
Roman Writers and Philosophers Follow Greek Predecessors
Philosophic Positions Perpetuated; but Materialistic Reactions 
Predominate; Adroit Recasting Undertaken, Followed by Final 
Emergence of Modified Neoplatonic School
1. Manilius (1st cent. B.C.)—fatalistic pantheism; soul part
of World-Soul
2. Cicero (106-43 B.C.)—Platonist; eternal pre-existence, or
eternal sleep
3. Lucretius (c. 96-c. 55 B.C.)—materialist; eternal death-sleep
4. Catullus (c. 84-54 B.C.)—sleep of eternal night
5. Horace (65-8 B.C.)—eternal sleep in nether world
6. Vergil (70-19 B.C.)—spark of World-Soul returns to source
7. Ovid (43 B.C.-A.D. 18)—divine spark produced man
8. Cato (95-46 B.C.), and Julius Caesar—death is utter end
9. Seneca (4 B.C.-A.D. 65)—Stoic; soul continues till next con­
flagration
10. 
Pliny the Elder (A.D. 23-79)—part of pantheistic world 
1 1. Tacitus (c. A.D. 55-1 17)—believer in fatalism
12. Epictetus (c. A.D. 60-120)—Stoic; refusion of soul
13. Plutarch (c. A.D. 46-120)—Platonist; Dualist; souls eternal
14. Juvenal (c. A.D. 60-c. 140)—death an everlasting sleep
15. Marcus Aurelius (A.D. 121-180)—last Stoic; reabsorption
into World-Soul
16. Lucian (c. A.D. 126-200)—Greek philosophy imported from
East
17. Plotinus (c. A.D. 205-270)—Dualism; emanation; fusion
with the absolute
18. [Porphyry (c. A.D. 232-c. 304); lamblichus (c. A.D. 250-
c. 333); Julian (A.D. 332-363)]
19. A.D. 529—Justinian closes academy; pagan philosophy for­
bidden; philosophers exiled
Pathetic Despair Predominant Among Roman Thinkers
Except for occasional Platonic, Stoic, or Pythagorean hold­
overs (among whom pantheism, emanation, reincarnation, and 
reabsorption were common), the ultimate loss of all personality 
was a recurring view.
616
CHAPTER 
THIRTY-FIVE
Pathetic Despair Predominant 
Among Roman Thinkers
In the great bulk of Latin and Greek literature belonging 
to the last century before Christ and the first century after, 
a strain of despair echoes and re-echoes through the prose 
and poetry of Rome—lyric, elegiac, tragic, and philosophic.
I. Widespread Revolt Against Platonic Positions
There was widespread revolt against the vaunted claims of 
the Platonic philosophy. Comparatively few were satisfied with 
Plato’s teaching. Dr. Salmond states significantly, “It made 
scanty conquests either at the time or in later schools of Greek 
and Roman thought.” 1 As a matter of fact, it was not even ac­
cepted by Plato’s own immediate disciples—not even by his star 
pupil, Aristotle, as we have seen. Nevertheless it persisted.
At best it offered hope mainly for the philosopher cult, 
rather than for mankind as a whole. No perfection was held 
out for the souls of the nonphilosophical. Moreover, it prof­
fered immortality for only the half of a man, for it depreci­
ated and degraded the body. It made the body the source of 
all evils and defilements, as hampering the way to virtue and 
knowledge. Death alone offered welcome release from oppres­
sion by the body, with purity attainable only through the 
separation of the soul from the body. Plato’s holiness expressly 
demanded riddance of the body. And the heaven of Platonism’s 
highest aspiration was a bodiless condition. That was the best 
that Platonism had to offer.
1 Salmond, Christian Doctrine of Immortality, pp. 151, 152.
617
i
REVIEW PICTURES
While Rome Was Ruling the World, Hellenic Thought and Philosophy Were
Still Supreme.
1. 
Barren Comfort of Stoics, Epicureans, and Skeptics. 
—The Stoics, whose influence continued for centuries into 
the Christian Era, though sympathetic with Plato’s moral pur­
pose, thought of the soul of man as destined to reabsorption 
into the great World-Soul after death, and believed that it sur­
vived for a certain time but never beyond the world’s periodic 
conflagration.2 To them life was a vast cycle of perpetual birth 
and death without any abiding personality. And the Epicurean 
was coldly materialistic and skeptical.
The popular refrain of the masses, “Soon we shall fall 
asleep to wake no more,” was the recurring voice of Greek and 
Roman anthology—poetry, prose, and sepulchral inscription.3
2 Dollinger, The Gentile and the Jew, vol. 2, p. 140.
3 Ibid., pp. 142-147.
618
DESPAIR PREDOMINANT AMONG ROMAN THINKERS 619
The tombs were silent on a blessed immortality, and were mute 
as to future rewards or punishments.
As before stated, when Christ appeared Hellenic thought 
ruled the world—a world then controlled by Rome, with 
Greco-Latin belief and disbelief in mortal conflict. Mankind 
desperately needed One who could speak with an authority 
higher than that of the philosophers, One who has the power of 
an endless life. There was a pathetic longing among Roman 
thinkers for certainty concerning the soul and the hereafter.
2. Manilius: 
Holds 
a 
Fatalistic 
Pantheism.—Many 
writers in this crucial period were markedly skeptical, some 
showing undisguised contempt for the Hellenic views. But the 
pantheistic strain still echoed. That too is significant. Caius 
Manilius (1st cent. B.C.), Roman tribune and legislator, in his 
astronomical poem taught a fatalistic pantheism, probably de­
rived from Stoic sources.4 To him the world itself is God— 
the World-Soul—man constituting a portion of Deity, with 
his life and destiny dependent on the stars, the fates steering 
the course of the world, and each man responsible for his own 
destiny. That was one concept.
With the exception of Lucretius, we shall present the 
Roman witnesses with broad rapid strokes, based upon the 
exhaustive studies of men such as Munich University’s professor 
Johann J. I. von Dollinger, whose masterful treatise covering 
this area is well documented.6 We desire only to sketch the 
scene as a bridge to the next great section.
3. Cicero: Vacillates Between Belief and Doubt.— 
Amid the widespread unbelief Cicero (106-43 B.C.), master of 
rhetoric and celebrated orator, philosopher and statesman, and 
noted writer of Latin prose, was the only Roman thinker of the 
day who publicly contended on philosophical grounds for a
* Dollinger, ibid., pp. 136, 137.
5 Johann J. I. von Dollinger (1799-1890), celebrated German theologian and historian, 
was professor of ecclesiastical history at Munich University. Opposing the claim of papal 
infallibility at the_ Vatican Council of 1869-1870, he was excommunicated in 1871. He was
author of about eight books of great value. His two-volume The Gentile and the Jew in the 
Courts of the Temple of Christ (Darnell, tr.), affords a definitive coverage of Greek and 
Roman paganism, religion, and philosophy, and the reaction against the Platonic concept.
620
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
real and individual existence of the soul after death. And this 
was because he was a professed Platonist. The Peripatetics 
Dicaearchus and Aristoxenus denied the existence of soul. And 
the Stoic Panastius had renounced the periodic conflagration- 
of-the-world theory, as well as the temporary duration of the 
soul.6 (On Cicero’s chronological sequence see page 616.)
At times even Cicero is inconsistent. For example, he 
sometimes sees nothing but poetic fancy or ancient superstition 
in the notion of a retributive future. But in his Tusculan Dis­
putations he supported Plato’s positions. The soul, he there 
says, is an entity, divine in origin and eternal in principle. God 
and the soul are of the same “texture.” And after death the 
soul goes to fellowship with the gods.
But along with his eternal duration of the soul went the 
customary pre-existence-of-the-soul concept. And with these 
went the principle of its own movement, within itself—man’s 
soul existing as a being from eternity, subsisting by its own 
power, indistinguishable from deity, with emanation from the 
divine spirit. Cicero did not say it was god, but it was divine. 
This led him to look with high anticipation to the day when he 
would join the divine communion of souls. Yet he recognized 
that his arguments were only a “probability.” 7 And while he 
accepted much of Plato’s doctrine, and reproduced not a little 
of his reasoning, Cicero nevertheless considered Plato’s specula­
tive arguments on the nature of the soul to be largely “conjec­
ture,” and merely a “possibility.” 8
At times Cicero speaks bravely, saying that if he errs regard­
ing immortality, he delights in his error. However, when faced 
with the sorrow of personal bereavement he is not so confident. 
He seeks comfort in the concept of the unconsciousness of 
death, and records, “If there is nothing good in death, at least 
there is no evil.” 9 But he said:
“If I err in holding die souls of men to be immortal, I do so gladly; 
nor while life lasts will I suffer this error, in which I delight, to be torn
«Ibid., pp. 121, 122, 141, 142. 
7 Ibid.. pp. 141-143.
8 See Cicero, Disputationes Tusculanae i. 27, 31, 38; v. 13; in LCL.
9 Ibid., i. 38; cf. Letters, ad. L. Mesain Epp. v. 21; ad Toran vi. 21.
DESPAIR PREDOMINANT AMONG ROMAN THINKERS 621
from me. If we are not immortal, then it is desirable for man that he 
should be extinguished at his hour of departure.” 10
Cicero’s view of the pre-existence of souls led him to the 
concept of man’s earthly existence being a state of punishment 
for sins committed in a previous life. But he repudiated this 
in his Hortensius and in Consolation upon the death of his own 
daughter. And he added the disconsolate words, “Not to be 
born is by far the best thing. . . . But the next best thing is, 
if you have been born, to die as soon as possible.” 11 In an­
other place he speaks of punishment after death as an “old 
fancy.” So he vacillated between doubt and hope.
However, most of Cicero’s contemporaries were not in 
agreement with his Platonism. Caesar and Cato held that death 
was the end of all things, there being neither joy nor sorrow 
beyond the grave.“ Vergil, Ovid, and Horace sought comfort 
and protection in the thought of an eternal sleep in the night 
of the nether world. Catullus cried to Lesbia, “When the short 
day is past and gone, the sleep of eternal night awaits us both.” 18 
And Seneca said, “There is nothing after death, and death itself 
is nothing; you will then be with the unborn.” 11 And Pliny 
declared the notion of existence after death to be an invention 
of childish folly.15 Dollinger calls attention to a vital point:
“Philosophers utterly failed in grasping the idea of personality. 
Hemmed in by their material horizon, they understood by the soul a 
kind of secretion or evaporation of brain, blood, or heart, or a sort of 
respiration. They described it as a subtle, aerial, or fiery substance; or 
conceived it to be a mere quality, like the harmony of a musical instru­
ment, which was lost in the dissolution of the body.” w
II. Lucretius—Bleak Materialism and Eternal Death-Sleep
Epicureanism, simplest of all Greek philosophies, pene­
trated Rome about 175 b.c. A century later Titus Lucretius 
Carus (c. 96-c. 55 b.c.), the great Latin poet of his day, con-
10 Quoted in Dollinger, op. cit., vol. 2, p. 142.
u Quoted in Lactantius, The Divine Institutes iii. 18, 19, in ANF, vol. 7, p. 90.
12 Dollinger, op. cit., vol. 2, p. 153. 
15 Ibid., p. i44.
13 Ibid. 
i# Ibid.
Lucretius Voiced a Pronounced Re­
action 
Against 
the 
Postulates 
of 
Platonism.
temporary of Cicero and himself an Epicurean, wrote his amaz­
ing poem The Nature of the Universe. This was produced 
probably about 55 B.C., after profound study of the Greek 
language and philosophy. He sought to dispel by science all 
fear of death and destruction. It was abstruse speculation, with 
some sublime concepts in mystic settings—a poet’s portrayal 
of the then “scientific” outlook.
Lucretius dismissed Divine Providence and an immortal 
soul alike as empty illusions. He was an antagonist of pagan 
Roman religio (“religion”), with its superstitions and taboos 
designed to terrorize. But out of the depths of pessimistic 
skepticism he rises at times to pathetic heights. The tradition 
is that he died a suicide—consonant with the principles he 
professed. Here is his actual teaching.
1. 
Book Synopsis Reveals Stark Materialism.—Trans­
lator Ronald E. Latham’s Synopsis of The Nature of the Universe 
(pages 21-26), shows that Book 1, on “Matter and Space,” deals 
with the “creative force of nature.” It praises Epicurus for 
“delivering mankind from superstition.” Nothing, Lucretius 
states, is ever “created out of nothing,” and “nothing is ever 
annihilated.” Matter exists in the form of “invisible” atoms.
622
DESPAIR PREDOMINANT AMONG ROMAN THINKERS 623
But in addition, the universe contains “empty space”—the 
universe consisting only of these two. Lucretius refutes the 
“false” philosophical theories of Heraclitus, Empedocles, and 
Anaxagoras, insisting that the universe is “boundless,” and 
without a “centre.”
Book 2, on the “Movements and Shapes of Atoms,” states 
that the atoms are “always on the move,” and that the world 
was “not made by gods.” Furthermore, our world is but one 
of an “infinite number,” self-regulating, and without inter­
ference from the gods. But it “had a beginning and will soon 
have an end.”
Book 3, on “Life and Mind,” praises Epicurus for reveal­
ing the “true nature of the universe,” and removing “the fear 
of death” and of torment after death. It insists that the mind 
is “part of the body,” and that mind and spirit are of a “single 
corporeal substance.” Life depends upon the “union of mind- 
spirit with body.” And mind and spirit, he says, “were born 
and will die.” Lucretius comments on the “blessings of mor­
tality,” and declares the “imaginary pains of Hell are symbolic 
of earthly sufferings.”
2. The Terrifying Issues of “Death.”—At the outset of 
Book 1 Lucretius speaks of those—
“haunted by the fear of eternal punishment after death. They know 
nothing of the nature of the spirit. Is it born, or is it implanted in us 
at birth? Does it perish with us, dissolved by death, or does it visit the 
murky depths and dreary sloughs of Hades? Or is it transplanted by 
divine power into other creatures? . . .
“Ennius indeed in his immortal verses proclaims that there is also 
a Hell, which is peopled not by our actual spirits or bodies but only by 
shadowy images, ghastly pale” (v. 93).17
3. The “Idle Fancy of Fools.”—Lucretius insists that 
“nothing can ever be created by divine power out of nothing” 
(162)—that is, nothing “can come into existence without 
atoms.” 18 And in reverse, “nature resolves everything into its
17 Ronald Latham, Lucretius on the Nature of the Universe, The Penguin Classics, p. 30.
™ Ibid., p. 31.
624
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
component atoms and never reduces anything to nothing” (226).1B 
If “throughout this bygone eternity there have persisted bodies 
from which the universe has been perpetually renewed, they 
must certainly be possessed of immortality. Therefore things 
cannot be reduced to nothing” (227).20 This he denies.
4. “Rarified Wind” Leaves Body at Death.—Coming in 
Book 3 to the heart of the question, Lucretius holds that “mind 
and spirit are interconnected,” and both are “composed of 
matter” of “very fine texture.”21 He then declares: “The body 
at death is abandoned by a sort of rarified wind mixed with 
warmth, while the warmth carries with it also air.” 22
5. Both Spirit and Body Are Mortal.—“Vital spirit,” 
he says, is “present in the whole body,” as well as these “atoms 
of spirit,” which are “less in magnitude than those composing 
our body and flesh.” 23 Mind is more dominant than spirit. 
And minds, he adds, are “neither birthless nor deathless.” 21 
The spirit, he opines, is “flimsy stuff composed of tiny par­
ticles.” 20 Then he twice states that spirit is mortal.20 And 
“without body” the mind alone cannot perform vital functions. 
So “both alike must be reckoned mortal.” 27
6. Ridicules “Immortal Spirits” Seeking Bodies.—Allud­
ing to the belief of some that an “immortal” spirit is “slipped 
into the body at birth,” 28 Lucretius ridicules this reincarnation 
theory by commenting:
“It is surely ludicrous to suppose that spirits are standing by at the 
mating and birth of animals—a numberless number of immortals on 
the look-out for mortal frames, jostling and squabbling to get in first 
and establish themselves most firmly.”28
7. Death: Eternal Sleep With No Awakening.—Turn­
ing to “death,” Lucretius comments, “Death is nothing to us 
and no concern of ours, since our tenure of the mind is mortal.”
18 Ibid., p. 33.
30 Ibid., p. 34.
31 Ibid., pp. 100, 101.
32 Ibid., p. 103.
23 Ibid., pp. 106, 107. 
34 Ibid., pp. 107, 108.
38 Ibid., p. 109.
30 Ibid., pp. 109, 112.
27 Ibid., p. 116.
28 Ibid., p. 116. See also pp. 117, 118.
29 Ibid., p. 119.
“We shall be no more.” 30 Therefore we “have nothing to fear 
in death,” since “one who no longer is cannot suffer.” “Mortal 
life has been usurped by death the immortal31 Death must be 
regarded as sleep. And nothing is more “restful than soundest 
sleep.” 33 So the alleged torments of Hell are brushed off as 
the present disciplines of life. Thus Lucretius dismisses “Hell 
belching abominable fumes” with its “boiling pitch.” 33 There 
simply awaits for all “the same eternal death.” 34
Such was the bleak prospect and the stark materialism of 
Epicurean Roman skepticism and disillusionment in 55 b.c. 
It was a pronounced reaction against the postulates of Platonism 
and the other philosophies based on the old mythologies and the 
pantheistic reincarnation and reabsorption theories, often tied 
in therewith. But that was not all.
III. Skepticism, Pantheism, Emanation, Refusion—All 
Intermingled
Two classes sought to free themselves from the terrors 
invested in the prospect of death and the nether world—first 
the Materialists, who sought to prove that death was to man 
the absolute end of all; and the later Platonists, who maintained 
that this world is the Hades, that Heaven is our home, and that 
death is but an ascent to a better life.
1. 
Catullus and 
Horace: 
Death, 
Sleep 
of 
Eternal 
Night.—We pass briefly over Gaius Valerius Catullus (c. 84- 
54 b.c.), celebrated Roman poet and versatile genius, who en­
joyed the society of the noted—such as Cicero and Caesar— 
who declared that he knew of nothing to follow the short day 
of life but the sleep of eternal night.36 And the same is to be 
said of Horace (65-8 b.c.), famous Latin lyric and satirical 
poet, from the point of common sense, who likewise saw nothing 
after death but weary night and endless exile, that makes it
DESPAIR PREDOMINANT AMONG ROMAN THINKERS 625
3« Ibid., p. 121.
*1 Ibid., p. 122.
32 Ibid., p. 125.
"Ibid., p. 127.
34 Ibid., p. 129.
35 Catullus v. 4.
Masterful Roman Cicero Publicly Contended for the Continued Existence of
the Soul After Death.
To Vergil, Another Roman Poet, the Spark of World-Soul Fire Must Return to
Its Source.
Uncertainty and Contradiction Marked the Witness of the Stoic Seneca.
wise to snatch the present hours for pleasure.30 He left the future 
to the gods.
2. Vergil: Spark of World-Soul Fire Returns to Source. 
—Vergil (70-19 b.c.), famous Roman epic, dramatic, and idyllic 
poet, philosopher, and intimate friend of Horace, wrote that 
there is a world-soul filling and moving the universe, inter­
penetrating Heaven, earth, sea, sun, moon, beast, and man. 
“It is divine fire [the Pythagorean concept], bestowing and 
sustaining universal life.” The particles of world-soul, consti­
tuting man, descend to the lower world for judgment. Then, 
it is alleged, a new body is assigned for it to animate. And if, 
after many migrations, at long last its stains are wiped away, 
it returns again, like purified ether, to its fount.87 He held to an 
inexorable destiny.
3. Ovid: Divine Spark Gave Being to Man.—Ovid, or 
Publius Ovidius Naso (43 b.c.-a.d. 18), Roman poet and leading
38 Dollinger, op. cit., vol. 2, p. 143.
37 Ibid., p. Í37; see Aenid vi. 727-751.
626
writer of the Augustan Age, who was exiled from Rome in a.d. 
9, likewise held to this ether-god, or Pythagorean doctrine of 
souls—that nature herself formed the world out of chaos. 
And the holy fire, or ether, the power of Heaven, has the heights 
of Olympus as a dwelling place. Ovid held that a spark of this 
divine ether descending to earth, gave being to man.38
4. Seneca: Uncertainty and Contradiction Mark Wit­
ness.—Stoicism had by now assumed the role of a religion. But 
with the later Roman Stoics—Seneca, Epictetus, and Marcus 
Aurelius—there was a strong reaction against certain of its 
logical subtleties. Seneca (4 b.c.-a.d. 65), celebrated Stoic philos­
opher, known for his brilliance of language, held that the soul, 
with kinship to God, would continue on after death, until the 
next periodic conflagration, after which all things start anew. 
Thus the blessed spirits will attain to the eternal. But his con­
cept of the state after death was full of conflict and uncertainty.
On another occasion he declared, “There is nothing after 
death.” At times he spoke of the last day of this present life 
as a birthday to the eternal. He talks of deliverance from the 
bondage of life, and of a happier state after being “received 
into the region of the departed.” But at still other times he 
consoles himself with the concept of the “loss of all conscious­
ness,” and therefore the impossibility of any future torment. 
“Death . . . preceded our present existence,” and there was 
nothing disagreeable about it—nor will there be after death.30
5. Pliny: Pantheistic Universe; Man Part of God.— 
Pliny the Elder, or Gaius Plinius Secundus (a.d. 23-79), 
celebrated Roman naturalist, author, lawyer, soldier, and pro­
consul, in his Natural History explains the universe pantheisti- 
cally as a divine being—the sun being the supreme deity in 
nature and the spirit of the whole. Man is possessed of a portion 
of that spirit. So there is deification of parts of nature and 
apotheosis of men. The deity is, he says, nothing but the power
DESPAIR PREDOMINANT AMONG ROMAN THINKERS 627
38 Dollinger, ob. cit., vol. 2, pp. 137, 138.
38 Ibid., pp. 140, 141.
628
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
of nature—in the sense held by the Stoics.40 Yet in another place 
he says that existence after death is the invention of folly.41
In his Natural History Pliny plainly affirms that death is 
an everlasting sleep.42 And the whole school of Epicureans sup­
ported such a position, invoking the combined forces of ridicule 
and argument in its advocacy. As already seen, their views are 
ably defended by Lucretius in his The Nature of the Universe. 
And Horace, Juvenal, and Persius concur.
6. Epictetus: Refusion of Soul Immediate at Death.— 
Epictetus of Hieropolis (c. a.d. 60-120), another celebrated 
Stoic moralist and philosopher, taught at Rome until a.d. 94, 
when all philosophers were banished from the city by edict of 
Domitian. Epictetus seemingly believed that the refusion of the 
human soul back into the World-Soul takes place immediately 
upon its separation from the body—man being an emanation 
from God anyway. Death, he held, is a return, or reunion, of 
the soul to its kindred elements,43 specifically reverting to the 
element of fire. To him there is no Hades.
7. Plutarch: Idea of Annihilation Is Intolerable.— 
Plutarch (c. a.d. 46-120), however, Greek biographer and high- 
ranking moralist, and foe of Stoicism, expressly defended the 
immortality of the soul and a divine providence. As a philos­
opher he is to be classed among the Platonists, with a heavy 
leaning toward the prevailing Orientalism. He was also a 
Dualist, recognizing an eternal principle of evil confronting 
God from all eternity. Souls were not made, he said, to bloom 
but for a day and then be annihilated forever.
He leaned openly on the Dionysiac beliefs, though admit­
ting them to be founded on myths. Plutarch disparaged rewards 
and punishments in an afterlife. And he adds that “the idea of 
annihilation was intolerable to the Greek mind. If the only 
choice they had was between entire extinction and an eternity 
of torment in Hades, they would have chosen the latter.” 44
«Ibid., p. 138.
« Ibid., p. 144.
42 Pliny, Historica Naturcdis, ii. 7.
43 D611inger, op. cit., vol. 2, pp. 128, 140.
44 Ibid., pp. 131-133, 145.
To Historian Plutarch, Likewise a Platonist, 
the Idea of Annihilation Was Intolerable.
Such was the wide diversity of views afloat at the time. And this 
was contemporary with Christ and the apostles.
8. Marcus Aurelius: Soul Reabsorbed Into World-Soul. 
—Marcus Aurelius Antonius 
(a.d. 121-180), noted Roman 
emperor-philosopher of the Stoic persuasion, betrayed a like 
hesitation as to whether the dissolution and refusion of the 
soul are immediately upon death or at the final conflagration 
of the world. He leaned toward the former. However, he was 
clear on the soul’s ultimate disappearance upon its dissolution, 
with reabsorption in the World-Soul and re-entry into another 
portion of the universe, this process of dissolution and begin­
ning anew going on to all eternity.46 The Stoic philosophers end 
with the emperor, and confusion becomes more pronounced.
And it should be added just here that Lucian, or Lucius 
Apuleius (c. a.d. 126-200), satirical writer and Platonic philos­
opher, pressed the point that much of Greek philosophy was 
originally brought in from the East. Such testimony is signifi­
cant.
9. 
Tacitus: 
Believer 
in 
Fatalistic 
Principle.—The 
confessions of Publius Cornelius Tacitus (c. a.d. 55-117), great­
est of Roman historians and noted legal orator, praetor, consul, 
and friend of Pliny the Younger, are less explicit. He denies the
« Ibid., pp. 129, 141, 175.
629
630
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
conduct of events by divine providence and any appearance 
of retributive justice in human affairs. He was not sure whether 
human events are controlled by destiny, immutable necessity, 
or mere hazard. He was evidently a believer in fatalistic 
principle.“
That is the list. We may therefore rightly say that uncer­
tainty, doubt, confusion, and contradiction prevailed and 
neutralized one another among the intellectuals, with the great­
est influence still exerted by the Stoics. They taught that souls 
were comprised of ethereal fire, derived from the World-Soul, 
and continued to exist in a separate state of being for a time 
after death. But no souls last longer than the general conflagra­
tion, when they are reabsorbed, and return to the primal fire.
10. 
Conclusion: Both Views Lead to Extinction of Per­
sonality.—These variant views led to two alternatives: (1) 
holding to the extinction of the soul along with the body; or (2) 
explaining it is a portion and emanation of the divine World- 
Soul, to be reabsorbed. If the latter, they expatiated on the 
heavenly origin of the soul, its descent from the bosom of the 
Deity to this life, and its return after death to its home. This 
return was simply a refusion of the part into the whole, from 
which it had been temporarily separated, and would be accom­
panied by the extinction of individual consciousness. Pantheism, 
reincarnation, and reabsorption are common—and loss of all 
personality.
Those who refuse to accept the mythical speculations had 
to choose between two theories as to the origin of the human 
race: (1) Either the soul had no more a beginning than the 
world, both existing from all eternity, through an infinite 
series of successive generations; or (2) there was an admitted 
beginning of the race, but not an act of creation. Man emerged, 
springing forth from the slime of earth, either impregnated by 
the sun or spontaneously.
But both theories led to the ultimate loss of all individu-
«Ibid., p. 139.
ality. The first had a cycle of perpetual births and deaths; the 
second left all to blind destiny.47 Both presented a dreary pros­
pect. Such was the situation in Roman thought when Christian­
ity was getting under way.
DESPAIR PREDOMINANT AMONG ROMAN THINKERS 631
« Ibid., pp. 144, 145.
CHAPTER 
THIRTY-SIX
Alexandrian Jews Forsake 
Ancestral Platform
I. The Tragedy of the Great Departure
We are about to trace one of the tragedies of ancient church 
history—the adoption, by one segment of the Jewish Church, 
of the essential elements of Plato’s enticing pagan philosophy 
concerning the nature and destiny of man. As previously men­
tioned, it will not be a pleasant journey for us to take, but it is 
unavoidable if we are to understand how God’s chosen people 
of old became confused by the subtle sophistries of devious 
reasoning, with one segment adopting these concepts that cast 
aside the uniform teachings of Moses and the prophets—those 
holy men of old who wrote under inspiration and set forth 
the revealed truth of God on this question.
Some questioning minds began to toy with these alluring 
pagan speculations and, becoming enamored, lost their bear­
ings and brought confusion and tragedy into the ranks of 
Jewry. Fortunately, not all took the tangent path, fraught with 
such fateful consequences. Others—and a goodly number at 
that—remained true to the faith of their fathers. Resultant 
conflicts and exchanges were sharp. The wanderers strayed 
into barren deserts, as it were, that were dull and profitless, 
but nonetheless real and disastrous. We will pass over these 
arid spots as rapidly as consistent with a balanced portrayal.
Happier will be our experience when we come to survey 
the stout allegiance of others to the revealed verities of Old 
Testament Scripture, as the breach widened over the irruption
632
During the Inter-Testament Period the Jews Were Debating Over Conflicting 
Views of Truth and Error.
of Platonic Immortal-Soulism in the ranks of Jewry. So we 
turn to the pathetic record of the great departure and its reper­
cussions that reach over into the Christian Era.
II. Character and Significance of Apocryphal and 
Pseudepigraphal Teachings
1. 
Prophets Followed by Priests and Priestly Struggles. 
—We now revert to the historic Jews, for it was among the 
Hebrews that Platonic Immortal-Soulism first began its inroads 
among believers in Holy Scripture. Following the close of the 
line of the Old Testament prophets from among the Hebrews 
came the period of the priests. Two widely different major 
sects emerged—the eclectic, traditional, formalist Pharisees 
(the religious), and the skeptical, materialistic Sadducees (the 
political) whose interests centered in the Temple and on power.
The Pharisees were eclectic because their beliefs were
633
Chart C
COMPARATIVE 
LISTS OF OLD TESTAMENT BOOKS, SHOWING SEPTUAGINT 
AND ROMAN CATHOLIC ENLARGEMENTS
(Apocryphal Portions Indicated by Italics)
1
2
3
4
Palestinian Jewish
Alexandrian Septuagint
Roman Catholic
Protestant
The Law
Genesis
Genesis
Genesis
Genesis
Exodus
Exodus
Exodus
Exodus
Leviticus
Leviticus
Leviticus
Leviticus
Numbers
Numbers
Numbers
Numbers
Deuteronomy
Deuteronomy
Deuteronomy
Deuteronomy
Joshua
Josue (Joshua)
Joshua
Judges
Judges
Judges
The Prophets
Ruth
Ruth
Ruth
Joshua
1 Kings (1 Samuel)
1 Kings (1 Samuel)
1 Samuel
Judges
2 Kings (2 Samuel)
2 Kings (2 Samuel)
2 Samuel
1 Samuel
3 Kings (1 Kings)
3 Kings (1 Kings)
1 Kings
2 Samuel
4 Kings (2 Kings)
4 Kings (2 Kings)
2 Kings
1 Kings
1 Chronicles
1 Paralipomenon (1 Chronicles)
1 Chronicles
2 Kings
2 Chronicles
2 Paralipomenon (2 Chronicles)
2 Chronicles
Isaiah
1 Esdras
1 Esdras (Ezra)
Ezra
Jeremiah
2 Esdras (Ezra and
2 Esdras (Nehemiah)
Nehemiah
Ezekiel
Nehemiah)
Tobias ( Tobit)
Esther
The Twelve
Psalms
Judith
Job
(Hosea
Proverbs
Esther (10:4 to 16:24 added)
Psalms
Joel
Ecclesiastes
Job
Proverbs
Amos
Song (of Songs)
Psalms
Ecclesiastes
Obadiah
Job
Proverbs
Song of Solomon
Jonah
Wisdom of Solomon
Ecclesiastes
Isaiah
Micah
Wisdom of Sirach, or
Canticle of Canticles (Song
Jeremiah
Nahum
Ecclesiasticus
of Solomon)
Lamentations
Habakkuk
Esther, with additions
Wisdom
Ezekiel
Zephaniah
Judith
Ecclesiasticus
Daniel
Haggai
T obit
Isaias (Isaiah)
Hosea
Zechariah
Hosea
Jeremias [including Lamenta­
Joel
Malachi)
Amos
tions], with Baruch
Amos
Micah
Ezechiel
Obadiah
The Writings
Joel
Daniel [3:24-90 (Song of the
Jonah
Psalms
Obadiah
Three Children), Chap. 13
Micah
Proverbs
Jonah
(Susanna), and Chap. 14 (Bel
Nahum
Job
Nahum
and the Dragon) added]
Habakkuk
COMPARATIVE LISTS OF OLD TESTAMENT BOOKS—Continued
l
Palestinian Jewish
Song of Songs 
Ruth
Lamentations
Ecclesiastes
Esther
Daniel
Ezra
Nehemiah
1 Chronicles
2 Chronicles
(Without Apocryphal 
additions)
Alexandrian Septuagint
Habakkuk
Zephaniah
Haggai
Zechariah
Malachi
Isaiah
Jeremiah
Baruch
Lamentations
Epistle of Jeremy
Ezekiel
Daniel, with additions of
Song of the Three Children 
Susannah
Bel and the Dragon
1 Maccabees
2 Maccabees
3 Maccabees
4 Maccabees 
Psalms of Solomon 
Enoch
Odes, including the 
prayer of Manasses
Roman Catholic
Osee (Hosea)
Joel
Amos
Abdias (Obadiah) 
Jonas (Jonah)
Micheas (Micah) 
Nahum
Habacuc (Habakkuk) 
Sophonias (Zephaniah) 
Aggeus (Haggai) 
Zacharias (Zechariah) 
Malachias (Malachi)
/ Machabees 
2 Machabees
Protestant
Zephaniah
Haggai
Zechariah
Malachi
(Without added 
Apocrypha)
COMPARATIVE LISTS OF OLD TESTAMENT BOORS, WITH APOCRYPHAL ENLARGEMENTS (IN ITALICS)
It will be observed that the Palestinian standard list (without the Apocrypha) is restored in the standard Protestant versions.1 On the contrary, the 
Alexandrian Septuagint,2 or “Larger Canon” (with Apocrypha), is largely followed by the Roman Catholic Vulgate (authorized by the Council of Trent, 
1546).3 Incidentally, the post-Nicene church list of Hippo (3d Council of Carthage, 4th cent.) included six apocryphal books,4 whereas the Medieval Wal- 
densian list, in the Confession of Faith,5 states that the apocryphal books are extracanonical. The significance of the four lists, the Alexandrian factor, is 
obvious. (Cf. Prophetic Faith, vol. 1, pp. 76-85.)
1 See The Holy Bible According to the Masoretic Text. A New Translation.
2 See The Ola Testament in Greek According to the Septuagint, ed. by Henry Barclay Swetc, 
vols. 1-3.
3 Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent (trans. by H. J. Schroeder), session 4, April 8, 1546, pp. 17, 18.
4 Charles Joseph Hefele, A History of the Councils of the Church, vol. 2, p. 400.
5 Samuel Morland, The History of the Evangelical Churches of the Valleys of Piemont, pp. 
30, 31.
636
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
drawn from a number of systems; traditional because they 
placed oral tradition on a parity with Scripture; and formalist 
because they often neglected weightier matters for scrupulous 
detail. The Pharisees were the popular party, stressing religious 
freedom and emphasizing synagogue worship.
On the other hand, the Sadducees were skeptical, because 
they openly denied the Pharisaic postulate of disembodied 
souls, angels, and spirits. They were materialistic because they 
rejected belief in retribution in an afterlife, and particularly 
in the resurrection—explaining away those statements in the 
Old Testament referring to a future life. The Sadducees, how­
ever, never had the following of the masses.
In addition, a third Jewish sect was the Essenes, the 
“monks,” as it were, stressing piety, justice, benevolence, and 
a hallowed way of life. They lived in communities, linked 
together by common beliefs and practices. And they were 
confined to Palestine and Syria.
The later Zealots in the early Christian Era were the 
party of revolt, who had broken away from the Pharisees. They 
were men of military action, devoted to national independence, 
who took the sword and fanatically resisted the Roman rule to 
the death. In fact, it was their resistance that led to the destruc­
tion of Jerusalem in a.d. 70.
During this inter-Testament period, in the cross currents 
of Palestinian Judaism, the Pharisees and Sadducees were in 
constant conflict, somewhat like the Fundamentalists and 
Modernists of Protestantism today. Nevertheless, both wor­
shiped in the same Temple, and together formed the Sanhedrin 
—the supreme governing body of seventy members—with first 
one group ascendant, then the other, and with the two 
factions ever struggling for the supremacy.
The Sadducees cared little about preserving the purity of 
the Jewish faith, but were absorbed with the enlargement of 
political power and prestige. But they were never popular. 
And with the destruction of Jerusalem the Sanhedrin ended, 
and the Sadducees ceased to exist. Thus the Pharisees were
ALEXANDRIAN JEWS FORSAKE PLATFORM 
637
left to impose their concepts, and concentrated on worship in 
the synagogue. The legalistic literature of Judaism was collected 
in the Mishnah/ about a.d. 200, and the Talmud2 followed, 
between a.d. 200 and 500.
2. 
Apocryphal and Apocalyptic Writings Appear.—The 
gap between the writing of the last book of the Old Testament 
and the first book of the New has often been misconceived as a 
bleak, barren, and silent period. Nothing could be farther 
from the truth. These centuries were, in fact, remarkable ones, 
and anything but barren or silent. Instead, they were filled 
with intense literary activity, for this was the time when the 
Jewish apocryphal books were in the process of production and 
circulation.
The Apocrypha,3 separate from Scripture, was a unique 
admixture of fact, fancy, and fiction. Truth and error were 
intermingled. The component books included not only his­
torical and literary treatises but a collection of apocalyptic 
missives brought forth by mystics and seers, and left on record 
for the centuries. Some of the Jews accepted them as canonical; * 
others rejected them as noncanonical and apocryphal. But 
they were neither forbidden nor suppressed.
During this critical period many were deeply concerned 
over conflicting views of truth and error that were current, 
as well as gravely apprehensive over things to come. The Messi­
anic hope found highly figurative expression, and an increas­
ingly high expectancy marked the era. Many solemnly declared 
that events of worldwide import and dimension were destined 
to occur in the predicted latter times, and that the climax of 
human affairs would be marked by divine interposition. Thus
1 Mishnah (Hebrew, “instruction”)—the authoritative collection of Jewish oral law 
that forms the basis of both the Palestinian and the Babylonian versions of the Talmud.
2 Talmud—the compilation that embodies the Mishnah. or oral teaching of the Jews, 
and the Gemara, or collection of the discussions of the Mishnah. The smaller Jerusalem 
Talmud (c. 
a.d. 200) gives the discussions of the Palestinian rabbis, whereas the larger and 
more important Babylonian Talmud (c. 
a.d. 500) is the authoritative guide to spiritual life.
3 Apocrypha (from the Gr. “hidden”)—the fourteen added books of the Old Testament 
appearing in the Greek Septuagint but not found in the Hebrew canon being excluded by 
the non-Hellenistic Palestinian Jews, and likewise excluded from the Protestant A.V.. R.V., 
et cetera. They were, however, retained in the Latin Vulgate and in the Roman Catholic 
Douay Version.
4 Canon (from the_ Gr. “measuring rod,” or “rule”)—a list, or catalogue, of the 
acknowledged inspired writings of the Old, and later of the New, Testament.
638
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
the apocalyptic literature made its appearance, giving utterance 
to new concepts and often leading away from Judaic patterns 
of previous centuries.
Significantly enough, the question most constantly and 
ardently discussed was that of eschatology, or the multiple 
doctrine of the last things—including the nature of the soul, 
the state and place of the dead, the nature of the resurrection, 
future rewards and punishments, and the fate of both the 
wicked and the righteous. That is why an understanding of 
this literature is incumbent upon us.
The time period of the writing of the Apocrypha covers 
roughly the last two centuries prior to the Christian Era and 
the first century a.d. The production of these Jewish treatises 
consequently continued until the apostles had actually com­
pleted the writing of the books of the New Testament canon. 
The New Testament did not therefore appear in the midst 
of a literary vacuum, as regards our quest.
3. 
PSEUDEPIGRAPHA INVOKES PRESTIGE OF FORMER PROPH­
ETS.—The names of former Jewish prophets and leaders were 
also invoked in support of various of these apocryphal produc­
tions. Although the activity of the Hebrew prophets had ended 
and the Old Testament canon was closed, these apocalyptic 
writings were frequently sent forth under the name of some 
ancient Hebrew worthy in order to add greater weight to 
these new predictions of things to come—such as The Book 
of Enoch, The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, The Wis­
dom of Solomon, The Assumption of Moses, et cetera.
These were accordingly called pseudepigraphicals writings. 
Although of unknown authorship, and of none-too-certain 
dating, they nevertheless afford a valuable insight into this 
crucial transition period in Jewish thinking and Judaism’s 
changing outlook—and into the penetration of Platonism into 
Jewry. Historically, they were actually written and widely 
read, and exerted considerable influence at the time, as well
5 Pseudepigrapha—writings ascribed to some other than their real author, with a 
view to giving them enhanced authority—as of Enoch, Moses, Solomon, Baruch, Ezra.
ALEXANDRIAN JEWS FORSAKE PLATFORM 
639
as subsequently—even to this day. They are therefore important 
in our quest.
4. Influenced by Thinking of Surrounding Nations.— 
Thus it was that these compositions of the Jews—historical, 
apocalyptical, ethical, mystical, and fictional—were definitely 
influenced by the impact of the thinking of the Egyptians, 
Babylonians, Persians, and especially the Greeks under whom the 
Jews had been subjected in the successive captivities of the 
centuries. Such is the background setting of the Jewish inter- 
Testamental apocryphal and apocalyptic literature.
Some of these productions were akin to Dante’s Divine 
Comedy or Milton’s Paradise Lost. Some reflected the thinking 
and feeling of their age; some forecast the future. And all of 
them molded Jewish religious thought, especially on the nature 
and destiny of man. Some of these writings, it will be found, 
were in harmony with Old Testament truth; others were sharply 
at variance therewith. And some of the incipient errors of this 
pre-Christian Era were erelong to develop into full-blown 
departure from the historic faith of their fathers.
5. 
Apocrypha 
Excluded 
From 
Palestinian 
Canon.— 
There is another important point that should be noted here: 
The apocryphal books, included in the “larger” Alexandrian 
Greek Septuagint translation, were excluded from the Pales­
tinian Hebreiu canon. This fact must not be missed. They were 
in the Alexandrian version only, and were not accepted at the 
Jerusalem base. Thus, while the Alexandrian Septuagint trans­
lators took certain lesser liberties with the Hebrew text—ex­
panding, abbreviating, transposing, and otherwise modifying— 
their revolutionary and far-reaching innovation was the adding 
of these fourteen apocryphal books to the Old Testament canon, 
all of which were produced after the close of the Old Testament 
canon.
But the New Testament apostle-writers of the newborn 
Christian Church did not recognize them as canonical. And 
scholarly, conservative Church Fathers—like Athanasius, Greg­
640
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
ory of Nazianzus, Cyril of Jerusalem, Julius Africanus, and 
Jerome—protested against including these Alexandrian accre­
tions in the canon.9 And it is also to be observed that the later 
difference between the Protestant Old Testament canon and 
that of Rome is precisely this difference between the Palestinian 
canon and the larger Alexandrian canon.
6. 
Extensive Coverage Justified and Imperative.—Be­
cause of the obviously vital bearing that all this and much more 
has upon our quest, we shall go rather fully into the historic 
background. We will trace in this introductory chapter the 
results of the pressures exerted upon Israel during her cap­
tivities, the sources of Judaism’s departures, and the several 
related factors.
The significance of the important witness of the extra- 
canonical Jewish literature of the inter-Testamental period 
climaxes with the witness of the famous Dead Sea scrolls and 
their epochal testimony. And the far-reaching, contrasting 
innovations of Philo Judaeus form their tragic counterpart.
III. Historical Background of Jewish Captivities and Decline
We would stress the point that, as the setting for the 
crucial developments that come within the field of our quest, 
it is essential that we have the historical background of the 
successive Jewish captivities and final decline clearly before 
us. Let us therefore go back to the sixth century b.c.
1. 
Subjugation by Babylon, Then by Persia.—In 587 B.C., 
the Jewish nation, having steadily declined since the days of 
Solomon, was nearly annihilated at the time of Nebuchadnezzar’s 
destruction of the first Temple 7 and Jerusalem and the remnant
9 Gregory of Nazianzus and Epiphanius questioned their canonicity, and in the west 
Jerome especially would not admit them into the Hebrew list as canonical. On the contrary, 
Ambrose and Augustine placed them on the same footing as canonical Scriptures.
7 There were three temples: Cl) that of Solomon, the great central sanctuary of Israel, 
which was destroyed in 586 b.c.j in the Babylonian conquest of Jerusalem^ (2) that of Zerub- 
babel, the rebuilding beginning in 520/19 B.C., desecrated by Antiochus Epiphanes, and redcdi- 
cated under Judas Maccabaeus; and (3) the great Herodian Temple, begun in 19 B.C. and 
destroyed in a.d. 70, when the Temple worship and its priesthood ceased.
ALEXANDRIAN JEWS FORSAKE PLATFORM 
641
were carried into captivity in Babylon.8 In Babylon, however, 
Nebuchadnezzar permitted the Hebrew exiles to retain much 
of their freedom and to preserve their religious faith and 
practices.
Then in 539 the Persian leader Cyrus conquered Babylon, 
and in his first year as king of Babylon he issued a decree per­
mitting the Jews to return to Palestine. The second Temple 
was constructed in Jerusalem, under Zerubbabel, and com­
pleted in 515 b.c. Ezra, and later Nehemiah, returned to 
Jerusalem and rebuilt the city walls and restored the observance 
of the law.
2. Syrian Oppression and Maccabean Revolt.—Darkness 
then fell upon Palestinian affairs. The seclusion was broken 
in 332 b.c. by the appearance at Jerusalem of Alexander the 
Great. But after his death Palestine fell under the rule of the 
Ptolemies (323-c. 200), and the Jews became the object of con­
tention between the rival dynasties of the Ptolemies of Egypt 
and the Seleucids of Syria.
After Judea fell into the hands of Syria, a Hellenizing 
process made rapid progress among the Jews. But under Anti- 
ochus IV Epiphanes (175-164/63), the struggle between the 
Hellenic and Hebraic influences came to the fore. Judaism 
was declared illegal, the observance of its religious practices 
was made a capital offense, and the Jews were compelled to 
worship idols.
Under the revolt beginning in 168 B.C., Judas Maccabaeus 
and his brothers resisted by force of arms and effective bargain­
ing. The Syrians were finally compelled to give independence 
to the Jews. Simon Maccabaeus was voted high priest and 
ethnarch (or ruler) in 141 /40 b.c.—these positions then becom­
ing hereditary.
3. Rome’s Dominance, Jerusalem’s Destruction, and the 
Diaspora.—A dispute among rival brothers over the throne led
8 The Jews in Palestine were under Babylonian rule (605-539 B.C.), Persian rule (539- 
332 B.C.), Alexander, the Ptolemies, and the Seleucids (332-168 B.C.), the Maccabees (168- 
63 B.C.), and under the Romans from 63 b.c.
PAINTING BY JES SCHLAIKJER, N.A. 
© 1957 8Y THE REVIEW AND HERALD
Paul the Apostle Portrayed the Immortalization of the 
21
Redeemed at the Resurrection Attendant Upon the Second 
Advent.
Rome in the Heyday of Its Power Was the Scene of the Rise and Spread of the 
Christian Faith, With Its Message to Man of Life Only in Christ.
to the invoking of the help of Rome in 65 b.c. As a result 
Pompey marched on Jerusalem and ended Judea’s inde­
pendence in 63 b.c. When Antipater was poisoned Herod 
assumed authority, and was eventually made king of Judea 
(40 b.c.) by appointment of the Roman Senate. He gained con­
trol of Palestine in 37 b.c., and began rebuilding the Temple. 
Because murder and outrage marked his reign he was hated 
by the Jews.
After his death Palestine was divided among his sons. And 
after a decade Emperor Augustus annexed Judea and Samaria 
as a Roman province, ruled over by a procurator. But the 
country seethed with discontent and rebellion, fomented by 
the Jewish Zealots in Galilee. This was roughly the period of 
Philo and Josephus.
Under Pontius Pilate, Jesus was crucified in a.d. 31. For 
a brief period Emperor Claudius reunified Palestine under the 
kingship of Agrippa, grandson of Herod. Then most of it was 
again put under procurators. Because of subsequent misgovern- 
ment the people were incited to revolt, and by a.d. 66 the Jews 
rebelled, and open warfare broke out against the Romans. 
In a.d. 70 the Temple was destroyed by Titus, and soon all 
Palestine was in Roman hands. Judea’s independence was
642
ALEXANDRIAN JEWS FORSAKE PLATFORM 
643
buried under the ruins of the city and the Temple. After 
Simon bar Cocheba’s rebellion 
(a.d. 132-135), Jerusalem was 
made a Gentile city, and barred to the Jews. Such Was the 
historical panorama.
Next note the impact of the captivities of the Jews upon 
their thinking as regards the nature and destiny of the soul.
IV. Triple Exposure to Immortality Postulate 
in Three Captivities
Turning next to the relationships of this checkered history 
to the changing Jewish understanding of the nature and destiny 
of the soul, we first note that prior to the age of the Maccabees 
(168-63 b.c.) the Jews had no important writings outside 
the Old Testament. There were, of course, some archeological 
inscriptions, but the canonical Scriptures stood alone in their 
sublime majesty and authority. Then human comments, reason­
ings, developments, and inferences began to appear. But these 
came after Israel had felt the impact of special pressures, partic­
ularly under the Grecian influence, the last of a succession 
of exposures to foreign influences. As just noted, the series 
embraced the Egyptian, Babylonian, Persian, and Grecian cap­
tivities. Each had its own particular emphasis and focal points 
of pressure. Note them.
1. 
Egyptian Immortal-Soulism and Transmigration.— 
In their early captivity in Egypt the Jews first came in contact 
with a clearly defined postulate of the Innate Immortality of 
the soul and a corresponding future retribution. Coupled 
with these was the notion of the transmigration of souls.9 This 
latter teaching is, of course, fundamentally at variance with 
the doctrine of the resurrection of the body. This Egyptian 
exposure lasted about two centuries, terminating in the fifteenth 
century b.c.
9 Technically termed “metempsychosis”—the doctrine that souls migrate from one body 
into another, until complete purification has been achieved.
644
COND1TIONALIST FAITH
2. Persian Retribution ism and Deadly Dualism.—Next, 
during their subjection to the Persian power, the Jews came 
in contact with Eastern Zoroastrianism, with its Zend-Avesta10 
and its doctrine of future retributions—involving the resur­
rection of the body and the eternal reward of the righteous 
at a future judgment, and corresponding punishment of the 
wicked. This system, which was allegedly based upon a special 
revelation, not on philosophical speculation, and which in­
volved the deadly pall of Dualism,11 left its imprint, though it 
did not immediately change Hebrew teachings.
3. Greek Immortalism Based on Philosophical Specula­
tion.—Then finally, during the period of Alexander and his 
successors, the Jews came into close contact with a doctrine 
of Innate Immortality of the soul and future eternal retribu­
tion based not on a professed revelation but on philosophical 
speculation, or reasoning.
This involved the concept of pre-existence and transmigra­
tion of souls, based upon the premise of the soul’s alleged 
divine, immortal, and eternal nature—as a kind of self-existent, 
eternal deity. These positions were developed by Plato, and 
repeated by Cicero as derived from Plato—for the philosophical 
systems of the Greeks and Romans were substantially the same. 
This third period extended until the time of Christ.
4. Antiochus Seeks to Replace Jewish Usages With 
Grecian.—The age of the Maccabees forms part of this third 
period, and completed the great circuit of exposure to foreign 
influences upon the Jewish mind. This Maccabean age began 
with a period of intense religious persecution of the Jews 
under Antiochus Epiphanes. It was an epoch of crisis, as Anti­
ochus undertook the eradication of the religious teachings and
10 Avesta—sacred book of the Zoroastrlans or Parsis, setting forth the religious belief of 
the ancient Persians.
11 Dualism—a metaphysical system which holds that good and evil are the outcome, or 
product, of separate and equally ultimate first causes. The world was made by Ormuzd. the 
good god, while Ahriman, the evil spirit, tempts man to wrong._ But God will finally triumph 
over evil, and all souls eventually pass over the “bridge of decision” (from which some must 
first fall into purifying flames), and enjoy eternal bliss.
practices of the Jews, and their replacement with those of 
Greece.
As we have seen, Antiochus captured Jerusalem, plundered 
the Temple, massacred the people, superimposed the altar 
of Jupiter upon that of Jehovah, and defiled the Temple by 
sacrifices of swine’s flesh. He sought to destroy the Law of 
Moses by invoking the death penalty upon those possessing 
copies, and prohibiting the Temple services, as well as the 
keeping of the Sabbath and circumcision. The heroic stand of 
Judas Maccabees and his brothers in behalf of the Jewish 
faith is one of the classics of religious history. Their wars were 
based upon deep religious convictions.
5. 
Apocryphal 
Writings 
Emerge 
During 
Maccabean 
Period.—It was following such cruel circumstances, during the 
two centuries just prior to the Christian Era, that the earliest 
non-Biblical declarations of the Jews on human destiny began 
to appear—after, be it noted, the establishment of the kingdom 
of the Maccabees. It was during this period that the two leading 
concepts of future rewards and retributions began to come 
into focus, one of which had not been held, prior to this, by 
the Jews. And it also began to be espoused by the Christian 
Church from the second century of the Christian Era onward.
These two major positions were: (1) The older concept 
of the eternal blessedness of the righteous through bestoived 
immortality, along with the ultimate destruction of the wicked; 
and then (2) the new concept of the eternal blessedness of 
the innately immortal righteous and the Eternal Torment of 
the immortal wicked. And to these must be added a third 
position that came in to a limited degree—the eternal blessed­
ness of the innately immortal righteous and the final restoration 
of the indefeasibly immortal wicked, after limited remedial 
punishment.
All three positions came to be held and defended by some 
among the Jews by the time of Christ’s public ministry. And 
all three views came to be embraced among the early Christians
ALEXANDRIAN JEWS FORSAKE PLATFORM 
645
COURTESY, BEECH AIRCRAFT CORP.
OAVID BERGER, ARTIST
Alexander’s Goal Was That the Glories of Greece Should Ultimately Infuse All 
Civilizations and Cultures.
by the middle of the third century a.d. And the Jewish views 
had a marked bearing upon their Christian espousal.
6. 
Pagan Dualism Makes Its Impress.—In this connection, 
one further factor should not be overlooked—that for centuries 
before Christ the dualistic thesis of two eternal, self-existent 
powers, or gods—one good and the other evil, and each creat­
ing its own system—was persistently promulgated. This point 
is vital, for it logically involves the contention of the eternal 
duration of evil, as well as of good—in other words, the Eternal 
Torment of the immortally wicked. (Some, however, held 
that good was in the ultimate to be victorious.)
The Jews were made aware of this dualistic concept, which 
originated in Persia and first affected the North African group. 
Later it touched the Christians and made its impress upon the 
Christian followers of Tertullian of Carthage—likewise in
646
North Africa. The third position was sponsored by Origen 
of Alexandria and his Restorationist followers. This places 
the threefold picture before us. These three schools will all be 
noted in due course.
Next let us note Alexandria, focal point for the new 
developments.
V. Alexandria—Intellectual Center of Learned World
1. Alexander’s Vision of Greek Intellectual Domi­
nance.—In his subjugation of the Persian world Alexander 
the Great simultaneously brought the Jewish race under 
Grecian rule. His ambitious goal was that the genius of Greece 
should ultimately infuse all civilizations, first with the Greek 
language and then its literature, customs, and philosophy.
To this end he founded the city of Alexandria, which 
became not only the crossroads and “mixing bowl” of the 
nations, and a center of political power, commerce, and wealth, 
but the hub of literary and scientific development. Alexander 
envisioned it as the intellectual metropolis of the learned world. 
Scores of Greek cities developed around the Mediterranean 
basin, and hosts of Jews swarmed to these cities.
2. Ptolemies and Seleucids Struggle for Mastery.— 
After Alexander’s death the struggle for mastery soon narrowed 
down to the Ptolemies of Egypt and the Seleucids of Syria. 
The Ptolemies transferred more than one hundred thousand 
Jews into Egypt, which figure grew to a million by the time 
of Christ. These exiles were thrust into a new environment, 
a new language, and the involvements of a new Greek philos­
ophy. In the market places they heard men discussing the lofty 
idealism and intriguing philosophy of Plato, Aristotle, and 
Zeno. In time they began to feel the pull and the power of 
the surrounding Greek intellectualism, with its focal point in 
Alexandria. They studied its language, its history, and its philos­
ophy, and were moved thereby.
ALEXANDRIAN JEWS FORSAKE PLATFORM 
647
In the Vast Alexandrian Library, With Its Amazing Assemblage of Scrolls, 
Hebrew Students Were Inducted Into Greek Philosophy.
But the Jews of Palestine, caught between two fires, re­
mained conservative and traditional. Thus a definite cleavage 
developed, Palestinian Judaism maintaining independence of 
thought, with views definitely, if not radically, different from 
the later Alexandrian Jews with their Platonic anthropology.
The Syrian tyranny and the accession of Antiochus (IV) 
Epiphanes marked a period of anguish for the Jews. We repeat, 
for emphasis, that Antiochus suppressed the Jewish religion, 
massacred the Jews, pillaged the Temple of its treasures, turned 
it over to the worship of Zeus, prohibited all sacrifices and 
services under pain of death, and caused swine’s flesh to be 
offered on the altar. He transformed Jerusalem into a Greek 
city, garrisoned by Syrians. But under the Maccabean revolt 
the Temple services were restored by the Jewish patriots.
648
3. 
Hebrew Students Inducted Into Greek Learning.— 
Meantime Alexandria was not only the meeting place of Europe, 
Asia, and Africa but also to a large extent the focal point of 
western Judaism. Alexandria’s vast library of more than a half 
million papyrus rolls represented the accumulated learning 
of the nations. Its academies, its vast museum (actually a royal 
university), its halls of philosophy, and school of medicine 
attracted scholars from all over the world, many thousands 
converging there from all lands. Historians, poets, and philos­
ophers came to sit at the feet of Greek masters.
And here also in the multiple halls of the library and 
university Hebrew students read Greek philosophy and poetry. 
Inevitably yet imperceptibly the charm and brilliance of Hellen­
ism began to captivate the mind of the Alexandrian Jews. After 
the Greek language was adopted by them it soon became neces­
sary for the Scriptures to be translated into the Greek Sep- 
tuagint. This, be it noted, was begun under the reign of Ptolemy 
Philadelphus, which translation became a sort of “people’s 
Bible” for the Jews of the Dispersion.
The next step was to attempt to explain Judaism to the 
Greeks—to present an apologetic for its faith, so as to appeal 
to Greek thought. This took the form of such books as Ecclesi- 
asticus, written originally in Hebrew by Jesus the son of Sira, 
and translated into Greek by his grandson, probably about 132 
B.C.; the Books of the Maccabees, 2 Enoch (the Slavonic Book 
of Enoch). The Sibylline Oracles sought to parallel current 
heathen myths with the stories of the Old Testament, but 
tinctured with Hellenic terms. This literature was a strange 
commingling of Platonic, Jewish, Rabbinic, Socradc, and 
Egyptian elements.
VI. Process Whereby the Jews Changed Their Anthropology
1. 
Shifting From the Ancestral Foundations.—Com- 
mendably the Jews held tenaciously to their monotheism. On 
this they never yielded, never ceasing to denounce the multi-
ALEXANDRIAN JEWS FORSAKE PLATFORM 
649
650
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
pie gods of the polytheistic nations. But they began to bor­
row Greek terms to expound their own distinctive beliefs. In 
the Septuagint translation, for example, they did not coin new 
Greek terms, but employed existing Greek ideology, thus 
opening the 
door 
to misunderstanding, 
confusion, 
and 
compromise.
Next, they found and studied those Greek philosophers 
who had risen above idol veneration and worshiped the one 
invisible God. They then sought to show that the supreme 
god of the philosophers is actually the same as the one 
Supreme God of the Hebrews.
Finally, they began to present their beliefs in accom­
modated philosophical form. For instance, they attempted to 
show that the Moses story of Creation really sets forth the best 
in pagan cosmogony. They felt that with God as Creator there 
was a basis of kinship here, and common ground. And there 
was much emphasis on divine wisdom, as in the apocalyptic 
“Wisdom” literature (the collected sayings and parables of 
Israel’s sages),12 appearing about this time, which paralleled 
certain pagan positions.
2. Presented Religious Views in Philosophical Setting. 
—The Alexandrian Jews did not repudiate Greek philosophy, 
but used it to set forth their own viewpoint. They made it 
clear that, while the Jews rejected the heathen deities, they 
were not atheists. Instead, they sought to present their religion 
as a superior “philosophy,” somewhat akin to Platonic philos­
ophy, which they often cited. That was the situation when 
Philo 
(c. 20 b.c.-c. a.d. 50) appeared, and carried the prin­
ciple of synthesis to its disastrous ultimate lengths. And this 
involved in particular a radical departure on the nature and 
destiny of man—or their anthropology.
3. Transmitted From Jews to Christians.—The apoc­
ryphal literature was often characterized by weird, cryptic,
12 For example, The Wisdom of Solomon 3:11; 4:19, in the Apocrypha, Greek and 
English, Septuagint Version, pp. 56, 58.
and mysterious but intriguing imagery. Nevertheless it ex­
erted a widespread influence. Apocalyptic imagination was 
given full rein, and there were multiple assurances of the 
restoration of Israel through divine judgments and super­
natural intervention, destined to end the reign of sin and 
establish God’s kingdom. As stated, fourteen of these apoc­
ryphal writings were included, in whole or part, in the canon 
list of the Greek Septuagint of Alexandria. And as mentioned, 
these were later incorporated in Jerome’s Vulgate, and finally 
by the Roman Catholic Church in the Douay Version of 
Counter Reformation fame. That is the line of transmission 
from Jewish to Christian ranks.
As one able writer aptly put it, the apocalyptic imagina­
tion “swept the strings,” and “soared on the wings of specu­
lation.” While the Sacred Canon had closed, pseudonymous 
writers continued to assume the prophetic role and the predic­
tive style, often, as mentioned, feigning the name of a former 
prophet or leader in order to obtain prestige—such as “Enoch,” 
“Baruch,” “Solomon,” “Ezra.” And though these pseudepig- 
raphal writings did not find their way into the canon, they 
were widely read notwithstanding, some being quoted even 
more widely than the incorporated apocryphal books, strange 
as it may seem.
4. 
Philo Fuses It Into a System.—Such was the situation 
when Philo of Alexandria appeared on the scene, which was 
now all set for revolutionary “advances”—or at least for 
sweeping changes. In him this Alexandrian trend came to a 
climax, and sporadic thinking on the Innate Immortality of 
the soul and the Eternal Torment of the wicked was fused 
into a movement, a system, and a school of thought. And 
students came from all parts to study under him. A revolu­
tionary change of thinking was taking place.
Let us now note these general developments in more 
specific form as they pertain to the soul, the hereafter, and 
the unseen world.
ALEXANDRIAN JEWS FORSAKE PLATFORM 
651
652
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
VII. Source of Revolutionary Concepts of Unseen World
It is apparent that throughout this new inter-Testament 
apocalyptic literature the hereafter, or life beyond the grave, 
was unquestionably the predominant theme. By the time of 
Jesus there was widespread expectation among the Pharisees 
of life beyond the grave uninterrupted by death. But there 
was a long and intriguing background behind it all. This 
concept had developed slowly but steadily during the three- 
hundred-year interval between the Testaments. It sprang from 
the popular apocalyptic writings produced during this disil­
lusioning period, and was brought in to “brighten the valley 
of the shadow of death,” as one writer puts it.
1. 
Revolutionary Concepts Developed in Time of Mac­
cabees.—As noted, when the Jewish commonwealth fell with 
the destruction of the Temple under Nebuchadnezzar, the 
Babylonian captivity began. At this time synagogues were 
introduced for nonsacrificial congregational worship, and the 
thoughts of the Jews turned more and more toward the future 
life of the individual soul. The very foundations of earthly 
expectation about them now seemed shattered.
Throughout Old Testament times the Hebrew she’61 had 
been considered the vague “abode of all the dead,” for good 
and bad alike—equivalent to the grave.13 The dark under­
world, the nether world of silence and sleep, was like the 
hades in the Greek. Its inmates were the dead, and it was not 
a place of conscious torment. But, owing to the outside con­
tacts and influences mentioned, the conviction developed with 
some that she’ol is “not the final curtain to the drama of life,” 
as aptly expressed. There must be reward or retribution beyond 
the grave. And, according to Rabbi S. Zeitlin, this conception 
of rewards and punishments in the next world came into 
focus and was developed in the time of the Maccabees.“
13 G. F. Moore. Judaism, vol. 2, p. 289.
14 S. Zeitlin, History of Second Commonwealth, p. 52.
ALEXANDRIAN JEWS FORSAKE PLATFORM 
653
2. 
Persian Impact Strengthens Resurrection Concept. 
—It was during the period of exile under Persia that the 
Zoroastrian stress on Dualism and on the resurrection came 
to be accentuated among the Jews—the struggle between the 
forces of good and evil, to end in the triumph of good, and 
with the resurrection of the dead to vindicate the righteous. 
But this resurrection to eternal life was to be the sole prerog­
ative of the righteous. And we should pause to observe, just 
here, that the Jews did not hesitate to appropriate the thought 
and incorporate the teachings of other peoples or cultures— 
so long as they did not appear to be alien to the genius of 
Judaism. This is attested by the scholarly Rabbi Israel Levin- 
thal:
“We often do not realize how much the Jews were influenced in their 
cosmological and eschatological conceptions by the Babylonians, who had 
a fixed notion of the cosmic system which held sway until the days of 
Copernicus—who spoke with such authoritativeness about the seven plan­
etary spheres, the seven heavens one on top of the other, and, by way 
of symmetry, the seven hells, one below the other [appearing in the 
apocalyptic literature]. And so, too, it is now generally recognized that 
there was a marked influence through the meeting with the Persians, 
and their elaborate and intricate teachings about the hereafter. This 
sudden contact with other minds and cultures was a powerful factor in 
shaping the eschatological views of the Jews.”18
And this principle applies particularly to the inter-Testa­
ment period.
It should also be emphasized here that apart from its 
Old Testament origin the truth of the resurrection had found 
its chief supporting emphasis in Persian Zoroastrianism. It was 
not found in Egypt or in Greece, and Greek philosophy was 
antagonistic to it. Thus it was that a Persianized-Pharisaic 
theology as to the resurrection came to prevail in a substan­
tial section of Jewry.
3. 
Speculations Crystallize as to Intermediate State. 
—Then she’ol began to be considered by some as an inter­
15 Israel H. Levinthal, Judaism, p. 158.
654
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
mediate state—a kind of prelude or vestibule to Heaven or 
Hell, a preliminary period of punishment (as in the pseude- 
pigraphal Enoch xxii. 9-13), with the righteous, upon death, 
entering at once into the life of blessedness. And erelong 
with some, such speculation became belief—if not indeed 
dogma.
Fantastic speculations on Paradise developed (as in the 
books of Enoch and the Jubilees). Sometimes Paradise was 
conceived to be on earth, sometimes in Heaven—with an 
upper paradise, and a lower paradise as a section of she’olJ* 
and Heaven as the abode of the conscious, living, righteous 
dead. Angelology was stressed, as was the case with other 
peoples of the time, with a highly developed heavenly hierarchy 
as instruments to carry out the mission of God. This is found, 
for example, in the Jubilees, Ethiopic Enoch, 2 Esdras, and 
2 Baruch.
Dr. Levinthal also interestingly states that “according to 
the testimony of most scholars, this literature was the product 
of the Essenes,” who had separated themselves from the com­
mon expectations of life.” (This will be noted further as we 
come to the important witness of the Dead Sea scrolls.) More­
over, in this time the names of angels were brought in, some 
of them gleaned from Babylon.18 And demonology was like­
wise stressed, with the kingdom of evil ruled by Satan. The 
picture was filling out.
4. 
Climax Reached in Platonic Concepts Under Philo. 
—Coming now to the climax in this preview, we find that 
the Jews of Egypt (particularly of Alexandria) began definitely 
to adopt the Platonic concept of the Innate Immortality of
16 This later crept into the Apostles’ Creed—the descent into Hell, or Hades, phrase.
17 Levinthal, op. cil., p. 160.
18 Michael, the protecting angel; Gabriel, the revealing angel; Uriel, watcher over 
she’ol; Ragucl, watcher over the stellar universe; Remial, angel of judgment; and Phanuel, angel 
of resurrection (R. H. Charles, The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament, 
vol. 2, p. 201, Enoch xx. 1-8). “Uriel, one of the holy angels, who is over the world and over 
Tartarus. Raphael, one of the holy angels who is over the spirits of men. Raguel, one of the 
holy angels who takes vengeance on the world of the luminaries. Michael, one of the holy angels, 
to wit, he that is set over the best part of mankind and over chaos. Saraqael, one of the holy 
angels, who is set over the spirits, who sin in the spirit. Gabriel, one of the holy angels, who is 
over Paradise and the serpents and the Cherubim. Remiel, one of the holy angels, whom God 
set over those who rise.”
ALEXANDRIAN JEWS FORSAKE PLATFORM 
655
the soul. In their new environment, surrounded by the subtle­
ties of Greek thought and absorbing its philosophy, they 
slowly developed a system of Greco-Judaic philosophy, adapted 
and synthesized according to their own tradition and pattern 
of belief. It has been appropriately called the Alexandrian 
Jewish philosophy.
This involved a radically new method of interpretation 
of Scripture—the devastating allegorical system, which was 
brought to climax by Philo, who was the end product of the 
great intellectual center of Alexandria, and master of synthesis. 
He used Greek terminology to describe the accommodated 
beliefs and institutions of Jewry as to the origin, nature, and 
destiny of man. This also gives us the time relationship of the 
development.
5. Eternal-Hell Concept a Pagan Invention.—It should 
be added here that the aforementioned eschatological concept 
of an eternal Dualism—an eternal Hell coeval with and for­
ever paralleling an eternal Paradise—is foreign to the orig­
inal teachings of Judaism. Moreover, such a final Dualism 
presupposes a metaphysical Dualism of two eternal and in­
compatible principles at the beginning, which is likewise 
utterly foreign to pure Hebrew concepts.
A theology that derives everything from a single power, 
or principle—the omnipotent God alone—can only conceive 
of evil as an innovator, which could not possibly crystallize 
in an eternal Dualism. There is a necessary correspondence 
between the principle of absolute creation and the complete 
restoration of all things. Judaism cannot, therefore, rightly be 
accused of inventing and imposing on the world an eternal 
Hell. Such a Hell is of pagan, not of Old Testament, origin.
6. Successive Exiles Leave Permanent Impress.—It is 
also to be remembered that these apocalyptic inter-Testament 
writings, often inconsistent and contradictory, were obviously 
produced under the impact and impress of the thinking of 
the Egyptians, Babylonians, Persians, and Greeks, to whom
656
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
the Jews had been subject, in succession, for centuries during 
their several exiles—though they still believed, theoretically, 
that the Old Testament was the supreme standard of faith 
and truth.
In these centuries, therefore, between the Maccabees and 
the formation of the New Testament canon, the influence 
of the Maccabean Age began its spread across the pages of 
history with a strange commingling of Jewish and then Chris­
tian elements. Thus the Sibylline Oracles were begun by pa­
gans, continued by Jews, and finished by Christians. And the 
Jewish Apocalypse of Ezra was later provided with a Chris­
tian introduction and close.
And it was during this same age of the Maccabees—when 
the Jewish faith and polity was again under heavy attack, 
and the two leading parties of the Pharisees and Sadducees 
were developing—that this strong current of belief took shape 
as to the universal Innate Immortality of the soul and the 
consequently Eternal Torment of the wicked. This “river of 
opinion,” as it has been appropriately called, was so broad 
and deep, and now so strong, that it carried a large section 
of the Hellenized Jewish populace along in its current. Thus 
we are brought down to the first century of the Christian (or 
“Common”) Era.
CHAPTER 
THIRTY-SEVEN
Alien Note Injected Into 
Inter-Testament Writings
As stated, following the close of the Old Testament canon, 
about 425 B.C., a series of Apocryphal and pseudepigraphal 
Jewish writings began to appear, some of them definitely bear­
ing on the origin, nature, and destiny of man. These ranged 
in time between 200 b.c. and a.d. 100. Some were largely 
apocalyptic in tone and structure. The first three, and there­
fore the earliest (Sirach, Tobit, and the Sibyllines), main­
tained the historic Conditionalist positions of their forefathers.
But about 130 b.c. a distinctly alien note began to appear, 
beginning with The Book of Jubilees and 2 Maccabees. Some, 
such as The Wisdom of Solomon, vacillated between the two 
positions. (The sequence, category, and timing of each and 
all will be apparent by referring to Tabular Chart D, on 
page 658.)
The next six treatises appeared in the early Christian 
Era—the Ethiopian Enoch, Slavonic Enoch, Syriac Apocalypse 
of Baruch, and 2 Esdras all continued to be Conditionalist, 
while two, Judith and 4 Maccabees, set forth the Innate- 
Immortality postulate, with its corollary of the Eternal Tor­
ment of the wicked.
Then, following these apocryphal and pseudepigraphal 
writings, there come two climactic and contrasting groups of 
writings of great significance. Both appear in the transition 
hour from the old to the new dispensations, at the dawn of 
the Christian Era. These are, first, the consistently Conditional­
ist Dead Sea scrolls, and, second, the militantly Immortal-Soulist
657
Chart D
TWO VIEWS OF LIFE AND DEATH IN JEWISH INTER-TESTAMENT WRITINGS
(Apocryphal and Pseudepigraphal Literature—c. 200 B.C. to A.D. 150)
CONDITIONAL IMMORTALITY
(Eternal Death of Wicked)
II. INNATE IMMORTALITY
(Endless Torment of Wicked)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9 
10 
11
12
Approximate
Dating
190-170
180
140
150 B.C.-c. A.D. 60 
1-50 
75-78
90-100
B.C.
Book of Tobit
Sirach, or Ecclesiasticus
(Jewish) Sibylline Oracles
Ethiopic Enoch* 
Slavonic Enoch 
Syriac Apocalypse of 
Baruch 
2 Esdras
A.D.
Approximate
Dating
130-125
153-105
48-40
10 B.C.-A.D. 1 
100 B.C.-A.D. 70
2 Maccabees 
Book of Jubilees
Wisdom of Solomon
Book of Judith 
4 Maccabees
(Other Determinative Writings)
13 
170 B.C.-A.D. 68 
Dead Sea (Essene) Scrolls
14 
20 B.C.-A.D. 50 
Philo
15 
77-94 
Josephus
Conditionalist 
Total 8 
Innate 
Total 7
* Recent investigators give a later date. See Cross, The Ancient Library of Qfimran, pp. 146-150; Burrows, More Light on the Dead Sea Scrolls, p. 180.
SIGNIFICANCE OF INTER-TESTAMENT JEWISH WRITINGS
Two distinctly opposing views on the origin, nature, and destiny of man are found in the inter-Testament Jewish writings. And some oscillated be­
tween these opposing views (cf. Wisdom of Solomon). Three Conditionalist works (Tobit, Sirach, and Sibyllines), beginning about 190 B.C., preceded the 
first Innate-Immortality writings (2 Maccabees and Jubilee), which view did not appear prior to 150 b.c. And two Conditionalist Apocryphal writings 
(Syriac Baruch and 2 Esdras) extend beyond the Innate group of five, in the right-hand column, between the two Conditionalist groups of three and four, 
respectively, ending with 2 Esdras.
It is important to note that in addition to the Apocryphal and pseudepigraphal writings, the Dead Sea (Essene) Scrolls are preponderantly Condition­
alist, and represent an impressive stand on this view, whereas the last two in the period covered (Philo and Josephus) are Immortal-Soulists. Thus the 
two opposing groups, about equally divided, close with the Innate-Immortality postulate of Philo predominant, and exerted a determining influence on 
the Alexandrian Christian group a little later.
ALIEN NOTE INJECTED
659
writings of Philo Judaeus—the latter destined shortly to exert 
a profound influence upon three variant groups (Jews, pagans, 
and Christians). Thus these opposing groups, about equally 
divided, had drawn far apart—with Philo’s aggressive position 
ascendant, and soon becoming a determining influence. This 
was especially true among the Alexandrian Neoplatonic Chris­
tian group a little later.
I. Pseudo-Sibyllines—“Mortal” Man’s Role in Drama of the Ages
One of the first in the apocalyptic writings of the time 
that must be noted is the Sibylline Oracles. These “oracular 
utterances” were of Greek origin. They began in the second 
century B.C., though the parts here noted are dated in the 
early Christian Era, and exerted considerable influence. The 
Sibyllines are a composite, falling into three categories—pagan, 
Jewish, and Christian; though all apparently had their place 
of writing in Egypt. The latter two groups—called the pseudo- 
Sibylline writings—were composed in imitation of the ante­
cedent heathen sibyls (Greek designation for a mysterious 
prophetess, or revealer of the secrets of the gods).
1. A Reflection of One View of the Soul.—These writ­
ing are not here cited for any authority attached to them, 
or because of their known authorship, but as a reflection, or 
voice, of the time, setting forth one view of the soul and its 
destiny and expressing dim presentiments of the future as 
conceived by the writers. What we are here to survey is from 
the Jeiuish sibyls, dated about a.d. 80.
The pseudo-Sibyllines flourished in the first three cen­
turies a.d., and passed with the downfall of pagan Rome. They 
were apparently a device used first by Jewish and then by 
Christian writers in the hope of catching the ear and thus 
winning the heathen to their respective faiths, by copying 
the Greek hexameter verse of the heathen sibyls.
This form of writing also afforded protection against
660
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
pagan retaliation, which protection was a highly important 
factor. By simulating the pagan sibyls and concealing their 
message in figure and symbol, the writers could the more 
safely utter their predictions that mighty eternal Rome was 
destined to perish—a forecast fraught with peril for the writer. 
So this Jewish sibyl was couched in the phrasings of a pagan 
prophetess.
2. 
Portrayed Drama of the Judgment.—A history of 
the world was here attempted, and a prediction of mankind’s 
future fate, both individual and corporate. It was an attempt 
to embrace all history in one grand theocratic sweep, with 
the proud kingdoms of the world of men to be destroyed in 
order to make way for the reign of the Messiah and the future 
kingdom of God and the righteous.
Its fundamental emphasis was on the terrors of the last 
times and the drama of the judgment—the dead of all ages 
summoned before the tribunal of God, their bodies raised 
by the power of God, the righteous to be purified and the 
wicked to be plunged into final ruin. The separation of good 
and evil is curiously portrayed as effected by passing through 
a river of fire, angels conveying the righteous to safety, and 
the wicked abandoned in the fire for destruction.
The coming judgment is therefore a “day of wrath,” 
they declared, which will destroy the world by fire. But it will 
be preceded by darkness and distress of nations, the light even 
of the heavenly bodies failing. Then God will appear in the 
clouds to destroy the earth and consume evil men, as Messiah 
comes to assume the predicted kingdom.1 These were the 
elements that made the Sibyllines conspicuous in the litera­
ture of the time. And in the second century an imperial 
decree forbade the reading of the Sibyllines, because they 
contained prophecies of the coming world kingdom of Messiah.
1 R. H. Charles, The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament, vol. 2,
p. 375. (Robert H. Charles [d. 1931J, whose text we shall follow, was regarded as the great 
authority of his day in Jewish eschatology and apocalyptic matters. He was not only professor 
at Dublin and Oxford but also archdeacon of Westminster.)
ALIEN NOTE INJECTED
661
II. Fateful Destiny of All Mankind Portrayed
1. 
Man Is Mortal; God Is Immortal.—In this portrayal 
two contrasting terms and their connotations run persistently 
throughout this Jewish section of the Sibylline Oracles—that 
man, the creature, is indeed “mortal ,” but God, the self- 
existent Creator is “immortal,” “eternal ” and “incorruptible.” 
In Fragment 1 the opening words are “O ye mortal men of 
flesh” (1:1). Then the terms “mortal flesh,” “mortals,” and 
“vain mortals” are repeated constantly, in contrast with the 
“eternal God” (1:1, 9, 11, 13, 25).2
The contrast is continued in Fragment 2, and Fragment 
3 states that “any thing brought into being wholly perishes, 
God could not have been fashioned from the loins of a man” 
(3:1, 2).3 Mortal man is contrasted with the “incorruptible 
Creator, the Eternal.” And the thought is added that the 
wicked are at last to be burned with fire (3:12, 17, 44),* while 
the blessed “inherit life, throughout the aeonian time, dwell­
ing in the fertile garden of Paradise” (3:47, 48).6
Book 3 iterates, reiterates, and amplifies the fact that in 
contrast with the “Eternal Saviour” and “immortal king,” 
man, fashioned by God, is “mortal” (3:17, 35).6 But Belial 
“deceives mortals” 
(3:68). And the sibyl records that the 
“Mighty God” “threatened mortals when they made a tower” 
at Babylon (3:97-104), and as a result tongues were multi­
plied.
Thus “mortal men” were incited to “strife” (3:103), and 
“this is the beginning of war to all mortals” (3:154, 155).T 
Thus the term “mortals” and the idea of mortality of man 
appears again and again (3:182, 195, 217, 259).8 It seems to 
be the continuing overtone. But the “Immortal God” (3:283)® 
is presented in connection with the provision of the “good at 
the end” that awaits the righteous.
3 Ibid., p. 377. 
0 Ibid., p. 379.
3 Ibid. 
7 Ibid., pp. 380, 381.
« Ibid., p. 378. 
* Ibid., pp. 382, 383.
5 Ibid. 
« Ibid., p. 383.
662
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
2. Fateful Judgm
ent Day Tries “M
ortal” M
en.—The 
fateful day of judgment comes to mortal man as a summons 
from the “Eternal God” (3:741-744).10 Then God will “burn 
with fire the race of stubborn men” (3:761). However, to the 
godly the Eternal will open “the portals of the blessed, and 
all joys, and everlasting sense and eternal gladness” (3:770, 771). 
These turbulent times will all come to pass “when the end 
of all things is coming on the earth” (3:797).n Thus the 
“mysteries of God” are proclaimed to “mortals” and “mortal 
men” (3:812, 823).12
3. Resurrected A
fter Fire Reduces to Ashes.—Book 4 
continues the strain, declaring that the mighty God cannot be 
measured with “mortal eyes, seeing He was not fashioned by 
mortal hand” (4: ll).13 Then, turning to the world’s prophetic 
outline, which forecasts destruction and conflagration for the 
earth (4:160, 161), the sibyl exclaims, “O ill-starred mortals” 
(4:162). Next the final cataclysm is portrayed—“The whole
world shall hear a rumbling and a mighty roar” (4:175). Then 
shall God “burn the whole earth, and consume the whole race 
of men” (4:176). And “He shall burn everything out, and 
there shall be sooty dust” (4:178).
Then, when “everything shall have been reduced to dust 
and ashes,” God will “quench the giant fire” and re-form man 
that has perished, and “shall raise up mortals once more as 
they were before” (4:179-182). The wicked will be in the 
“black recesses of hell,” while the “godly shall dwell again 
on earth when God gives breath and life and grace to them” 
(4:186-189).1* That is the sibyls last-day outline, or eschatology.
Book 5 also speaks of “God, the Chief of all, the Immortal 
and Eternal,” and “mortal men” (5:276, 277).“ The “end to 
mortal men” and the utter destruction of the ungodly are 
repeated (5:301, 302), with the observation that the dead bodies 
on earth are “more numerous than the sand” (5:305).“ “Fire 
shall rain on mortal men” (5:377).1T But the Father is “from
10 Ibid., p. 391. 
12 Ibid., p. 393. 
1« Ibid., p. 3%. 
10 Ibid., p. 403.
11 Ibid., p. 392. 
13 Ibid. 
« Ibid., p. 402. 
17 Ibid., p. 404.
ALIEN NOTE INJECTED
663
everlasting,” the ‘‘Great Eternal God” (5:498, 500).18 His 
power and justice will prevail, and evil be punished.
4. 
Four World Powers and Eschatological End.—All 
this was part of the great prophetic sweep of the centuries 
leading to the grand climax of the ages. The sibyl, obviously 
patterned her ‘‘prophecy” of four world powers after the broad 
outline of the Biblical Daniel 2 and 7, which tell of these 
same four successive kingdoms. And the sibyl daringly names 
and describes them in sequence. First, the ‘‘Assyrians,” or 
Babylonians, ‘‘rule over all mankind” 
(4:49). Then the 
stronger ‘‘Medes and Persians” ascend the throne of power 
(4:54, 62).19 Next the ‘‘Macedonians” overthrow the Persians 
and grasp the world ‘‘sceptre” (4:88).
And, finally, the great “Italian,” or Roman, power from 
the “west,” takes over and oppresses the earth (4:103, 104).20 
But, the sibyl boldly declares, God will at last destroy the 
nations of mortal man by a great “conflagration” (4:160, 161), 
then “raise up” mortal man again, from the moldering mounds 
of earth (4:181, 182).a Even the overthrow of a lawless usurper 
(a sort of antichrist) is portrayed in connection with the 
destruction of Rome and the fiery judgments to come at the 
world’s end (5:34, 177, 178).22
Such is the curious but nevertheless pertinent witness of 
this section of the pseudo-Sibylline writings in this inter- 
Testament period on the contrast and conflict of “mortal man” 
with “Immortal God,” intermingled with strange speculations 
and assertions. These latter extraneous elements are in marked 
contrast with the sound, reasonable, and consistent picture 
portrayed by the Old and the New Testament penmen.
Such are the peisisting contrasts of mortal and immortal 
in the Sibyllines. It was one of the voices in the first century 
of the Christian Era. Varying views were thus held and pro­
claimed.
W Ibid., p. 406.
10 Ibid., p. 394.
20 Ibid., p. 395.
21 Ibid., p. 396.
22 Ibid., pp. 397, 400.
664
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
III. Variant Positions Presented by Minor Writers
1. “Tobit”: Grave Is E
ternal in A
nnihilation Effects. 
—Tobit, another Apocryphal writing, included in the enlarged 
Alexandrian canon, probably emanated from Egypt. It is the 
story of Tobit, a pious Jew of the captivity of Nineveh. Prob­
ably originally written in Aramaic it is dated about 190- 
170 B.C.151 Formerly regarded as historical, it has come to be 
considered merely folklore with a historical basis, but enriched 
with the fable of the grateful dead, and showing traces of 
Magian demonology.
Nevertheless, it exerted some influence. Since the book 
is a mixture of piety and superstition, its testimony is not 
decisive. But it is indicative of a trend. The writer desires 
to be released from off the earth and become “earth” again (3:6).™ 
In death he sees release from distress. The grave is a place 
of “darkness” (4:10, ll).28 According to Charles’s summation, 
in his introduction, “The grave is external in its annihilating 
effects.” 20
2. “Sirach”: No Remembrance in the Grave.—Brief note
must also be taken of the Apocryphal book of Ecclesiasticus,
or Sirach, one of the Wisdom Writings. This was probably
written, or compiled, about 200-175 B.C., by Jesus Ben-Sira, a
Jerusalemite holding the Sadducean position and inclining
toward rationalism. He did not believe in Innate Immortality,
and set forth no hope of a resurrection. He shows that already
in his day “two views concerning death exist among men.” 87
He is here noted only because he is one of the variant voices
on record at the time, heard just as the divergent views were
beginning to be injected. According to Dr. Charles, the Sirach
taught that “in death there is no remembrance of Thee,” 28
and that in death one is “resting” in the grave.
According to Ben-Sira, thanksgiving has perished from
23 Ibid., vol. 1, p. 193.
* Ibid., p. 208.
20 Ibid., pp. 211, 212.
28 Ibid., p. 197.
27 Ibid., pp. 268, 269.
28 Ibid., pp. 313, 314.
the lips of the dead, as “one that is not.” Death is not, how­
ever, the end of all things. There is a future life. But there is 
no mention of endless punishment. Here are two key excerpts: 
“In Sheol there is no delight” (14:16);“ and “thanksgiving 
perisheth from the dead as from one that is not” (17:28).ao 
Ben-Sira’s fundamental belief regarding the hereafter was 
much like the teaching of the Psalms—“In death there is no 
remembrance of thee: in the grave who shall give thee thanks?” 
(Ps. 6:5). Thus he says:
“For what pleasure hath God in all that perish in Hades; in place 
of those who live and give Him praise? Thanksgiving perisheth from 
the dead as from one that is not, (but) he that liveth and is in health 
praiseth the Lord” (17:47, 28).31
Death is sometimes spoken of as a punishment. But, says 
Charles, “there is nowhere any mention of punishment after 
death.” 32 The sense in which he lives after death is by means 
of the wisdom he acquired in his lifetime—deathless, post­
humous fame. Thus: “His understanding many do praise, 
and never shall his name be blotted out: his memory shall 
not cease, and his name shall live from generation to genera­
tion” (39:9)."
So the writer says, “Weep gently for the dead, for he 
hath found rest” (22:ll).34
The Hebrew describes man’s state in death: “Humble 
(thy) pride greatly, for the expectation of man is decay” (7:17).38 
And the Greek renders it, “For the punishment of the un­
godly man is fire and the worm.”38 Such is another of the 
conflicting minor voices.
3. 
“Judith”—
Supports Eternal-Torm
ent Concept.—On 
the other hand, the Apocryphal book of Judith} named after 
its heroine, was written by an avowedly Pharisaic Jew of 
Palestine in the latter part of the last century prior to the 
Christian Era.37 It was put in the form of 
a historical episode
» Ibid., p. 368. 
33 Ibid., p. 313.
*' Ibid., p. 378. 
*« Ibid., p. 456.
31 Ibid., pp. 377, 
378. 
3< Ibid., p. 391.
35 Ibid., p. 340; note 17 reads, “fire and the worm.”
33 Ibid., p. 314. 
3? Ibid., pp. 246, 247.
ALIEN NOTE INJECTED 
665
666
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
describing the defeat of the Assyrians by the Jews through the 
prowess of a woman. It was an assurance that deliverance will 
come. God will punish transgression in the day of judgment, 
at which time the wicked will be consigned to Eternal Torment.
Here is the solitary reference: “To put fire and worms in 
their flesh; and they shall weep and feel their pain forever’’ 
(16:17).38
Thus, as the Christian Era approaches, distinctly variant 
voices strive for a hearing in the ranks of Jewry.
IV. Differing Books of Maccabees Exemplify Divergencies
The four Books of the Maccabees were named after the 
Jewish hero Judas Maccabaeus (d. 161 
B.C.), leader of the 
Hebrew revolt against the Syrians for the purification of the 
Temple and the restoration of its worship. The first two books 
are included in the canon of the Greek and Latin churches, 
and in the Apocrypha of certain English Bibles. 1 Maccabees 
traces the history of the Jews from the accession of Antiochus 
Epiphanes (175 b.c.) to the death of Simon Maccabaeus (135
B.C.).
2 Maccabees largely parallels, rather than follows, Book 
1, Dr. Charles suggesting that it may even be the older. It 
describes the horrors of the Maccabean wars from the death 
of Syrian king Seleucus IV (176 b.c.) to the victory of Judas 
Maccabaeus over Nicanor (d. 161 B.C.). It is an epitome of 
the larger, original work by Jason of Cyrene.
4 Maccabees is a philosophical treatise addressed to the 
Jews on the supremacy of devout reason over the passions. 
For a time it was erroneously attributed to Josephus, but was 
obviously written by a Hellenistic Jew of Alexandria, later 
than Book 2 but before a.d. 70. Books 2 and 4 are commonly 
recognized as bearing on the immortality question we are 
tracing, as is apparent from the following recent authority:
38 Ibid., p. 267; note 17 adds, “i.e., without losing consciousness of their pain.’
“The Books of the Maccabees contain important doctrinal teaching 
on immortality (2 Macc. 7. 9, 23, 37 and 4 Macc.), the value of human 
suffering as a means of expiation (2 Macc. 7. 39 f.) and prayers for the 
dead (2 Macc. 12. 43-5). This last passage has played an important part 
in the defence of the doctrine of Purgatory.” 38
1. “2 M
accabees”—Innate Im
m
ortality W
ith Prayers 
for Dead.—That Hebrew views of the soul and its destiny had 
undergone little alteration until a century and a half prior 
to the Christian Era is attested by the earlier apocryphal writ­
ings. Then the divergencies begin, with 2 Maccabees as a clear 
case in departure. This was written to encourage the Jews to 
hold fast the faith of their fathers and to provide an inspir­
ing account of their religion and sanctuary.
The present form of the treatise is an abridgment of the 
original work, made about 125 B.C. by Jason of Cyrene, a 
Hellenistic Jew. 1 Maccabees had been written by a Sadducee 
and friend of the Maccabean dynasty, but 2 Maccabees was 
composed by an Alexandrian Pharisee, suspicious of the Mac­
cabees, who sought to sustain Pharisaism as the only legit­
imate Jewish faith. It makes no reference to the coming 
Messiah.
2. Believes Both in Im
m
ortality and in Resurrection. 
—2 Maccabees repeatedly asserts belief in the survival of the 
soul upon the death of the body, as well as teaching that 
after death only the righteous rise up with their bodies in 
reunion with those near and dear (7:11, 22ff.; 14:46)/° Thus we 
read, when they are raised up it is to “life everlasting” (7:10). 
Again, the Creator “in mercy will restore to you the breath 
of life” (7:23). So will they be received again (7:29).“
3. 
Prayer to and Sacrifices for the Dead Commended. 
—But another distinct innovation is introduced. The writer 
of 2 Maccabees contends that God does not irrevocably seal 
the eternal doom of men immediately at death, but that He
39 The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (hereafter abbreviated as ODCC), art., 
“Maccabees,” p. 839.
40 Charles, The Apocrypha and Pseudepierapha, vol. 1, pp. 141. 152.
41 Ibid., p. 141.
ALIEN NOTE INJECTED 
667
may be influenced by the prayers and sacrifices of the surviv­
ing friends of the departed dead (12:43-45). The practice must 
have been common, as it is commended. The Roman Church, 
it is to be noted, leans heavily on this precedent. In fact, the 
later popularity of 2 Maccabees is due, in large part, to the 
support found in it by Roman Catholics for their practice of 
prayers for the dead (12:43-45) and for intercession of saints 
(15:11-16). This point is so vital that we quote the first passage:
“He [Judas Maccabaeus] then collected from them, man by man, the 
sum of two thousand drachmas of silver, which he forwarded to Jeru­
salem for a sin-offering. In this he acted quite rightly and properly, 
bearing in mind the resurrection—for if he had not expected the fallen 
to rise again, it would have been superfluous and silly to pray for the 
dead—and having regard to the splendour of the gracious reward which 
is reserved for those who have fallen asleep in godliness—a holy and 
pious consideration! Hence he made propitiation for the dead, that they 
might be released from their sin” (12:48-45).'“
4. Vicarious Suffering Expiates God’s Anger.—Two ad­
ditional points should also be noted: (1) The vicarious suffer­
ings of the righteous martyrs allegedly serve to expiate God’s 
just anger, thus atoning for the sins of the rest of God’s people, 
and staying His anger (7:33-38);“ and (2), the intercession of 
saints (15:11-16),“ as well as the interposition of angels (“five 
resplendent men from heaven’’) for the salvation of God’s 
people (10:29).“
5. Hope of “Seven 
B
rothers” 
Based on Resurrection. 
—Chapter six tells of the Hellenization of the Jews. In chap­
ter seven the moving story is told of the martyrdom of seven 
brothers and their mother, all in one day, for refusing to 
obey the demands of Antiochus Epiphanes, obedience to which 
would violate the commands of God. One by one these noble 
men were tortured and mutilated, but they refused to yield. 
One boldly declared that if slain the King of Heaven would 
“raise us up,” and would “revive us to life everlasting” (7:9, 
10). Their “hope divine” was that they should “be raised up
668 
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
42 Ibid., p. 150. 
44 Ibid., p. 153.
«Ibid., pp. 141, 142. 
45 Ibid., p. 146.
PA I NT ING BY ANTONIO CISERI
BETTMANN ARCHIVE
The Seven Sons of Solomona, 
Together 
With 
Their 
Mother, Were All Slaugh­
tered in One Day, Under 
Antiochus Epiphanes in the 
Terrible Desecration,
by God again” (7:14). One boldly declared to Antiochus, 
‘‘Thou shalt have no resurrection to life” (7:15).
And the courageous mother assured her sons that the 
‘‘Creator of the world,” who had ‘‘fashioned” each, would in 
mercy ‘‘restore to you the breath of life” again (7:23).
The youngest son, the last to die, she admonished, ‘‘Show 
thyself worthy . . . , and accept thy death, that by God’s 
mercy I may receive thee again together with thy brothers” 
(7:24, 30). He solemnly warned the king, ‘‘Thou hast not
669
670
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
yet escaped the judgment of the Almighty God who seeth all” 
(7:35, 36). In standing firm unto death he tells of ‘‘torment 
and plagues” to be visited upon transgressors (7:38).“ Such 
was their heroic faith in the resurrection.
If ever in all Jewish literature one would expect to find 
a declaration of Eternal Torment for this tyrant, it would 
seem to be here. But there is no allusion to Gehenna. The 
strongest word is, “Thou shalt have no resurrection to life” 
(7:14),47 which, as Dean Farrar notes, would “at the worst” 
seem to point to final extinction, or annihilation. And while 
the faithful receive “overflowing life,” the sacrilegious, deserv­
ing Antiochus Epiphanes receives “just punishment” for his 
pride, but “not a syllable about endless torments” (7:36).“
<albid., pp. 141, 142.
«Ibid., p. 141.
48 F. W. Farrar, Mercy and Judgment, p. 192.
CHAPTER 
THIRTY-EIGHT
nnate Immortality Established 
by Last Century B.C.
I. The Book of Jubilees—Soul Survives; Resurrection 
Abandoned
We come next to the apocryphal Book of Jubilees, called 
“important” by Dr. Charles. It was widely read in some of the 
early Christian churches. It is important for us too because it 
furnishes, apparently, the earliest recorded instance in the 
apocryphal writings of the expected entrance for the souls of 
the righteous upon a “blessed immortality immediately after 
death.” 1
It was called Jubilees because it divides Biblical history, 
from Creation onward, into “Jubilees,” or periods of forty- 
nine years each—the heptadic system. It was also called “The 
Little Genesis,” because it constitutes a compendium of Gen­
esis. Its author was obviously a Palestinian Jew, because he 
gave minute descriptions of things Jewish, and probably he 
was a Pharisee. The majority of authorities places its date 
about 135 b.c.
Comprising a commentary on the canonical books of 
Genesis and Exodus, it advances the theory that the “sons 
of God,” of Genesis 6, were angels who seduced the “daugh­
ters of men” (4:22; 5:l-4).2 According to The Book of Jubilees, 
human depravity stems from this rather than from the fall 
of Adam, and occasioned the Deluge. Human freedom and
1 Charles, Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, vol. 2, p. 9.
2 Ibid., pp. 19, 20.
671
672
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
responsibility are emphasized. And demonology is also stressed, 
demons being the offspring of fallen angels (5:1-4; 7:27).3 The 
doctrine of retribution is likewise pressed, and final judgment 
both for the human and the superhuman worlds (5:10-14; 
10:1-15).*
1. Innate Immortality Already Firmly Established.— 
The Book of Jubilees thus reveals another facet of Jewish 
belief in the century before the Christian Era—that the pos­
tulate of Innate Immortality was already firmly established 
on the part of some. It proves that many Jews by now believed 
in the survival of the soul after the death of the body (23:31), 
and had abandoned “all hope of a resurrection of the body.” 6 
Nowhere is the resurrection mentioned in the treatise.
The Jubilees taught the existence of Satan (Mastema), chief 
of the legions of evil spirits (10:8, 9)a which have dominion 
over men. It shows that many Jews believed in the coming 
and kingdom of the Messiah, and the great day of judgment 
(31:18, 19, note; 23:11, 30).7 But in that coming kingdom 
“there shall be no Satan nor any evil destroyer; for all their 
days shall be days of blessing and healing” (23:27-29).8
2. Body Rests; Spirit Lives On Independently.—As to 
the nature and destiny of man, Jubilees taught that the 
“bones” rest while the “spirits” live on independently. So 
the life of the spirit, separated from the body, is portrayed. 
Here are the precise words in the Jubilees:
“And their bones shall rest in the earth, and their spirits shall have 
much joy, and they shall know that it is the Lord who executes judg­
ment, and shows mercy to hundreds and thousands and to all that love 
Him’’ (23:31).®
Thus, according to Charles, outstanding British authority 
on the apocryphal writings, “This is the earliest attested 
instance of this expectation in the last two centuries B.C.” 10 
The new thesis had been put forth.
3 Ibid., pp. 20, 24. 
1 Ibid., 
pp. 20, 27, 28. 
3 Ibid., p. 9.
0 Ibid., p. 28. 
7 Ibid., 
pp. 61, 
49. 
8 Ibid., p. 49.
0 Ibid. Charles’s note on verse 31 is: “The bodies rest, but the spirits rise.
1(1 Ibid., pp. 9, 10.
INNATE IMMORTALITY ESTABLISHED 
673
II. 4 Maccabees—Presses Immortal-Soulism Beyond 
All Predecessors
4 Maccabees, likewise named after Judas Maccabaeus, was 
a philosophical treatise on the supremacy of reason over pas­
sion, as illustrated by the struggles of the Maccabees. It was 
evidently written around the beginning of the Christian Era 
by a Hellenistic Jew in order to steady the Jews, surrounded 
as they were by philosophical heathenism. They were to stand 
alone, isolated by character and blessing.
But the writer was himself profoundly influenced by 
Alexandrian concepts—that is, by Platonism and Neo-Pythag- 
oreanism.11 At first this book was attributed to Josephus, but 
that was disproved. Though it was neglected by the Jews, it 
was lauded by the Western Church.
1. 
Men Go to Respective Rewards at Death.—At the 
time of the writing of 4 Maccabees, in addition to the two 
great Jewish sects, the Pharisees and the Sadducees, there was 
a third sect represented by the author. Dr. Charles observes 
that the writer was “saturated” with Greek philosophy, as 
attested by his systematic adoption of their terminology. The 
writer was a Pharisee of the same school of thought as Philo, 
contending that “at death men meet with the reward or pun­
ishment due for their deeds.”
In brief, the righteous dead are immediately “received 
into bliss.” (See 10:15; 13:17; 17:18; 18:23.) And the wicked 
suffer eternal torture. (See 9:8, 32; 10:11, 15; 12:19; 13:15; 
18:5, 22.)12 They are tormented in fire forever (9:9; 6:76). The 
faithful rise to endless bliss while the wicked descend to end­
less torment, varying in intensity. This treatise well illustrates 
the ascendant philosophy of this school of Jewish belief just 
before the time of Christ and the apostles.18 Dr. Charles’s 
explanation is worth quoting:
11 Ibid., p. 662. 
« Ibid.
»a Ibid., p. 654.
22
674
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
“How the Alexandrian School came to adopt the doctrine of the 
immortality of the soul but not of the resurrection of the body is too 
large a subject to enter upon here, but it is usually attributed to their 
having come under the influence of the philosophy of Plato and die neo- 
Pythagoreans. That the author was saturated with Greek philosophy is 
proved by his systematic adoption of its terminology.”14
Because of this fact The Books of the Maccabees (espe­
cially 2 and 4) are often cited by proponents of Immortal-Soul- 
ism, since they unequivocally teach Innate Immortality.“ And 
they are especially invoked by Roman Catholics because they 
also teach prayers for the dead and Purgatory. With the basic 
premise went these inseparable, supporting corollaries.
2. Righteous Immediately Received Into Heaven.—The 
writer of 4 Maccabees contends that at death the righteous are 
immediately received into bliss. Here are the documented 
declarations: After death, “ ‘Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob shall 
receive us, and all our forefathers shall praise us’” (13:17).19 
According to this writer, the seven martyred sons of Solomona, 
referred to in 2 Maccabees, ‘‘now do both stand beside the 
throne of God and live the blessed age” (17:18).17 These same 
martyred seven sons ‘‘are gathered together unto the place of 
their ancestors, having received pure and immortal souls from 
God” (18:23).“ There is here, apparently, no mention of a 
resurrection of the body. This is, of course, in direct conflict 
with the position of 2 Maccabees.
3. Wicked 
Punished 
With 
Eternal 
Torture.—The 
wicked endure torments without end. Thus: ‘‘But thou for 
our cruel murder shalt suffer at the hands of divine justice 
sufficient torment by fire for ever” (9:9).“ And, ‘‘Thou for 
thy impiety and thy cruelty shalt endure torments without 
end” (10:11), elsewhere referred to as ‘‘eternal doom” (10: 
15).20 Again, ‘‘For which things the divine justice delivers thee
11 Ibid., p. 662. See also W. O. E. Oesterley and G. H. Box, Synagogue Religion and
Worship, p. 224.
15 "Unto God they die not, as our patriarchs, Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, died not,
but that they live unto God’’ ([7:19]; ibid., p. 675).
18 Charles, op. cit., p. 679.
INNATE IMMORTALITY ESTABLISHED
675
unto a more rapid and an eternal fire and torments which shall 
not leave hold on thee to all eternity” (12:12).21 And last, 
“For a great struggle and peril of the soul awaits in eternal 
torment those who transgress the ordinance of God” (13:15).“ 
Such is the 4 Maccabees testimony.
III. The Wisdom of Solomon—Strange Combination 
of Glaring Contradictions
Another pseudepigraph in the Apocrypha, The Wisdom 
of Solomon, presents a confusing picture because of certain 
glaring contradictions. The opening chapters are clearly Greek 
in thought and theology rather than Jewish. This section dis­
cusses the different destinies awaiting the righteous and the 
wicked—the righteous to be rewarded with blessed immortal­
ity, while the ungodly will certainly be punished. But the 
earlier individual immortality is later shaded with national 
immortality.
The dating is frequently placed, as by Charles, between 
50 and 30 b.c. for the first part of the book and 30 b.c. to a.d. 
10 for the second part.23 As part of the Apocrypha it exerted 
considerable influence on Christian thought, for it was a 
rather brilliant production, esteemed because of the splendor 
of its diction.
The writer was obviously an Alexandrian Pharisee, fully 
acquainted with Greek literature and philosophy, and pro­
foundly influenced thereby. He discounts the Epicurean posi­
tion of some who held that after this life “none was ever 
known that returned from Hades” (2: l).24 But glaring incon­
sistencies and contradictions appear in the treatise. For ex­
ample, the writer says, “I myself also am mortal, like to all” 
(7:1);“ yet the death of the righteous is asserted to be followed 
by immediate immortality.
Again, in death the righteous “shall be at rest” (4:7);“
21 Ibid.. p. 678.
« Ibid., p. 537.
22 Ibid., p. 679.
25 Ibid., p. 545.
23 Ibid., vol. 1, p. 521.
20 Ibid., p. 540.
676
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
or, “we shall be as though we had never been” (2:2).27 And 
yet at the same time the righteous dead are allegedly keenly 
alive. But of that, more later. So in theology the writer (or 
writers) is boldly Alexandrian; or more accurately, he exhibits 
a conflicting blend of Pharisaic Judaism and Greek philosophy.
1. Curious Admixture of Truth and Error.—The Wis­
dom of Solomon presents a strange mixture of truth and error. 
It distinctly declares that “immortality” belongs to the good, 
while “destruction,” its opposite, is the destiny of the wicked. 
This seems the more surprising in the light of the preponderant 
Alexandrian emphasis of the book. Yet, despite the Greek In- 
nate-Immortality aspect, it seeks to combine with it bodily 
resurrection and aspects of Conditionalism. Note these whole­
some words:
“Court not death in the error of your life; neither draw upon your­
selves destruction by the works of your hands: because God made not 
death; neither delighteth he when the living perish: for he created all 
things that they might have being: and the products of the world are 
healthsome, and there is no poison of destruction in them: nor hath 
Hades royal dominion upon earth; for righteousness is immortal, (but 
the gain of unrighteousness is death)” (1:12-15).®
2. Immortality 
Is 
for 
the 
Righteous 
Only.—The 
Epicurean concept of pleasure in life and extinction at death 
is noted as seeking to disprove the fallacy of the contrary view. 
Yet Wisdom says:
“. . . God created man for incorruption, and made him an image of 
his own proper being; but by the envy of the devil death entered into 
the world, and they that belong to his realm experience it. But the souls 
of the righteous are in the hand of God, and no torment shall touch 
them” (2:25-3: l).29
The concept of restorationism is, however, to be found. 
Thus:
“In the eyes of fools they seemed to die; and their departure was 
accounted to be their hurt, and their going from us to be their ruin: but 
they are in peace. For though in the sight of men they be punished, their 
hope is full of immortality; and having borne a little chastening, they
» Ibid., p. 537.
® Ibid., p. 536.
* Ibid., p. 538.
INNATE IMMORTALITY ESTABLISHED
677
shall receive great good; because God tested them, and found them worthy 
of himself. As gold in the furnace he proved them, and as a whole burnt 
ofFering he accepted them. And in the time of their visitation they shall 
shine forth” (3:2-7).30
3. “T
ranslation” of Some Is A
lluded to.—Allusion is 
made to the translation of some (like Enoch) who are “caught 
away,” and “hastened . . . out” of the “wickedness of earth” 
(4:7-14).31
4. D
estruction of W
icked Is U
tter End.—The “destruc­
tion” of the wicked is repeatedly mentioned. For example:
‘‘Because he shall dash them speechless to the ground, and shall 
shake them from the foundations, and they shall lie utterly waste, and 
be in anguish, and their memory shall perish” (4:19).32
They are “utterly consumed” (5:13);” the “hope of the 
ungodly is like chaff carried off by the wind”; “like smoke 
which is scattered by the wind, and passeth away as the 
remembrance of a guest that tarrieth but a day” (5:14).34
5. Im
m
ortality 
Is Fruit of 
Righteousness and Obedi­
ence.—In contrast he says of the righteous: “But the righteous 
live for ever, and in the Lord is their reward, and the care for 
them with the Most High” (5:15).”
And the part played by obedience to God’s law is this:
“To give heed to her [wisdom’s] laws is the assurance of incorruption; 
and incorruption bringeth near unto God” (6:18, 19).38
“For to know thee is perfect righteousness, yea, to know thy dominion 
is the root of immortality” (15:3).”
It will be observed that the “immortality” here spoken 
of is equivalent to living forevermore, and is expressly con­
fined to the righteous. That, of course, is the Conditionalist 
position. And the utter destruction of the wicked, as primarily 
noted, indicates their entire end—likewise Conditionalist.
30 Ibid., p. 539.
si Ibid., pp. 540, 541.
32 Ibid., pp. 541, 542. See also x. 3, 6 ("perished,” “perishing”); 11:19 (“consume,” 
“destroy”); 12:12, 14 (“destruction,” “punished”), on pp. 551, 553, 555.
33 Ibid., p. 542.
3< Ibid., p. 543.
33 Ibid.
38 Ibid., p. 545. A footnote (6:18, 19) reads, “The keeping of her laws is immortality; 
immortality bringeth near to God.”
37 Ibid., p. 559.
678
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
IV. Innate Immortality and Noxious Involvements
But that is not all. The opposite and conflicting side of 
the same treatise must be noted—the Greek Innate-Immortal- 
ity postulate and its involvements. To grasp this is imperative 
in order to understand and evaluate the pseudo-Solomon’s 
reasoning and his conclusions. Let us now follow “Solomon’s” 
major reasoning—which was evidently written shortly before 
the birth of Philo.
It will also be well to note that at this time there were 
believed to be a million Jews in Egypt, half of them in Alex­
andria, and a great number tinctured with Hellenism (1:1, 
note).38 This is the setting of the other side of the conflicting 
picture presented in The Wisdom of Solomon. Perhaps it 
reflects the hand of another writer or redactor.
1. 
Unabashedly Avows 
Innate 
Im
m
ortality.—Part I 
(chaps. 1-6) deals with eschatology and openly abandons the 
historical Jewish traditional view. As mentioned, it vividly 
portrays the different destinies awaiting the righteous and 
the ungodly. In Dr. Charles’s detailed “Introduction” he is 
eight times constrained to stress the fact that the writer of 
The Wisdom of Solomon enunciates the doctrine of entrance 
upon immortality immediately upon death.
His several statements are: “The writer enunciates the 
doctrine of immortality immediately after death”; “a blessed 
immortality with God entered immediately upon death”; “the 
soul immediately after death receives its full reward, happiness 
or misery, life or death”; “immortality immediately after death 
—a purely Greek idea”; “after their death their souls are 
guarded by angels”; “the writer simply added the idea of the 
immortality of the soul immediately after death to one or 
other of the current forms of Jewish eschatology”; “the writer 
adopted a purely Greek view of immortality”; and “adopted
38 F. W. Farrar, Mercy and Judgment, p. 535.
INNATE IMMORTALITY ESTABLISHED 
679
the Greek idea of immortality.” 30 And scrutiny of the treatise 
justifies the multiple statements of Charles.
2. “Wisdom” 
the 
Source 
of 
Im
m
ortality.—Part II 
(chap. 6:6 to chap. 11) is a panegyric on wisdom. The writer 
presents a remote, transcendent God with no immediate con­
tact with the world. All relationships are by means of Wisdom 
—not a person, but the personification of this attribute of 
God. Wisdom is set forth as omnipotent (“all-powerful,” the 
instrument in the making of all things—7:22, 27; 8:5, 6); as 
omniscient (“knoweth all things”—8:11; 9:11).
Wisdom is portrayed as the Creator (as above, “artificer 
of all things”—7:22, 23; 8:5, 6). Moreover, “wisdom is immor­
tal” (8:17, note), and those akin to her share her “immortal­
ity” (8:13, 17). “Through wisdom were they saved” (9:18), 
and it is Wisdom that “delivered out of troubles” (10:9)/°
3. The Righteous Only Seem to Die.—The righteous 
do not actually experience death, they only seem to die (3:2)." 
They are “in peace” (3:3). It is purely a spiritual death; it 
does not mean ultimate extinction. The wicked continue in 
a miserable condition in the next world. Such are all “in 
anguish” 
(4:19).42 But all punishment is remedial and 
reformative.
The first part of the writer’s solution to the sin problem 
is “the theory that suffering is meant to test the righteous 
and prove them worthy of immortality and communion with 
God,” 43 “as gold in the furnace, he proved them” (3:6). Though 
they be punished, “their hope is full of immortality” (3:4).44 
That, it is to be noted, is similar to Philo’s declaration:
“ ‘The wise man who appears to have departed from this 
mortal life lives in a life immortal’ ” (3:2, note).4*
The summarizing subhead following 4:6, in the Charles 
edition, reads, “The premature death of the righteous is fol-
39 Ibid., pp. 518, 529-531. 
43 Ibid., p. 530.
40 Ibid., pp. 546-551. 
« Ibid., p. 539.
« Ibid., p. 539. 
« Ibid.
42 Ibid., pp. 530, 542.
680
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
lowed by immortality.” 16 But it continues, ‘‘The very memory 
of the ungodly shall perish.” As to spiritual death, the writer 
of Wisdom says, ‘‘We also, as soon as we were born, ceased to 
be” 
(5:13), being ‘‘utterly consumed in our wickedness,” 
‘‘like smoke which is scattered by the wind and passeth away” 
(5:14).47
4. 
Assumes Pre-existence of the Soul.—The writer of 
this ‘‘Wisdom” pseudepigraph assumes the existence of the 
soul before birth (8:20).48 Thus he says, ‘‘I myself am mortal, 
like to all, and am sprung from one born of the earth” (7:1). 
His body was “in contrast to the soul which pre-existed” (8:2, 
note).49 And he adds, “A good soul fell to my lot”; and “I came 
into a body undefiled” (8:19).“
He expresses the thought that “the soul which was lent 
him shall again be demanded” (15:8), and refers to “one whose 
own spirit is borrowed” 
(15:16).61 This evidently involved 
some form of pre-existence as an inseparable part of his Innate- 
Immortality concept. There is the same depreciation of the 
body as in Platonism. He speaks of how “a corruptible body 
weigheth down the soul” and “the earthly frame lieth heavy” 
(9:15).“
Such is the strange conflicting picture presented in the 
apocryphal Wisdom of Solomon. And such were the inseparable 
premises lying back of his Innate-Immortality conclusions. This 
was the transition hour in Judaism. Variant voices struggled 
for utterance. But the trend was Platonic.
«Ibid., p. 540.
« Ibid., pp. 542. 543. 
« Ibid., pp. 531. 549. 
« Ibid., p. 545.
m Ibid., p. 549. 
™ Ibid., p. 560. 
Ibid., p. 550.
CHAPTER 
THIRTY-NINE
Majority Adhere to Historic 
Conditionalism
I. Ethiopic Enoch—Underworld Torments End in Annihilation
We now turn to certain stalwart Conditionalists who 
parallel and close the Jewish dispensation witness, counter­
balancing the advocates of Immortal-Soulism just cited. The 
Ethiopic Enoch, or 1 Enoch (not to be confused with several 
other Enochs), consists, according to Littmann,1 of a series of 
layers, or sections, the oldest produced about 200 b.c. and the 
latest about 63 b.c. Some of it was consequently pre-Maccabean.
However, the bulk of it was evidently written between 
144 and 120 b.c. by a Jew of northern Palestine, while other 
portions were seemingly produced by a Sadducee. It is a 
pseudepigraph, and greater “authority” is being sought for 
it by the putting of it into the “mouth” of the Biblical Enoch. 
In any event the Ethiopic Enoch is one of the more compre­
hensive of the Jewish apocalypses. Fuchs says:
“[It is] the most magnificent of all apocalypses, the ‘apocalyptic Bible 
of the time of Jesus.’ ... It affords the most important religio-historical 
material for the study of the mystic tendency, among the Jews of the 
Maccabean time, which some pronounce to be already Essene.”2
R. H. Charles gives a formidable list of more than fifty 
New Testament passages that coincide either in phraseology 
or in thought with passages in the Ethiopic Enoch—some of 
them strikingly similar.3 One excerpt was apparently quoted
1 Enno Littmann, “Enoch, Books of,” The Jewish Encyclopedia, vol. 5, pp. 179-182.
2 H. Fuchs, “Enoch, Book of,” The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia, vol. 4, p. 132.
3 Charles, The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, vol. 2, pp. 180, 181.
681
682
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
by Jude, in verses 14, 15 (see Book of Enoch 1:9).4 And Enoch 
not only exerted a definite influence on Judaism but also 
played a significant part in the formation of Christian Gnos­
ticism. However, around a.d. 300 this treatise began to be 
discredited by the Christian Church. Nevertheless, it reflects 
clearly the general tendency of Jewish thinking in the im­
mediate pre-Christian Era. The future judgment is portrayed 
and the times of final restitution, along with fallen angels 
and legions of darkness, the resurrection and retribution, and 
final rewards. Such was its eschatological outline.
1. Somber Scenes of Judgment Day Depicted.—
He deals 
with the approaching judgment of the wicked, with the 
“Righteous One” coming as judge (38:2). The sobering scenes 
of the future day of judgment of man and fallen angels are 
depicted:
“And the Lord of Spirits placed the Elect One on the throne of glory. 
And he shall judge all the works of the holy above in heaven, and in 
the balance shall their deeds be weighed” (61:8).®
The wicked He will “deliver” “to the angels for punish­
ment, to execute vengeance on them.” But the “righteous and 
elect shall be saved on that day,” and “never thenceforward 
see the face of the sinners and unrighteous.” Their “garments 
shall not grow old” nor their “glory pass away” (62:10-16).® 
“The days of their life shall be unending, and the days of 
the holy without number” (68:3).T
The somber scenes of the great assize are presented, with 
the “books of the living” open (47:3). The “Most High” will 
“execute great judgement amongst sinners” (100:4),8 and fear 
and trembling will come upon them (102:1-3).®
2. Resurrection Expressly Portrayed.—On the question 
of death, resurrection, and the intermediate state, contradictory 
statements sometimes appear—just as would be expected in a 
book of composite authorship, with its parts written over an
MAJORITY ADHERE TO HISTORIC CONDITIONALISM 683
extended period. Sometimes mention is made of a general 
resurrection, sometimes of a partial one. As to the “sleep” of 
the righteous, “Enoch” interestingly says, “And though the 
righteous sleep a long sleep, they have nought to fear” (100: 
5).10 Here is an illuminating excerpt:
“And in those days shall the earth also give back that which has 
been entrusted to it, and Sheol also shall give back that which it has 
received, and hell shall give back that which it owes. For in those days 
the Elect One shall arise, and he shall choose the righteous and holy 
from among them: for the day has drawn nigh that they should be saved” 
(51:1, 2).11
It has been noted that the first alleged use of the word 
“Sheol” “in its New Testament signification” in these apoca­
lyptic writings appears here in 1 Enoch™
3. 
Wicked to Be Utterly Consumed.—Various verses 
tell of coming utter destruction of the wicked, with “no trace” 
remaining:
“And I will give them over into the hands of Mine elect: as straw in 
the fire so shall they burn before the face of the holy: as lead in the 
water shall they sink before the face of the righteous, and no trace of 
them shall any more he found” (48:9).13
“Yet the sinners shall be destroyed before the face of the Lord of 
Spirits, and they shall be banished from off the face of His earth, and 
they shall perish for ever and ever” (53:2).14
On this point of utter destruction Dean F. W. Farrar, of 
Canterbury, observes pointedly:
“The book [of Enoch] explains its own threats to mean annihila­
tion, which is the very antithesis of endless torment.”15
“An everlasting judgment shall be executed, and blasphemers shall 
be annihilated everywhere (Enoch 92:16 [Archbishop Laurence]).”16
Evil “kings and the mighty” will suffer a severer punish­
ment—being cast into “burning fire” in a “deep valley,” with 
great “chains” prepared for the “hosts of Azazel” (author of
“Ibid., p. 272.
w Ibid., p. 218.
ii Ibid., p. 185.
13 Ibid., p. 217. (Italics supplied.)
1« Ibid., p. 220.
15Farrar, Mercy and Judgment, p. 187. His footnote points out that “in accordance 
with Jewish idiom—‘annihilation’ is described as ‘being destroyed, condemned, slain for ever.’ ”
1« Ibid., p. 189.
684
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
sin), who are cast into the “abyss of complete condemnation” 
(54:1-5).1T
4. 
Torments of Accursed in Underworld.—On the other 
hand, a forerunner of Dante’s Divine Comedy appears in the 
treatise from some other hand. “Enoch” is led by an angel 
through both heaven and the underworld. He sees the “prison 
of the angels” and the place of punishment of fallen angels 
(21:7-10). They are judged “till they are made an end of” 
(19:2). And “Enoch” gives a detailed description of the 
mountains of fire. He sees heaven’s storehouse of rain, hail, 
and thunder.
During his wanderings he comes to Sheol. He sees hol­
low places, deep and dark and wide, for the “spirits of the 
souls of the dead,” the “souls of the children of men” who 
should assemble there. He hears them make appeal to the 
courts of Heaven (22:2-6).18 Sheol, in this instance, is no longer 
a place where the dead are unconscious, and unaware of what 
is happening on earth.
Under the hand of this writer they are fully conscious, 
and raise their voices in clamor. Here the unrighteous suffer 
great pain, and there are scourgings for those “accursed for­
ever” (22:9-12).”
Thus, while some passages (according to the Charles edi­
tion) accord with New Testament thought, there is on the 
other hand a radical departure from the former Old Testa­
ment teachings on death and the destiny of the soul hereafter. 
And the innovations unquestionably laid the groundwork for 
many of the pronounced departures that later crept into the 
thinking of the Christian Church. But we need to know how 
these departures came about, that we may understand the grave 
results.
We must press through the remaining writings that we 
may have the whole story before us.
17 Charles, Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, vol. 2, p. 220. 
w Ibid., p. 202.
» Ibid., p. 203.
II. Slavonic Enoch—Eternal Heaven and Unending Hell 
for Immortal Souls
The opposite picture is portrayed in The Book of the 
Secrets of Enoch, called the Slavonic Enoch (or 2 Enoch), 
which is preserved only in the Slavonic form. It is not a 
translation of the Ethiopic Enoch, for although the same 
subject is treated, it is a different pseudepigraph. Here “Enoch” 
is led through the ten heavens (chaps. 2 to 22)—God dwelling 
in the tenth 20—to learn the secrets of the universe, that he 
might instruct and teach the fear of the Lord.
According to Charles, the final editor of this little work 
was clearly a Hellenist Jew who lived in Alexandria, Egypt, 
fountainhead of the Immortal-Soul theory. The date is evi­
dently early in the Christian Era, within the first fifty years.21
1. 
First 
Jewish 
Propounder 
of 
“Six-Thousand-Year” 
Theory.—Here apparently for the first time in Jewish lit­
erature appears the equation of each day of Creation week 
for a thousand years of human history, with its final thou­
sand years of rest.22 Thus it was both a history of the past 
and a forecast of the future—a theory which came to play an 
important role in both early and modern Chiliasm.
It was an attempt to compute the time of the end of the 
world,23 and of the opening up of the gates of eternity when 
time shall be no more. God created the world out of nothing 
(24:2),24 with the specifications of each day of Creation week 
(chaps. 25 to 30). Man, it is here recorded, was created on 
the sixth day of Creation week (30:8-18),28 and the Fall is 
depicted, as well as the Flood (31:1-34:3). And the Second 
Coming is also expressly taught (32:1).29
MAJORITY ADHERE TO HISTORIC CONDITIONALISM 685
» Ibid., pp. 432-443.
21 Ibid., pp. 426-429.
22 This six-thousand-year 
concept for the duration of the 
world, was not, however,
simply Jewish apocalyptic, but was traceable back 
to paganism. 
The Zoroastrians in Persia and
the Etruscans in Italy believed 
that the human race was to 
live six thousand years. Some
scholars find evidence of Persian influence in the Jewish apocalyptic 
and Talmudic writings on
this point. Cf. William S. Fox, Greek and Roman Mythology, p. 289; J. A. MacCulloch, 
in Hastings, Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, vol. 5, pp. 376 381.
23 Charles, Apocrypha ana Pseudepigrapha, vol. 2, p. 451.
24 Ibid., p. 444. 
as ¡bid> pp 448-450. 
“ Ibid., p. 451.
686
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
2. Souls Prepared for Eternity Before W
orld’s Forma­
tion.—The Slavonic Enoch taught that all souls were “pre­
pared to eternity, before the formation of the world,” and 
thus before they took up their abode in material earthly 
forms (23:4, 5). And “places” are similarly prepared for them 
for all eternity:
“Many mansions [are] prepared for men, good for the good, and 
bad for the bad, without number many. Blessed are those who enter the 
good houses, for in the bad (sc. houses) there is no peace nor return (sc. 
from them)” (61:2, $).*
3. Free W
ill, Death, Punishment, and Reward.—Man 
was originally created good, and bestowed with free will, and 
thus had power to choose between good and evil. He became 
the master of his own destiny (30:15). Death came as a result 
of sin (30:16).“ All will be judged, and punished or rewarded 
according to their works (40:12, 13; 46:3).“ The righteous will 
escape punishment, and be gathered into eternal life (65:8).80
4. Righteous “Live Eternally” in 
Paradise.—Paradise 
is placed in the third heaven, “between corruptibility and in­
corruptibility.” In the midst of it stands the tree of life. 
There are two springs sending forth milk and honey and 
oil and wine (8:3-6).31 This is the “eternal inheritance” of 
the righteous (9: l),82 where the righteous “live eternally” (65:9), 
possess “eternal life” (65:10), and “escape the great judgment” 
(66:V).83 It is a pleasing prospect.
5. “Merciless 
Tortures” 
Are 
“Eternal 
Inheritance” 
of Wicked.—At the northern end of the third heaven is Hell, 
a place of cruel darkness, lighted only by sheets of “murky 
fire” (10:1-6).34 Everywhere is fire, and strangely, everywhere 
is frost. In the “lowest hell” the wicked prisoners are “in pain,” 
awaiting “limitless judgment” (40:12, 13).85 Merciless torture 
is the eternal inheritance of the wicked. For such there is no
27 Ibid., p. 466.
* Ibid., pp. 449, 450.
“ Ibid., pp. 455, 456, 458.
3« Ibid., p. 468.
3i Ibid., p. 434.
“ Ibid., p. 435. 
33 Ibid., p. 468. 
a* Ibid., p. 435. 
33 Ibid., p. 456.
return, and no repentance after death. Cruel and merciless 
angels apply fearful tortures to those condemned to live for­
ever therein, because of their sins against God and man. The 
guardians of Hell are thus vividly described:
“I saw the guardians of the keys of hell standing over against the 
gates like great serpents, their faces like lamps that are gone out, their 
eyes like darkened flames, and their teeth naked down to their breasts” 
(42:1, col. B).36
It is a forbidding picture, but such are the torrid teachings 
of this extra-Biblical Jewish apocalyptic, appearing just after 
the opening of the Christian Era. The Eternal Torment of 
the wicked postulate was thus being promulgated in the inter- 
Testament period.
III. Syriac Baruch—Conditionalist View; Righteous Sleep 
Till Resurrection
On the contrary, The Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch, or
2 Baruch for short, was a composite work, characterized by 
Dr. Charles as a “noble utterance. It was evidently produced 
by Jews of Pharisaic background, in the latter half of the first 
century of the Christian Era. It was consequently contemporary 
with the writing of earlier portions of the New Testament.*7 It 
is likewise a pseudepigraph, sent forth as if written by Baruch, 
Jeremiah’s amanuensis. But its position is highly significant, 
definitely presenting as it does the Conditionalist view of im­
mortality at that critical time.
The Syriac 2 Baruch—not to be confused with the later
3 Baruch, The Greek Apocalypse of Baruch 38—is an apology 
and defense of Judaism, and affords an illuminating example 
of one of the paralleling schools of Jewish thought current 
at the time of the apostles. The book, originally written in 
Hebrew, was translated from the Greek into Syriac, and bears
MAJORITY ADHERE TO HISTORIC CONDITIONALISM 687
38 Ibid.
37 Ibid., p. 470.
38 Ibid., pp. 527-541. It was written probably soon after a.d. 136.
striking similarity to 2 Esdras. Observe certain characteristic 
positions.
1. Death, Sleep, and Resurrection.—Dr. Charles calls 
particular attention to the fact that the writer of the Syriac 
Apocalypse adheres to the older Jewish view of death as a 
“sleep.” Here is Baruch’s statement:
“For there have been many years like those that are desolate from 
the days of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, and of all those who are 
like them, who sleep in the earth” (21:24).*®
And the anticipated awakening, or resurrection, will take 
place, he says, only after the decreed number of persons to 
live on this earth is made up:
“Because when Adam sinned and death was decreed against those 
who should be born, then the multitude of those who should be born 
was numbered, and for that number a place was prepared where the 
living might dwell and the dead might be guarded. Before therefore the 
number aforesaid is fulfilled, the creature will not live again, . . . and 
Sheol will receive the dead” (23:4, 5)/°
And death, he holds, came through individually commit­
ted sin:
“For though Adam first sinned and brought untimely death upon all, 
yet of those who wrere born from him each one of them has prepared for 
his own soul torment to come, and again each one of them has chosen 
for himself glories to come” (54:15).41
2. Eschatological View of the Last Things.—Baruch’s 
eschatological portrayal is vivid, including of course the judg­
ment (chap. 24). The signs of the end are enumerated (chaps. 
25, 26).‘3 Woes will sweep over the world—commotion, wars, 
famines, earthquakes, terrors, the falling of fire, wickedness, 
and unchastity—all commingled (chap. 27).43 Distress and de­
struction will be worldwide, and irremedial corruption will 
prevail. Then Messiah will come. But certain chiliastic excesses 
are also portrayed—every vine to have a thousand branches; 
every branch producing a thousand clusters; and every cluster
688 
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
30 Ibid., p. 495.
43Ibid., p. 496.
40 Ibid.
43 Ibid., pp. 496, 497.
41 Ibid., p. 511.
a thousand grapes (chap. 29).44 But it was by such fanciful 
portrayals that the whole concept of the millennium was 
brought into disrepute.
3. 
Righteous Dead Sleep Until Messiah’s Return.— 
When Messiah returns, “then all who have fallen asleep in 
hope of Him shall rise again.” The righteous will all be gath­
ered in a moment, and rejoice together, not grieving that one 
had to wait longer than the other for the full consummation. 
But the wicked, on the other hand, will grieve because the 
time of their torment and perdition lias arrived (chap. 30).46
So here in The Syrian Baruch we find the original Con­
ditional Immortality concept portrayed and perpetuated by 
Baruch. Commenting on this, Dr. Charles adds authoritatively: 
“This conditional immortality of man appears also in 1 Enoch 
lxix.ll, Wisdom i.13, 14, 2 Enoch xxx.16, 17, 4 Ezra iii.7.”46
It was thus one of the two concepts now current.
It is highly significant that Baruch was not alone in this 
view, though of course the parallel Immortal-Soulist views had 
now been definitely developed by others. So contemporary 
schools of opposite teaching were prevalent in Judaism at 
this time. Let us therefore survey Baruch with greater detail 
and documentation.
IV. Sets Forth the Conditionalist School of Immortality
1. 
Epitome of Baruch’s Hope of Judaism.—As noted, 
2 Baruch presents a picture of the hopes of Judaism in the 
second half of the first century a.d.—at the very time the 
Christian apostles were also writing. It sets forth original sin 
and free will (15:5-9; 19:12), with sin as a conscious breach 
of moral law, and human depravity beginning with Adam’s 
sin. Physical declension and death follow (17:3; 19:8; 23:4).
MAJORITY ADHERE TO HISTORIC CONDITIONALISM 689
690
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
“Otherwise,” Charles comments, “man would have been im­
mortal,” that is, immortal sinners.
The tendency to evil became established in man (48:42ff.), 
with affliction, disease, and death following.47 But the issues 
of right and wrong remain before man, and the power of 
choice likewise remains his (19:1, 3).48 Then, at the appointed 
time, the Messiah will return and the righteous dead will rise 
to a blessed life (30:1). The righteous will thus receive their 
promised reward (59:2) in the glories to come (54:15), while 
the unrighteous are cast into the torment of fire (54:14; 55:7; 
59:2, 10).4e
2. Prays for End of Mortality and Corruption.— 
Baruch prays that the time of human mortality and corrup­
tibility may be ended:
“Bring to an end therefore henceforth mortality. And reprove accord­
ingly the angel of death, and let Thy glory appear, and let the might of 
Thy beauty be known, and let Sheol be sealed so that from this time 
forward it may not receive the dead, and let the treasuries [chambers] 
of souls restore those which are enclosed in them” (21:25, 24).“
3. Coming Judgment and Messiah’s Advent.—Chapters 
twenty-four and twenty-five tell of the coming judgment at 
the “end of days,” and certain precursors, such as “much 
tribulation,” that would precede. Then chapter thirty opens 
with, “ ‘And it shall come to pass after these things, when the 
time of the advent of the Messiah is fulfilled, that He shall 
return in glory.’ ”61 It is remarkable how often this note is 
sounded throughout this apocryphal literature. There was 
high expectancy, and the eschatological emphasis was pro­
nounced.
4. Resurrection and Assemblage of Righteous Dead.— 
Next, the tremendous scenes of the resurrection are immedi­
ately portrayed:
“ 'Then all who have fallen asleep in hope of Him shall rise again.
«Ibid.
«ibid., p. 478.
«• Ibid., p. 479.
» Ibid., pp. 494, 495.
® Ibid., p. 498.
MAJORITY ADHERE TO HISTORIC CONDITIONALISM 691
And it shall come to pass at that time that the treasuries [chambers] 
will be opened in which is preserved the number of the souls of the 
righteous, and they shall come forth, and a multitude of souls shall be 
seen together in one assemblage of one thought, and the first shall rejoice 
and the last shall not be grieved. For they know that the time has come 
of which it is said, that it is the consummation of the times. But the 
souls of the wicked, when they behold all these things, shall then waste 
away the more. For they shall know that their torment has come and 
their perdition has arrived’ ” (30:2-5).“
5. The D
ust Gives Up the Dead.—Turning to the destiny 
of the wicked and the great “consummation,” and the measure­
ment of the “times” and the “seasons,” Baruch says:
“ ‘For corruption shall take those that belong to it, and life those 
that belong to it. And the dust shall be called, and there shall be said 
to it: “Give back that which is not thine, and raise up all that thou hast 
kept until this time”’” (43:7, 8).“
But Baruch, with assurance of “many eternal consolations” 
awaiting him, is instructed:
“ ‘For thou shalt depart from this place, and thou shalt pass from 
the regions which are now seen by thee, and thou shalt forget whatever 
is corruptible, and shalt not again recall those things which happen 
among mortals’ ” (43:2).“
6. 
The Punishm
ent of the W
icked.—Chapter fourteen 
alludes to the incorrigibly wicked, with “no mercy on those 
who depart to torment” (44:12). That will be their tragic 
“inheritance of the promised time.” To the righteous “shall 
be given the world to come, but the dwelling of the rest who 
are many shall be in the fire” (44:13-15).“
In his prayer Baruch refers to “the destruction that is to 
be” (48:7),“ the multitude who from the time of Eve have 
turned to evil, the coming of the Judge, the weeping over the liv­
ing rather than the dead, the multitude going to corruption, 
and the unnumbered host of “those whom the fire devours” 
(48:37-47)."
7. Body 
Raised 
Im
m
ortal 
and 
Incorruptible.—Then
™ Ibid.
» Ibid., p. 502.
« Ibid.
K Ibid., p. 503.
“ Ibid., p. 505.
n Ibid., p. 507.
692
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
the resurrection body is portrayed as undying (51:3), incor­
ruptible (74:2), and invisible to mortal vision (51:8). This is 
applied to the redeemed who are to live in the renewed world. 
The resurrection reunites soul and body (21:23; 42:8). Thus:
“ ‘The earth shall then assuredly restore the dead, [which it now 
receives, in order to preserve them]. It shall make no change in their 
form, but as it has received, so shall it restore them. And as I [God] 
delivered them unto it, so shall it raise them' ” (50:2).“
Then Baruch asks, “ ‘Why therefore do we again mourn 
for those who die? Or why do we weep for those who depart 
to Sheol?’ ” (52:2). Lamentation is reserved for those upon 
whom “torment” and “destruction” are coming (51:3). Make 
ready the soul, he admonishes, for “the reward which is laid 
up for you” (52:7).“
8. 
A “Term
inable 
R
etribution” 
Indicated.—In a sort 
of history of mankind, after the giving of the law, Baruch 
speaks of how—
“ ‘at that time the lamp of the eternal law shone on all those who sat 
in darkness, which announced to them that believe the promise of their 
reward, and to them that deny, the torment of fire which is reserved 
for them’” (59:2, 3).60
It should be added that, regarding the book of Baruch 
with its terms “perdition,” “torment,” and “fire,” Dean Far­
rar of Canterbury observes: “It therefore points to a terminable, 
not to an interminable, retribution.” 91
Such is Baruch’s Conditionalist testimony.
68 Ibid., p. 508. See note 50-51. (Brackets in original.) 
» Ibid., p. 509.
«“ Ibid., p. 513.
81 Farrar, Mercy and Judgment, p. 191.
CHAPTER 
FORTY
2 Esdras” Maintains the 
Conditionalist View
I. 2 Esdras—Immortalization of Righteous and Destruction
of Wicked
“Esdras” is both the Greek and Latin form of Ezra, 
2 Esdras 1 being originally called the “Ezra-Apocalypse.” There 
is common agreement that it is a composite, the product of 
a group of Jewish writers 2—a pseudepigraph brought together 
and invested with the name “Ezra.” This compilation was evi­
dently made around the close of the first century a.d., after 
Titus' destruction of Jerusalem. Its importance in this survey 
is therefore obvious. Later it was translated into Latin, Syriac, 
Ethiopic, Arabic, and Armenian. It found entrance as an ap­
pendix into the Latin Vulgate, and from thence was retained 
in certain Protestant Bibles as part of the Apocrypha. (See 
Chart on pages 634, 635.)
In its present form 2 Esdras is commonly dated between 
a.d. 120 and a.d. 150. It was extensively read, and exerted 
considerable influence. Even in modem times it is still read 
for edification in certain communions. It sought to impress its 
apocalyptic message upon certain hostile rabbinical circles, 
in order to secure a permanent place in orthodox Judaism. 
Jerome, it should be added, was the first to deny its canonicity.
1 It is called “Second” because in the Vulgate it follows the canonical books of Ezra- 
Nehemiah, which are combined and styled “First Ezra.”
2 Some think it to have been based on the Salathiel apocalypse (of chap. i. 1), of a.d. 
100, to which were added the Eagle Vision, the Son of Man Vision, and the Ezra-Legend, from 
other apocalypses, and extracts from an old Ezra-apocalypse.
693
694
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
It is generally admitted that 2 Esdras contains some interpola­
tions by a later hand, as well as novel and fantastic elements, 
which facts account for certain inconsistencies and contradic­
tions in the text. And sometimes an expression will appear in 
one translation that is not present in others. Hence an occa­
sional conflicting expression cannot logically overthrow or 
neutralize its preponderant Conditionalist evidence.
1. History Explained in Light of Original Sin.—The 
treatise begins with the doctrine of original sin. If an evil 
heart is transmitted to all from Adam, then all history must 
be explained and justified in the light of this fact. The major 
episodes of history are therefore recounted—the wickedness 
that called forth the Flood, the speedy apostasy again, then 
another apostasy after the giving of the law, and yet another 
after the building of the Temple. But the cause of it all was 
the evil heart derived from Adam. This problem troubled 
Ezra. But the answer given was that the understanding of 
the doctrine of the evil heart was beyond man’s capacity. Only 
God understands it all.
2. W
orld’s End, Final Judgment, and Results.—Then 
the end of the world, the day of doom, and the final judgment 
are set forth, and in their light the mysteries of Adam’s sin 
become clear. The signs that will precede the end, and the 
judgment itself, are described in Old Testament settings. And 
the resurrection and the judgment are presented in the phras­
ing of the sleep of the dead. That was the eschatological frame­
work. Here it is in some fullness:
"And
the earth shall restore those that sleep in her, 
and the dust those that are at rest therein,
[and the chambers shall restore those that were committed unto 
them].
And the Most High shall be revealed upon the throne of judgement: 
(and then cometh the End) 
and compassion shall pass away,
(and pity be far off,)
and longsuffering withdrawn;
“2 ESDRAS” MAINTAINS THE CONDITIONALIST VIEW 695
But judgement alone shall remain, 
truth shall stand, 
and faithfulness triumph.
And recompense shall follow,
and the reward be made manifest. . . .
And then shall the pit of torment appear,
and over against it the place of refreshment;
The furnace of Gehenna shall be made manifest, 
and over against it the Paradise of delight.
And then shall the Most High say to the nations that have been 
raised [from the dead]:
Look now and consider whom ye have denied, whom ye have not 
served, whose commandments ye have despised.
Look, now, before [you]:
here delight and refreshment, 
there fire and torments!
Thus shall he speak unto them in the Day of Judgement” (7:32-38).®
3. 
“M
ortal” W
orld Succeeded by “Im
m
ortal” Age.—In 
2 Esdras eschatological speculations are rife, and a strong con­
trast is maintained between the two ages—the present and the 
future. Dr. Charles sums it up significantly: “The corruptible 
world, and all that is mortal, will dissolve, and be succeeded 
by the incorruptible world and immortality.” 4 And his find­
ings are well attested.
The Lord has appointed the time of deliverance. The 
course and duration of the present world is predetermined, 
with the glorious better world to follow the catastrophic col­
lapse of the present one. But sin has not yet reached its 
climax (4:26-31). Then the signs by which the fullness of 
time may be recognized are enumerated (4:32 to 5:16). When 
these portents of the latter days reach fulfillment, the present 
world will terminate and the world to come begin (6:1-10). 
The day of judgment will have come, announced by a trumpet 
(7:1-25). Now let us survey in some detail the remarkable 
witness of 2 Esdras, for it is a remarkable and refreshing 
presentation.
3 Charles, Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, vol. 2, p. 583. (Brackets in original.)
4 Ibid., p. 555.
696
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
II. Documented Evidence of Ezra’s Conditionalist Position
1. 
“M
ortal M
an” in a “C
orruptible W
orld.”—2 Esdras 
takes the form of a dialogue, in which the speakers are Ezra 
and an angel. God’s ways are defended by the angel, who is 
God’s spokesman. The first questions concern the source of 
“sin and misery in the world,” and the condemnation of men, 
and how affliction can be reconciled with divine justice (3:4- 
36). Ezra protests it, but it is justified on the ground that men 
are free moral agents and know their duty, but wickedly re­
fuse to do it. The divine reply maintains that God’s ways are 
inscrutable. Ezra had never “gone down into Hades,” nor 
“ascended to Heaven,” “nor entered Paradise” (4:8).8 “The 
human spirit can only hope to understand dimly and in part” 
(4:1-11).“ So Ezra submits. The angel answers for God:
“ ‘How then should thy vessel (note 10: “understanding”) be able 
to comprehend the way of the Most High? For the way of the Most 
High has been formed without measure, how, then, should it be pos­
sible for a mortal in a corruptible loorld to understand the ways of the 
Incorruptible?’” (4:11).T
2. “New 
Age” 
and 
the 
Interm
ediate 
State.—Ezra is 
told of a new age about to dawn that will solve all difficulties 
(4:22-32). And he is assured that “the [present] age is hastening 
fast to its end” (4:26).8 In answer to his question, “When shall 
these things be?” the reply is “When the number of the right­
eous is complete.” And reference is mysteriously made to “the 
souls of the righteous in their chambers” (note: or “habita­
tions”) (4:34-43), and to the underworld (infernum, or Sheol) 
(4:41),° a general term for the abode of the wicked dead.
Then the “signs which precede the End” (4:51-5:13) are 
mentioned—world panic, hiding of truth, barrenness of faith, 
and increase of iniquity, as well as certain celestial signs (5:1-4). 
There is reference to the mystic, eschatological time periods of 
Daniel,10 which must first be fulfilled.
0 Ibid., p. 565.
« Ibid., p. 564.
7 Ibid., p. 565. (Italics supplied.)
s Ibid., p. 566.
0 Ibid., p. 567.
10 Ibid., p. 569, note 4.
“2 ESDRAS” MAINTAINS THE CONDITIONALIST VIEW 697
3. Righteous to Live, W
hile Ungodly Perish.—Ezra is 
told, as epitomized in the headings, that “the earth has grown 
old and its offspring degenerate” (5:50-55), and that “the end 
of the age shall come by the agency of God alone” (5:56-6:6).u 
And “numberless armies of angels” are mentioned (6:3). The 
discussion continues on the corruption of the present world, 
and the outcome of it all at the end of the age. Then the 
question is asked Ezra, “Why disquietest thou thyself that 
thou art corruptible? Why art thou moved because thou art 
mortal?” (7:15). And Ezra answers, “Thou hast ordained in 
thy law that the righteous shall inherit these things, but that 
the ungodly shall perish” (7:17).12 And perish is emphasized 
again in verse 20, and many times in chapters seven and nine.
4. General Resurrection and Final Judgment.—Then 
the writer comes to the “end of the age” (7:26-44), the revela­
tion of the Messiah, the general resurrection, and the final 
judgment, when “that which is corruptible shall perish” (7: 
31).13 And the end of time is the beginning of Immortality 
(7:43). The Messiah’s immortal companions, Enoch and Elijah, 
“who have not tasted death” (6:26),“ will appear as evidence 
of the future life and its rewards.“
5. “Sleepers” in the “Dust” Called Forth.—Next the 
discussion turns to the restoration, or resurrection, of those 
who “sleep” in the “dust,” until brought forth to judgment.
“The earth shall restore those that sleep in her, and the dust those 
that rest therein, [and the chambers shall restore those that were com­
mitted unto them]. And the Most High shall be revealed upon the throne 
of judgement: (and then cometh the End)” (7:32, 33).1®
6. The 
Wicked Are 
Doomed 
to 
Destruction.—“Rec­
ompense shall follow,” and righteousness and iniquity be 
manifest. Then comes this contrast:
11 Ibid., p. 574. 
is Ibid., p. 582.
12 Ibid., p. 581. 
. 
14 Ibid , p. 576.
15 This conception was likewise stressed in The Book of Enoch.
18 Ibid., p. 583. (Brackets in original.) (This is all patterned after the prophet Daniel’s
portrayals.!
“And then shall the pit of torment appear, and over against it the 
place of refreshment; the furnace of Gehenna shall be made manifest, 
and over against it the Paradise of delight” (7:36).”
And Dr. S. D. F. Salmond notes that—
“the language of the later apocalyptic books is sometimes indeterminate, 
so that it is possible to interpret it as pointing now to annihilation, and 
again to a punishment limited in duration. The Fourth Book of Esdras, 
for example, says of the day of judgment that ‘its duration shall be as 
it were a hebdomad of years’ [7:30-(6): 16], and describes the wicked as 
doomed to be destroyed [8:52-62].”38
7. 
W
icked, as a “Flam
e,” U
ltim
ately “Extinguished.” 
—Ezra grieves because the number of the good is so small— 
so many condemned and so few saved (7:45-74). The reply is 
that gold is scarcer than silver, iron, lead, and clay (7:56, 57). 
Then comes the comparison to “vapour” and to “smoke,” and 
“unto the flame.” They are “fired, burn hotly, are extinguished” 
(7:61).1* Ezra’s comment is that it were better not to be an 
accountable and condemned free moral agent, “because we 
perish and know it” (7:64). Then follows Ezra’s lament over 
the sad condition and destiny of man. But the answer is that 
man is accountable to judgment, and will be punished because 
of his accountability (7:62-74).“
But while Ezra still laments the “fewness of the saved” 
(7:45-61) and the “multitude of them that perish” (7:61),21 
he inquires as to “the state of the soul after death and before 
judgement” (7:75-101), and—
"whether after death, even now when every one of us must give back his 
soul, we shall be kept in rest until those times come in which thou shalt 
renew the creation, or shall we suffer torture forthwith?” (7:75).“
The answer given is that all souls return to God, and 
are assigned places awaiting the judgment day:
“When the decisive decree has gone forth from the Most High that 
the man should die, as the soul from the body departs that it may return 
to him who gave it, to adore the glory of the Most High” (7:78, 79).“
698 
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
17 ibid.
18 Salmond, The Christian Doctrine of Immortality, p. 365.
19 Charles, Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, vol. 2, pp. 585, 586.
20 Ibid., p. 586.
27 Ibid., p. 585. Cf. pp. 592 (8:1-3), 596 (8:41-44), 598 (8:55), 600 (9:16, 22).
22 Ibid., p. 587. 
23 Ibid.
“2 ESDRAS” MAINTAINS THE CONDITIONALIST VIEW 699
On the contrary, those who “have not kept the ways of 
the Most High, that have despised his law, and that hate 
those who fear God—such souls shall not enter into habita­
tions, but shall wander about henceforth in torture, ever 
grieving and sad” (7:79, 80).“
They contemplate “the torture laid up for themselves in 
the last days,” how “the habitations of the other souls are 
guarded by angels in profound quietness,” and how they 
must “pass over into torture” (7:85-87, 100, 101). Allusion is 
made to the righteous “when they shall be separated from 
this vessel of mortality [note: “corruptible vessel”]” (7:88),“ 
“gathered together in their habitations” (7:101).“ The deci­
sions of the judgment are final, and as to the question of 
intercession for sinners, the answer is that there is “no inter­
cession on the day of judgement” (7:102-115).” No man can 
assist another, nor cast his burden on another. Each must bear 
his own.
8. “Treasures of Im
m
ortality” M
ade M
anifest to Ezra. 
—Still troubled over the fate of the wicked, Ezra prays 
to God who “dwellest eternally” (8:20-30).“ But the divine 
reply (8:46-62) is that such is man’s destiny, and that there 
should be no thought of the “fate of sinners,” which is of 
undetermined but limited duration, but rather one should 
think of the “treasures of immortality” (8:54).“ This is the 
assurance:
“For to you is opened Paradise, planted the Tree of life; the future 
Age prepared, plenteousness made ready; a City builded, a Rest ap­
pointed; . . . and Death is hidden, Hades fled away; Corruption for­
gotten, sorrows passed away; and in the end the treasures of immortality 
are made manifest” (8:52-54).30
9. 
W
icked Brought to “D
eath by Torm
ent.”—Ezra is 
admonished to “ask no more concerning the multitude of 
them that perish; for having received liberty they despised
700
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
the Most High; scorned his Law, and forsook his ways,” tread­
ing the saints underfoot (8:55, 56). “The Most High willed 
not that men should come to destruction” (8:59). But they 
have “defiled the Name of him who made them, and have 
proved themselves ungrateful to him who prepared life for 
them” (8:60, 61).31
Still meditating on the signs of the end, and the last 
times, Ezra is assured:
“For all who failed to recognize me in their lifetime, although I 
dealt bountifully with them; and all who have defied my Law, while 
they yet had liberty, and, while place of repentance was still open to 
them, gave no heed but scorned (it); these must be brought to know 
after death by torment” (ix. 11, 12)3"
This “death by torment” phrase has often been put forth 
as evidence of the doctrine of eternal future punishment. But 
the case for Eternal Torment is not sustained, for wherever 
the words “perish” or “destruction” are used, they denote 
“bringing” or “coming to an end.” Thus when Ezra tells of 
the ungodly perishing, it is almost immediately followed by 
the thought that there be many who perish in this life (7:17, 
20). So whether it be punishment here or hereafter, the Lord 
“delivers to death and destruction.”
10. W
icked Perish Because of Disobedience.—So to Ezra 
was presented the “justification of the fewness of the saved,” 
and that “there are more who perish than shall be saved, even 
as the flood is greater than a drop!” (9:16). All God’s bounties 
were prepared in the “eternal ages” for the obedient, but 
because of corruption the wicked are “destroyed” (9:18-22).*’ 
Again and again there is the thought that the disobedient 
“perish” because of their willful disobedience to the will and 
abiding “law” of God (9:32-37).34
11. 
Ezra’s Single 
Prophecy 
Deals W
ith 
Eschatology. 
—In the Eagle Vision (10:60-12:35) prophetic symbols are 
presented, and the course of empire and “lordship over the
« Ibid., p. 598.
•■>2 Ibid., p. 599.
33 Ibid., p. 600.
34 Ibid., p. 602.
'2 ESDRAS” MAINTAINS THE CONDITIONALIST VIEW 701
earth” (12:23) is portrayed, in relation to it all. Its climax 
is “kept for the time when its time for dissolution shall ap­
proach” (12:21, 22).“ So there is, as it were, “a lamp in a dark 
place, as a haven of safety for a ship in a storm” (12:42).38
This is Ezra’s only venture into prophecy, and he here 
seeks to link his Eagle Vision with the paralleling vision of 
the prophet Daniel of the four world powers (Babylon, Medo- 
Persia, Grecia, and Rome). Ezra’s climactic Eagle parallels 
Daniel’s symbolic fourth monster—the Roman Empire (Dan. 
2; 7; and 8).m The vision leads up to the world’s climax. Thus 
his prophetic portrayal is definitely eschatological in intent.
12. 
Tim
e’s 
Last 
Hours, 
and 
M
ortality.—In the final 
Ezra-Legend, Ezra, in discussing “the secrets of the times” and 
the “end of the season” (14:5), is again told that “the world 
has lost its youth,” and the times are waxing old (14:10). Then 
Ezra is admonished, “Now do thou renounce the life that is 
corruptible, let go from thee the cares of mortality” (14:13, 
14).38
Ezra’s last words (14:27-36) include the following con­
clusion.
“If ye, then, will rule over your own understanding and will disci­
pline your heart, ye shall be preserved alive and after death obtain mercy. 
For after death shall the Judgement come, [when we shall once more live 
again:] and then shall the names of the righteous be made manifest, and 
the works of the godless declared” (14:34, B5).88
“Ezra” was clearly a Conditionalist.
x-Ibid., pp. 613, 614.
39 Ibid., p. 614.
=« Ibid., p. 613.
38 Ibid., p. 621.
30 Ibid., p. 623. (Brackets in original.)
Chart E
PARALLELING PAGAN AND CHRISTIAN NEOPLATONIC 
SCHOOLS CENTER IN ALEXANDRIA
(Pagan School Climaxes in Resurgence of Paganism, Expiring in A.D. 529; 
Christian Catechetic School Becomes Mighty Force, Giving Way to Developing
Catholic Church)
1. Philo (c. 20 B.C.-c. A.D. 47), precursor—emanation; pre-existence; in­
carnations
2. Lucius Apuleius (c. A.D. 126-c. 200) of Numidia—Orientalism; World-
Soul postulate
3. Numenius (fl. A.D. 
150-200) of Syria—incarnations punishment for
former sins
Christian Catechetical School of Alexandria
I. 
Pantaenus (d. A.D. 190)—Neoplatonic positions replace those of 
apostles and Apostolic Fathers
II. Clement of Alexandria (d. A.D. 220)—switches to Immortal-
Soulism, with restorative purgation of wicked
III. Origen (d. A.D. 254), allegorizer—pre-existence of souls; suc­
cessive transmigrations; 
spiritual 
resurrection; 
ultimate 
res­
toration of all
[Origenism condemned in A.D. 544, under Justinian, at a Council of 
Constantinople]
IV. Heracles; Dionysius; Theognostus; Pierius; Didymus
4. Ammonius Saccas (c. A.D. 175-c. 242)—lays foundations of pagan Neo­
platonism
5. Plotinus (c. A.D. 205-270) of Egypt—Orientalism; Emanation; Dualism;
Mysticism; Reabsorption
6. Porphyry (c. A.D. 232-c. 304), Skeptic—holds to Universal-Soul; libera­
tion from body
7. lamblichus (c. A.D. 250-c. 333) of Syria—mythology; astrology; necro­
mancy
8. Julian the Apostate (A.D. 332-363), emperor—suppresses Christianity;
exalts paganism
9. Proclus (A.D. 412-485)—emanation; reabsorption; mystic union of soul
with deity
10. 
A.D. 529—Justinian closes academy; confiscates property; forbids teach­
ing of philosophy; philosophers exiled to Persia
ACCOUTERMENTS PASS, BUT MAIN PLATONIC TENET REMAINS
North Africa (particularly Alexandria and Carthage), gathering place for 
philosophers, Jews, Gnostics, and Christian apologists and teachers, was the 
rallying point for Neoplatonism, both pagan and Christian, the last great system 
of Greek philosophy. Its penetrations continued until the Christian Church was 
compassed by the doctrinal darkness of the Middle Ages.
As with the demise of pagan Neoplatonism under Justinian in a.d. 529, so in
a.d. 544 Origen’s Universal Restorationism was condemned in the Second Council 
of Constantinople, and Tertullian-Augustinianism prevailed, with its Universal 
Innate-Immortality postulate and Eternal-Torment corollary.
Thus, while the accouterments of Neoplatonism passed—with its emanation, 
pre-existence, reincarnation, and reabsorption—the basic premise of Platonism 
(the Innate Immortality of the soul) became a permanent plank in the creed 
of the dominant Catholic Church, with its paralleling postulate of the Eternal 
Torment of the wicked.
702
CHAPTER 
FORTY-ONE
Neoplatonism’s Development— 
Jewish, Pagan, and Christian
As mentioned, we are witnessing two simultaneous but 
contrasting developments: one, the progressive adoption of 
the Platonic philosophy of Immortal-Soulism by one group of 
inter-Testament Jewish writers; and two, the continuing fidel­
ity of others to the Mosaic faith of their fathers—namely, Old 
Testament Conditionalism. It is a confused and confusing 
unfoldment, sad but actual, and destined in due time pro­
foundly to affect a major section of the Christian Church.
That is because this segment of the church was influenced 
not only directly by this same Platonic philosophy but indi­
rectly by Plato through this Alexandrian wing of the Jew­
ish Church, particularly through Philo. So we are here tracing 
the development of a double tragedy.
I. Alexandria—Seat of Two Paralleling Schools
1. 
Greek Philosophy Takes Root in Roman Empire.— 
Rome was founded some seven hundred years before Christ. 
But for centuries the Romans were a fierce, barbarous people, 
taking little interest either in speculative philosophy or in 
religion. Not until the second century b.c. did philosophy 
begin to be studied at Rome, being then introduced by Gre­
cian philosophers. At first there was strong opposition from 
Roman leaders.
But following Rome’s military conquest of Greece the 
two nations began to commingle. And soon Grecian religion
703
704
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
and philosophy began to flourish at Rome. Though victorious 
in war, the conquerors began to adopt the philosophical opin­
ions of the vanquished.
Before long every major Grecian school of philosophy 
had its devotees among the Romans—Platonists, Pythagoreans, 
Stoics, Epicureans, Pyrrhonics, and others. Some later schools 
openly denied the immortality of the soul. But Platonism, 
with its insistence on Innate Immortality, was embraced 
by others, such as Cicero (106-43 B.C.). He greatly admired 
Plato, and wrote much to establish the theory of Immortal- 
Soulism. In fact, he sought to do among the Romans 
what Plato had done for this doctrine among the Greeks. 
Nevertheless, even Cicero confessed that he felt assurance of 
the soul’s immortality only when he was arguing the case— 
while in his hours of sober reflection he doubted it. Thus:
“I have read and re-read Plato’s Phaedo, but, how it is, I know not, 
while I read I assent; when, however, I have put aside the book and 
have begun to cogitate for myself on the immortality of souls, all my 
assent slips away.” 1
2. 
Neoplatonic School Result of Eclectic Choice.— 
Then, about the beginning of the Christian Era, a unique 
school was started in Alexandria, Egypt, now of course, consti­
tuting part of the Roman Empire. It was an eclectic2 school, 
significantly called the School of Neoplatonic Philosophy. 
Wearying of the endless disputes and bickerings between the 
different sects of philosophy and religion, certain pagan phi­
losophers formulated a plan of gleaning from each school 
what was deemed best, and consonant with reason—rejecting 
the rest of the clashing. Thus the rivals joined forces, with 
Platonism as the determining factor in the selection.
This eclecticism, it should be added, was stimulated by 
the Roman lack of sympathy with subtle metaphysical niceties 
and distinctions. To the hardheaded Romans the disputes of
1 Cicero, Dispulationes Tusculanae 1:11, quoted in Petavel, The Problem of Immortality,
p. 59.
2 Eclecticism—the attempt to reach the highest probability by selection from already 
existing systems of philosophy.
the Greek philosophers were trifling and unseemly. So Neo­
platonism built upon this new platform, with its deletions and 
refinements, but with the immortality of the soul remaining 
one of its most conspicuous planks.
It is to be borne in mind in this connection that the 
masses of the Greeks and Romans were still silent before the 
mystery of death, and the afterlife had no fixed place in their 
thoughts. The cold criticism of the philosophers, the skepti­
cism of the poets, and the sneer of the satirists had cast a pall 
of gloom over the sorrowing. And the hypothetical hope of 
immortality was but the uncertain hope of the few, not the 
expectation of the masses.
3. 
Alexandria the Center of Conflicting Cultures.— 
But let us probe a little deeper. The conquests of Alexander 
the Great, extending from the Mediterranean to the Indus, 
brought the Occidental and Oriental peoples, cultures, and 
civilizations closer together, opening new areas of philosophical 
and mystical lore. The monotheistic Hebrews, whose home 
lay between the two, yielded a distorted contribution through 
Philo. Then the succession of the Romans to the empire drew 
East and West even more closely together.
Alexandria became the new world center of philosophical 
and intellectual activity. Here the learning of Egypt continued 
to flourish. Here Greek polytheism, deifying nature, and Per­
sian Dualism, with its principles of good and evil eternally 
struggling for mastery, came to the fore. And added to these, 
Indian mysticism, pantheism, emanation, reincarnation, and 
reabsorption were all interjected in varying degrees. And here, 
finally, the new Christian faith began to establish itself.
So in this cosmopolitan city with its conflicting concep­
tions of monism and dualism, monotheism and polytheism, 
magism and mysticism, and asceticism and Orientalism—but 
primarily Platonism—a common platform of postulates was 
now brought forth in the early centuries of the Christian Era. 
Thus, we repeat, this religious eclectic philosophy was devel­
oped under the name of Neoplatonism, which supplanted the
NEOPLATONISM—JEWISH, PAGAN, AND CHRISTIAN 
705
23
706
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
classical philosophies, the pagan division of which became 
intensely hostile toward Christianity. (See Pictorial Chart I, 
pages 524-527, for time sequence and relationship.)
Neoplatonism sought to become the representative and 
type of all religions, contesting with Christianity for the mind 
and conscience of man. It was a syncretism that sought to 
array all the influences and forces of paganism under its ban­
ners in a final attempt to resist and turn back the dread rival 
religion, Christianity, that was spreading alarmingly. Like the 
rising sun, it seemed destined to eclipse every lesser light.
4. 
Pagan Neoplatonism Becomes Anti-Christian.—As 
noted, pagan Neoplatonism was nearly coeval with the rise 
of Christianity, but erelong it developed strong anti-Christian 
and pantheistic attitudes. It centered first in Alexandria, then 
transferred to Rome under Plotinus. Neoplatonism grew out 
of the failure of the previous pagan philosophies to satisfy the 
longings of the human soul for certainty concerning God, and 
the origin, nature, and destiny of man and the universe. The 
assumptions of the older philosophies, including the original 
Platonism, had resulted in a reaction of disillusionment and 
skepticism. This led to a recasting of the old and the develop­
ment of Neoplatonism.
This new development now crystallized at Alexandria. 
There Philo, as noted, at the very dawn of the Christian Era 
first sought to show the inner harmony between Plato and 
Moses, or Greek philosophy and the Jewish religion, just as 
Origen soon endeavored to do with Christianity and Platonic 
philosophy. It was an attempt to combine the conflicting sys­
tems into one synthesis. Philo was clearly one of the pioneers 
in this broad Neoplatonic movement—the last great stand of 
Greek philosophy.
And so it came to pass, as we shall shortly see, that the 
speculations of Plato, admittedly one of the world’s greatest 
pagan philosophers, came to exert more influence on the reli­
gious opinions of compromising Christians than those of any
other philosopher. He became the unsurpassed molder of both 
Christian and pagan thought in this area of human destiny.
II. Pagan Neoplatonism—Greek Philosophy’s Last Stand
In his penetrating analysis of the history of Greek philos­
ophy, the noted professor, John W. Draper, astutely summa­
rized the “four problems,” or inquiries, of “Greek Philosophy” 
as: “1. Origin of the World; 2. Nature of the Soul; 3. Exist­
ence of God; 4. Criterion of Truth.” 8 And at the close of 
his able tracement of its development, as he looked back over 
the thousand years of its meanderings, he interestingly observed:
“Under the shadow of the Pyramids Greek philosophy was born; 
after many wanderings for a thousand years round the shores of the 
Mediterranean, it came back to its native place, and under the shadow 
of the Pyramids it died.” *
The last stand we will now trace with rapid strokes.
In its declining days pagan philosophy became retrospec­
tive, falling back on the support of ancient mythicism and 
speculation, and borrowing heavily from Orientalism. Let us 
follow pagan Neoplatonism’s rise, dominance, and fall.
1. 
Philo: Precursor, Builds Upon Emanation Theory. 
—Earliest precursor of Neoplatonism in point of time, as well as 
in importance, is Philo Judaeus (c. 20 b.c.-c. a.d. 47). In laying 
the foundation for Neoplatonism he invoked the allegorizing 
method of interpreting the Old Testament, thereby wresting 
the Scriptures5 in an attempt to harmonize Moses’ revealed 
theology with Plato’s speculative philosophy. It was an acknowl­
edged “blending of Platonism and Judaism,” Deity and matter 
being regarded as the two first principles, existing from eter­
nity. And he built his system upon the emanation concept. 
Draper specifically states, concerning his “mystical philosophy”:
“It is very clear, therefore, that though Philo declined
NEOPLATONISM—JEWISH, PAGAN, AND CHRISTIAN 
707
3 John W. Draper, History of the Intellectual Development of Europe, vol. 1, p. 207.
708
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Oriental pantheism, he laid his foundation on the Oriental 
theory of Emanation” *
That was the starting point.7
2. Lucius: Asserts “World-Soul” Principle.—This tend­
ency to patronize Orientalism “occurs still more strongly” in 
Lucius Apuleius (c. a.d. 126-c. 200), Numidian8 teacher of the 
Platonic and Aristotelian philosophies, and Latin representa­
tive of the developing tendency to blend the Oriental with 
the Occidental philosophy. He tried to “bridge the gulf between 
a transcendent God and matter” by assuming that there were 
numerous demons as “intermediaries.” 9
3. Numenius: Incarnations Punishments for Previous- 
Life Sins.—Numenius of Apamea (fl. a.d. 150-200), Neo- 
Pythagorean philosopher and forerunner of Neoplatonism, 
likewise had strong leanings toward the Oriental. He boldly 
declared what had then become a general belief, namely, 
that “all Greek philosophy was originally brought from the 
East”10 He borrowed from “the magicians, Egyptians, Brah­
mans, and Jews.” u That is significant. He cited the Stoics as 
holding that the World-Soul alone is eternal, and that all 
souls are to be blended and intermingled immediately after 
death.
He maintained that Plato constitutes the connecting link, 
actually proclaiming in Greek form the revealed teachings of 
Moses. Numenius went so far as to ask, “What is Moses talk­
ing but Attic Greek?” And he styled Plato the “Attic Moses.” 
This was the crowning argument of Greek philosophy as a 
“philosophical religion,” as it entered into mortal conflict with 
the rising power of Christianity.
Numenius himself syncretized Pythagorean, Egyptian, 
Persian, and Oriental dogmas. More especially, he made the
6 Ibid., p. 210. (Italics supplied.)
7 Thrasyllus of Mendes (d. a.d. 36) also had a contemporary part, by arranging the 
works of Plato and combining certain Neo-Pythagorean speculations with Platonism.
8 Ibid., pp. 210, 211.
0 Eduard Zeller, Outlines of the History of Greek Philosophy, p. 309.
10 Draper, op. cit., vol. 1, p. 211. (Italics supplied.)
11 Zeller, Outlines of the History of Greek Philosophy, p. 309.
Gospels the subject of philosophical allegory, just as Philo 
had done with the Pentateuch.u So highly was Numenius 
esteemed that some regard him as the real founder of the 
Alexandrian School. And it is significant that Numenius held 
the soul to be immortal and immaterial, with its descent from 
its former incorporeal state implying moral delinquency in a 
previous life. So the basic emphasis continues.
4. 
Ammonius: 
Lays Foundations for Neoplatonism
.—
 
Usually regarded as the founder of the Alexandrian school of 
Neoplatonic philosophy, Ammonius Saccas 
(c. a.d. 175-c. 242) 
was born of Christian parents in Alexandria and trained in 
the Christian faith. He lapsed into paganism, however, when 
his mind became absorbed in the study of heathen philosophy, 
and he helped in laying the foundations of pagan Neoplato­
nism. His fame was dwarfed by that of his famous pupil Plo­
tinus. He is also said to have had Origen as one of his students, 
but he left no authentic writings.13
Pagan Neoplatonism, now assuming the aspect of a phil­
osophical “religion,” soon began to combat the rising power 
of Christianity, with Alexandria the scene of the contest. Here 
the pagan school was established that lasted for some three 
hundred years. It was identified with the expiring effort of 
decadent Greek philosophy.14 In this Ammonius played his part.
5. 
Plotinus: 
O
rientalism
, 
Dualism, 
Em
anation, 
Re­
absorption.—We now come to the celebrated Egyptian Neo­
platonic philosopher Plotinus 
(c. 
a.d. 205-270), the first to 
develop, systematize, and put into written form the now- 
crystallizing Neoplatonic positions. For eleven years he sat 
under the teachings of Ammonius, then traveled to India and 
Persia to acquaint himself with Eastern thought, studying 
under the Brahmans and the Magi. Finally he opened a phil­
osophical school in Rome in 244, teaching there until his
NEOPLATONISM—JEWISH, PAGAN, AND CHRISTIAN 
709
12 K. O. Muller, History of the Literature of Ancient Greece, vol. 3. p. 182.
13 Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, art., “Ammonius Saccas, 
p. 44.
14 Draper, loc. cit.
710
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
death. His writings were published posthumously—one deal­
ing just with the soul.
Plotinus acquainted himself with every system of phi­
losophy, and culled whatever supported his solution of the 
great problem of thought and existence. But to him Plato was 
the supreme authority and the starting point of his extended 
speculations. Plotinus’ Neoplatonism was a religio-philosoph- 
ical eclecticism. However, it was all markedly tinctured with 
Orientalism, mysticism, and pantheism.
Ascetic in habits, Plotinus held his body in utter contempt, 
regarding it as a phantom and a clog to his soul. He considered 
it a “penitential mechanism for the soul.” So ashamed was he 
of his body that he would never name his parents, nor remem­
ber his birthday, nor allow a portrait to be painted. These 
were all, he believed, alien to the soul—the real self. He found 
justification in Plato for the concept that “Thought is the 
Soul.” So he disparaged the life of sense, and extolled the life 
of pure thought—transcending the world of matter.
He stressed union with God, and return to Deity. Deny­
ing the personality of God, he held Deity to be the first prin­
ciple. The soul belongs to the supersensuous world, he said, 
and leads an eternal life without time. Further, the first soul 
sends forth the second from it, like a beam of light. This 
Plotinus called Nature.15
Under the Neoplatonic impulse this philosophical attitude 
was carried into an intellectual mysticism. It became a process 
of high abstraction—mere being, as in the East. God became 
the infinite background—mystic contemplation being the ulti­
mate for man melting into oneness with the Absolute.
Plotinus based his Neoplatonism on a new theory of 
emanation. Finite existence was considered a progressive fall­
ing away from original perfection—the eternal one overflowing 
from its central being, losing itself in the surrounding dark­
ness, through spirit, soul, and body—the body being the
15 Draper, op. cit., vol. 1, pp. 211-213; Zeller, Outlines of the History of Greek Philos­
ophy, pp. 313-325.
Porphyry, Sophist and Skeptic, 
Plotinus — Stressed World-Soul,
Nevertheless Held to the Im- 
Emanation, Reabsorption, and
mortal-Soul Concept. 
Dualism.
lowest of all. Thus individual souls separate from the World- 
Soul by a mystic process. Such were the lengths to which 
Plotinus went.
From his contact with Persian ideas a pronounced Dualism 
(found as noted in its most pronounced form in Persia) was 
also injected—and having a distinctly ascetic tinge. In the 
moral struggle there is division of the world into the two con­
flicting principles of good and evil. In Persia it was the con­
test between Ormuzd and Ahriman, or God and the devil, light 
and darkness. Evil was connected with the body and the lower 
appetites—that is, matter. The flesh is against the spirit. Salva­
tion therefore lies in exterminating these desires and cultivating 
the pure life of the spirit, unsoiled by taint of body. At one 
point he even said, “Without the existence of evil the world 
would be less perfect.” 18
Plotinus likewise stressed the idea of the “World-Soul,” 
creator of all material things, an emanation from the Nous— 
the soul being the image and product of the Nous. The souls
16 Quoted in Petavcl, The Problem of Immortality, p. 433.
711
712
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
of men, in consequence of their descent into human bodies, 
have forgotten their divine origin, and have become estranged 
from the Good One. And the highest duty of man is, he held, 
to return into mystical union with the Deity.” This return to 
original perfection must be accomplished by ridding ourselves 
of the restrictions of matter, rising above the finite and retrac­
ing our steps toward God.
The great goal of existence, he taught, is to withdraw the 
soul from external things and fasten it in contemplation upon 
God. This is reached when the soul, in ecstasy, loses all 
thought and desire in union with God, “is loosened from its 
material prison separated from individual consciousness,” and 
becomes one with God, absorbed and cojoined, center with 
center.18 That, of course, is straight Orientalism.
Plotinus’ ideas on the Trinity were based on a mystical 
theory of emanation—the second principle issuing by emana­
tion from the first, and the third out of the second—“Thought 
arising from Reason, but Thought is the Soul.” “Reason,” he 
held, “is surrounded by Eternity, but the Soul is surrounded 
by Time.” Such were the new concepts he added to Platonism.
We are to devote life, he urged, to intimate communion 
with God, divesting ourselves of all personality, and passing 
into the condition of ecstasy, in which the soul is loosed from 
its material prison and separated from individual consciousness 
and reabsorbed into the infinite intelligence whence it 
emanated. Thus in Plotinus the strain of Orientalism is pre­
dominant, together with specific Indian principles and prac­
tices—even “the process for passing into ecstasy by sitting long 
in an invariable posture, ... or by observing for a long time 
an unusual or definite manner of breathing,” familiar to East­
ern devotees.19 This was the complex pattern of the new pagan 
Platonism. But, whether pagan or Alexandrian Christian, it 
involved the natural-immortality-of-the-soul thesis.
17 The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, art., “Plotinus,” pp. 1084, 1085.
18 Draper, op. cit., vol. 1, pp. 213, 214.
18 Ibid., p. 214.
6. Porphyry: Skeptic, Yet Holding to Universal Soul. 
—The opinions of Plotinus were strengthened and turned 
against Christianity by his celebrated pupil Porphyry, of Tyre 
(c. a.d. 232-c. 304). Of pagan parentage, he studied philosophy 
at Athens, becoming persuaded of the Neoplatonic principles 
by Plotinus. He was also devoted to Aristotle’s postulates. And 
he too established a school at Rome. He was pronounced in 
his hostility against all religions, with special bitterness against 
Christianity. Strangely, he too was a pagan mystic, but denied 
immortality to the demons who allegedly rule the air. His 
emphasis likewise attempted to withdraw the soul from contact 
with the sensible world. And he similarly recommended Ori­
ental silence in worship and pure thought.20 This emphasis had 
now become more than a trend, it was a characteristic.
As to the soul, Porphyry held that the universal soul em­
braces the essence of the individual souls, yet without dividing 
itself among them. He did not extend the migration of souls 
to the bodies of animals. The purified soul looks forward to 
complete liberation from the body. However, he held that 
remembrance of the earthly state is extinguished. For purifica­
tion he advocated asceticism and celibacy. He repudiated the 
prevailing ideas about the gods.21 His treatise against the 
Christians was ordered publicly burned by Theodosius II in 
a.d. 448.
7. Iamblichus: Mythology, Astrology, Necromancy.— 
Under the highly speculative and superstitious Iamblichus, 
or Jamblicus (c. a.d. 250-c. 333), pupil of Porphyry and founder 
of Syrian Neoplatonism, the influences of the East were still 
more markedly felt. While Plato and Aristotle were still ex­
pounded, astrology, magical rites, and necromancy began to 
overshadow. Numerous Greek and Oriental pagan mythol­
ogies were introduced, including number symbolism. The con­
cept of emanation was stressed. Iamblichus arranged the “vari­
ous emanations in subordinated triads.” The “lowest of all in
NEOPLATONISM—JEWISH, PAGAN, AND CHRISTIAN 
713
20 Ibid., pp. 214, 215.
21 Zeller, Outlines of the History of Greek Philosophy, pp. 323-325.
714
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
the cosmos” was “the world of sense.” 23 He also challenged 
the transmigration of human souls into the bodies of animals.
So, in the losing struggle against Christianity, the succes­
sors of Plotinus and other champions of paganism staged a 
resurgence of paganism. But this phase soon passed, for the 
future belonged to the Christian faith. Their pagan world 
was filled with a great hierarchy of souls—gods, demons, and 
men—“with mystical affinities and relationships between souls, 
which find expression in divination, astrology, and magical 
rites.” 23
8. Julian: Suppresses Christianity, Exalts Paganism.— 
For the moment paganism seemed to have its chance, when 
the Roman emperor, Julian the Apostate 
(a.d. 332-363), 
cousin of Constantine—brought up in the Christian faith but 
trained in the pagan philosophical school of the pagan Neo- 
platonists at Athens—tried to reverse the current of history. 
At Athens he was initiated into the old Eleusinian mysteries. 
Julian sought to repress Christianity and promote paganism 
by every means short of persecution. But his scheme came to 
nought at his death. Paganism had now lost the struggle 
against Christianity.
9. Proclus: Mystic Union of Soul With Deity.—The 
last refuge of pagan Neoplatonism was the academy at Athens, 
in connection with Proclus (a.d. 412-485), just before its ter­
mination under Justinian. Proclus was a respected scholar, 
but ascetic and fervid, who had high regard for the ancient 
Orphic poems and Chaldean oracles. He now sought, ambi­
tiously, to develop a complete theological system embracing 
all the theological and philosophical tenets of his predecessors, 
including the theory of emanation, embellished with mysticism.
It was based on a complicated triadic development. “The 
soul comprises three classes of part-souls—divine, daemonic
and human,” 24 with demons connected with the gods. He too
22 The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, art., “Iamblichus,” p. 674; Zeller, 
Outlines of the History of Greek Philosophy, pp. 325-327.
23 A. K. Rogers, A Student’s History of Philosophy, pp. 183, 184.
24 Zeller, Outlines of the History of Greek Philosophy, p. 331.
NEOPLATONISM—JEWISH, PAGAN, AND CHRISTIAN 
715
deals with the descent and future fortunes of the immortal 
soul. With him the final goal is likewise the elevation of the 
soul to mystic union with the Deity.
Proclus enjoyed the study of Plato, and speculated par­
ticularly on the manner in which reabsorption is to take place 
—whether one can pass at once into the primitive or whether 
a returning succession of states is required. Under him Neo­
platonism reached its final pagan form.28 But, unable to vie 
with Christianity, its mission had simply lapsed into an attempt 
to preserve the older traditions in their Oriental setting.
The last refuge of Neoplatonism was the academy at 
Athens. But in a.d. 529 it was closed by Emperor Justinian, 
the property confiscated, the teaching of pagan philosophy for­
bidden, and the few remaining philosophers driven into exile 
in Persia. The future belonged to Christianity.
III. Paralleling Christian Catechetical School
1. 
A
lexandrian C
enter Exerts Pow
erful Influence.—
 
And now, from the latter part of the second century onward, 
a Christian Catechetical (or theological) School flourished in 
Alexandria, addressing itself to the propagation of the Chris­
tian faith among the cultured classes. Its first known head, 
or teacher, was Pantaenus.29 But it was under Clement, and 
particularly under the presiding genius of Origen, that the 
Catechetical School rose to its greatest height, attracting not 
only Christians but large numbers of pagans and Gnostics 27 
as well. It was here in this school that the first attempt was 
made to reduce the individual doctrines of Christianity to a 
single unified system—and this distinctly under the influence 
of Neoplatonic principles.
25 Ibid., p. 332; Draper, op. cit., vol. 1, pp. 215, 216.
'M Pantaenus (d. c. 190), probably of Sicily, and first-known head of the Alexandrian 
Christian Catechetical School, was converted from paganism to the Christian faith. He taught at 
Alexandria, where he greatly influenced his more celebrated disciple, Clement of Alexandria. 
According to Eusebius (H.E., V.x2) he preached the gospel in India, and others say in 
Ethiopia.
27 The Gnostics differed chiefly in that they later had little sympathy with the spirit of 
Christianity or with the belief in the divine authority of the Old and New Testaments. They 
paid no regard to the historical.
716
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
After Origen’s enforced retirement to Caesarea in 231, 
the school came more directly under episcopal control, with 
Heracles, Dionysius, Theognostus, and Pierius, and successors, 
on to Didymus. (See Tabular Chart E, page 702.) It is to be 
remembered that this Catechetical School existed alongside 
the University (Museum) of Alexandria, and continued to 
attract students from distant parts.
2. Characterized by Speculation and Allegorization. 
—As Alexandria had been the focal point of speculative phi­
losophy, especially since the Christian apologists had earlier 
been pagan philosophers, it was but natural that Alexandrian 
Christianity should assume a definitely speculative form. And 
further, as the Alexandrian theologians had been Platonists 
(with admixtures of Pythagoreanism and Stoicism), it was not 
surprising that, though they rejected paganism as such, they 
should remain definitely Neoplatonist, seeking to explain Chris­
tianity according to the Platonic categories—much as Philo 
two centuries prior had attempted to explain Judaism—and 
likewise along allegorical lines, with conscious indebtedness to 
Philo,28 as well as directly back to Plato.
3. Shadows Deepen Into Midnight of Middle Ages.— 
Clement and Origen, the philosophical theologians, were thus 
the chief architects and builders in this reconstruction. It was 
their genius that framed the arguments that removed the ir­
reconcilable disagreements between Scripture and pagan phi­
losophy—by the simple device of allegorizing away the intent 
of Holy Scripture when conflict was inevitable if taken literally. 
Safely entrenched behind this effective contrivance, they could 
resist the assaults of Scripture against the devious postulates 
of Neoplatonism.
As time went on the entire contour of the faith of the 
church came to be altered. And when the empire collapsed 
the church began to assume first the guidance and eventually 
the control of the state, welding the far-flung Christian groups
28 A. H. Newman, A Manual of Church History, vol. 1, pp. 271, 272.
into a single Catholic body with a definitely formulated ortho­
dox creed, with Innate Immortality as one of its central dog­
mas and all that sprang therefrom. And in it all, as the late 
A. K. Rogers, formerly of Butler College, significantly says:
“Personal immortality, which in Greek philosophy had either been 
rejected outright or held with much hesitation, becomes a fundamental 
article of the Christian creed.”29
That is why we have traced it with such fullness through 
these crucial centuries.
So it was that Neoplatonism came to overshadow the light 
of the gospel hope of immortality through the resurrection, 
until the shadows deepened into the settled midnight of the 
Middle Ages. The Christian faith had been remodeled. And 
when the barbarian nations of Europe, into which Rome was 
divided, were converted in large numbers to the reconstructed 
Christian faith, it was a norm similar in many respects to their 
pre-Christian concepts.
Thus Platonism, having found its way into pagan Rome, 
in due course made its entry into the Roman Church. And as 
Doctor Salmond rightly observes: “The Platonic doctrine is 
first and last a doctrine of the persistence of the souls.” 80
That is its significance for us.
NEOPLATONISM—JEWISH, PAGAN, AND CHRISTIAN 
717
20 Rogers, op. cit., p. 192.
30 Salmond, The Christian Doctrine of Immortality, p. 145.
CHAPTER 
FORTY-TWO
Philo Judaeus Fuses Platonic 
Philosophy With Judaic Doctrine
Indulgence must again be asked for having to traverse 
another tedious section of this historical journey. But it is 
inescapable if we are to become aware of the grave departure 
that had now developed in Jewry—a digression that drew a 
major segment farther and farther away from the Mosaic faith 
of their forebears, as concerns the soul. It is admittedly a bar­
ren stretch, neither pleasant nor edifying to pass through. But 
it is an integral part of the fateful deviation now under way. 
And we must not lose sight of the fact that it is not only essen­
tial for the record but necessary in order to understand the 
emasculation of the faith of the chosen people, now far 
advanced.
I. Alexandria, Seat of Two Paralleling Schools
1. 
On Borderline of Old and New.—Philo Judaeus (c. 
20 b.c.-c. a.d. 47), most distinguished of all Hellenic Jewish 
scholars and famous as a philosophical mystic, exegete, and 
author, was a native and lifelong resident of Alexandria. He 
stood on the borderline between the old and the new. His 
life completely spanned the thirty-three-year life of Jesus, and 
he was contemporaneous not only with the public ministry of 
Christ but with the early activities of the apostles, as well.
Philo came from a rich and influential priestly family, 
and according to Josephus, had a Pharisaic background. He 
received the highest Jewish and Greek education the times
718
afforded, was intimately acquainted and fascinated with Pla­
tonic philosophy, and quoted learnedly from Plato, Aristotle, 
and the Stoics. But Philo was an Alexandrian Platonic Jew, 
not a Palestinian Zoroastrian Jew. He exerted considerable 
influence in political life, and at thirty-nine headed a five-man 
embassy to plead before Emperor Caligula, at Rome, for the 
religious rights of the Jews.1
2. Blends Various Views Into Single System.—In reli­
gious outlook Philo was an eclectic—gathering his teachings 
from various contemporary philosophical systems, as well as 
from basic Jewish sources, weaving them together into a single 
system. According to Philo-specialist Dr. H. A. Wolfson,2 he 
was steeped in both the spirit and the teachings of Plato, but 
in modified and adapted form. In fact, he was called the “Jew­
ish Plato.” His allegorical system of interpretation enabled 
him to “discover,” he believed, much of the Greek philosophy 
hidden in the Old Testament. And he maintained that the Old 
Testament in its deepest meaning and real significance is to 
be understood allegorically.
Philo forthrightly condemned idolatry, the gods and demi­
gods of the nations, the deification of kings, and all animal 
worship—rams, goats, dogs, cats, birds, and fishes—as well as 
the deification of the dead. He likewise denounced mythology 
and the mysteries. But he used Greek terminology to describe 
the beliefs and institutions of Judaism/ thereby leading to 
confusion and compromise. And, most significant of all, he 
employed the allegorical method of interpretation whereby 
“true knowledge” is extracted from the letter of the law, 
though often in direct conflict therewith.
3. Pre-eminent Champion of Immortal-Soulism.—This 
famous Alexandrian scholar became the most conspicuous cham­
1 In searching into the life and teachings of Philo we have followed the lead of H. A. 
Wolfson, Philo, 2 vols.; James Drummond, Philo Judaeus, 2 vols.; E. R. Goodenough, An Intro­
duction to Philo Judaeus; I. H. 
Levinthal, Judaism; H. A. A. Kennedy, Philo’s Contribution 
to Religion; R. H. Charles, A Critical History of the Doctrine of a Future Life; and other 
authoritative books and periodical articles.^
2 Dr. Harry A. Wolfson, Austrian-born Jew, and professor in Hebrew literature and 
philosophy at Harvard University, is doubtless the greatest American authority on Philo.
3 H. A. Wolfson, Philo, vol. 1, pp. 88, 89.
PHILO FUSES PHILOSOPHY WITH JUDAIC DOCTRINE 719
720
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
pion of the immortality-of-the-soul postulate of his day, which 
he derived chiefly from Plato and expounded in Platonic terms. 
Flourishing at the beginning of the Christian (or “Common”) 
Era, he contributed materially to the acceptance of the Innate- 
Immortality concept among both Jews and Christians, together 
with the scheme of eternal rewards and punishments that 
were inseparable.
Philo’s twofold contribution as to the nature and destiny 
of man might be said to be his rejection of the resurrection 
of the body and his espousal of the natural immortality con­
cept. One group of the oncoming fathers of the Christian 
Church such as Clement of Alexandria and Origen, borrowed 
heavily from Philo, their predecessor and fellow townsman, 
and were strongly influenced by him. (For Philo’s time place­
ment and category listing, see Inter-Testament Tabular Chart 
D on page 658.)
II. Basic Features of Philo’s Teaching Concerning Man
1. 
“Revelation” the Distinguishing Principle of Neo­
platonism.—When the intellectual center of Hellenism was 
shifted from Athens to Alexandria, Jewry was established 
there also. The postulates of Hellenism were based solely 
upon intellectual investigation, research, and analysis. On the 
contrary, the tenets of Judaism were based upon divine revela­
tion. When, therefore, two such intellectual forces as Hellenism 
and Judaism met—representing Grecian philosophy and the 
Jewish religion—there was bound to be an encounter that 
would inevitably result in new alignments.
This conflict between Hellenism and Judaism was basically 
a spiritual struggle, and eventuated in a definite change of 
thought and belief on the part of a large segment of Jewry. 
How to reconcile their fundamental differences was the ques­
tion confronting Philo. The figurative interpretation of revela­
tion provided the needed bridge. So the antagonisms were 
reconciled by the ingenious but compromising device of alle-
M e
n
 r 
k
o  
v / / 
V// f'/’A’fAC
•r tu inn
vnn<'i
’/’A/Ô
’I’iftilMI
»•///vv V'i
/ / 
\ \ * y j> fi
t<\K is.fii 
AU 
Hf
NA/’/xW'/j
m
i
n
e
 y
 t
*/'////A A./
A/A\////>
« 
 
 
 
Philo Did More Than Any 
Other Jewish Leader of His 
Day in Setting Aside the 
Teachings of Holy Writ on 
the Nature and Destiny of 
the Soul.
gorizing the Scriptures to bring about essential accord with 
Platonic philosophy.
It was this that laid the foundation of Neoplatonism—a 
philosophy involving in its formative period the syncretism 
of Alexandrian-Jewish and Hellenistic-Platonic philosophy. 
It was distinguished from that of pure Platonic philosophy by 
the adding of the principle of revelation contained in the new 
philosophy, both in its early Jewish and later Christian forms. 
And the originator and pre-eminent representative of this new 
syncretism was Philo.
He held to the inspired character of the Old Testament 
and the truth of the Jewish religion. But, as stated, while so
721
722
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
doing he also introduced and sustained his philosophical con­
cepts by allegorizing his Jewish beliefs. Thus the theology of 
Philo was clearly a blend of Platonism and Judaism.
2. Philo’s Concept of God Was a Synthesis.—Philo 
held fast to the personality of God—incorporeal, invisible, 
eternal, self-existent, universal, omniscient, omnipotent, per­
fect, and self-determining. The world is His creation, and 
He is surrounded by ministering spirits. But, in accordance 
with the Platonic idea of transcendence and the Stoic concept 
of divine imminence, Philo regarded God as exalted above all 
contact with matter, which he held to be essentially evil. He 
sought to bridge this gap with creative and regulatory powers 
and provisions, combining Jewish angelology with the Stoic 
Logos concept and Platonic ideas—such as the view that God’s 
breath is that which gives life.
Combining Neoplatonism, Neo-Pythagoreanism, and old 
Egyptian philosophy with Jewish concepts, Philo thus exalted 
the Supreme Being above all contact with the visible world. 
And he explained all passages of the Old Testament that 
seemed inconsistent with such exaltation as referring not to 
the Supreme Being but to a derived being, or Logos.
To Philo, God stands apart from the world in ineffable 
and ultimate perfection, connected with mundane affairs only 
by a series of lesser intelligible forms or powers—sometimes 
as in Platonic concepts, sometimes akin to Jewish angelology, 
and sometimes as an emanation from God’s nature. This con­
cept has its consummation in Philo’s doctrine of the Logos— 
the mediator of God’s revelation of Himself.
3. Greek and Hebrew Thought Blended by Allegoriza- 
tion.—Philo sought to blend his honored Jewish inheritance 
with his newly acquired Hellenistic culture, so as to reconcile 
and retain the “treasures” of both Platonic philosophy and 
Jewish faith. He therefore sought to fuse the best of Greek 
philosophy with the leading concepts of the Old Testament, 
as well as current Rabbinism. To this end he adapted and
adopted Greek philosophical thought. Most conspicuously he 
accepted, in accommodated form, the Platonic concept of rela­
tionship between God, the world, and man. As mentioned, 
he bridged the gulf with his Logos philosophy and accom­
plished the synthesis by his allegorical method of interpreta­
tion.
Under this scheme all Scripture became figurative and 
symbolic. In this way a passage could mean almost anything, 
according to the fancy of the interpreter. Thus allegorization 
became the universal solvent for every perplexity and cared 
for everything opposed to his new philosophical concepts. He 
still believed the law to be the way to goodness, and faith in 
Jehovah the entrance to eternal life—but all in accommodated 
form and readjusted setting and phrasing. He considered that 
in Babylon and Jerusalem the Jews were largely worshiping 
the past; in Alexandria they faced the future.
Philo’s was a systematic attempt to show the inner harmony 
between Plato and Moses; that is, between Jewish religious 
thought and Greek philosophy. In discovering this “higher 
sense” of Scripture, Philo believed he had penetrated the outer 
shell to get the inner kernel of what he conceived to be 
fundamental philosophic truth. He even declared that those 
who held to the literal interpretation of Scripture were un­
worthy and superstitious. The celebrated German Hellenist 
professor of the University of Gottingen, Karl Otto Muller, 
long ago stated the facts succinctly:
“The object of Philo ... is to harmonize the philosophy of religion, 
which he had derived from a study of Plato, Aristotle, and other eminent 
heathen writers, with the letter of the books attributed to Moses. And 
he effects this reconciliation by an unlimited use of allegory.” *
4. 
Strange Conflicting Concepts of Logos.—In Philo’s 
Logos doctrine, as in the countless aeons of the later Christian 
Gnostics,5 we see attempts to mediate between the Supreme 
God and those aspects of the material world that were con­
PHILO FUSES PHILOSOPHY WITH JUDAIC DOCTRINE 723
4 Muller, History of the Literature of Ancient Greece, vol. 3, p. 175.
5 See p. 854 ff.
724
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
sidered unworthy of contact with Him. Philo’s Logos was the 
highest of the divine forces, the soul of the world, the inter­
preter and revealer of God. His doctrine of the Logos combined 
Jewish, Platonic, and Stoic concepts.
His Logos was the vicegerent of God, the mediator between 
the Eternal, the material, and the ephemeral. It embodied the 
Platonic idea of good, the Stoic World-Soul, and the Jewish 
Shekinah and eternal High Priest. It was at once the Angel of 
the Lord, Eternal Wisdom, the Mind of God, the Shadow of 
God, the First-born, Captain, Supplicator—but not a person, 
as such. Its involvements are confusing and difficult to grasp, 
but they are essential to his view.
And Philo’s Logos is baffling because he employs the term 
in so many different senses—as a divine faculty of thought; 
as thinking and creative activity; as the result of thinking; 
the ideal world itself; and the active, divine principle, potency, 
or agency in the visible world. His very obscurity and ambiguity 
created endless speculation.0
Just as Philo equated Logos with the mind in the intel­
ligible world, so he came to use it as the equivalent of the 
mind that is in man. Moreover, in Plato, whom Philo followed, 
Logos is used as an equivalent of the “immortal soul” (Timaeus 
46d, 69d-e), the “supreme form of soul within us” (Timaeus 
90a), and the “rational” soul part of us (Republic iv. 439d). 
So the Logos within is part of the pre-existent Logos—thus 
“the mind with and the mind above us” (Heres 236).7 Such 
was Philo’s subtle and conflicting concept of the Logos. Now 
we come to the soul question.
5. 
Flash Pictures of Philo’s Immortal-Soulism.—We 
now note in general terms 8 the highest points in Philo’s teach­
0 Wolfson, in the index to his two-volume Philo, lists under Logos the following divisions, 
among others: Logos is “the mind of God identical with His essence”—also the “created 
thinking mind . . . the totality of ideas ... or the_ totality of powers”—“immanent in the 
world”—the “instrument of divine providence.” Logos is also described as “angel,” “archangel,” 
“bond of all existence of the universe,” “eternal,” “incorruptible,” the “first-born son of 
God,” “image of God,” “a second God,” “second to God,” “shadow of God,” “mediator,” 
“harmonizer of the opposites,” “source of the powers,” “wisdom,” and even Messiah. AH 
this and more (vol. 2, pp. 518, 519).
7 Ibid., vol. 1, p. 393.
8 We shall seek to hold to as simple a form as possible Philo’s complex, involved, and
ing, in order to get an over-all view of his concepts in the aggre­
gate. The documented particulars will follow in Section III.
Man, according to Philo, has both an irrational (or ani­
mal) soul and a rational soul. The first is had in common with 
all living creatures; the second is not possessed by animals. 
The multitude of pre-existent, unbodied souls in the heavens 
include the angels. But rational souls descend from their eternal 
dwelling place and enter human bodies that are under the 
dominance of the irrational souls. An inevitable battle of the 
two souls ensues, man’s free will deciding the outcome for 
eternity. And Philo defines immortality as eternal persistence, 
or existence.
Philo held that the breath of life is nothing less than the 
breath of God, and that the rational soul of man is uncreated. 
Deity and matter, he taught, are existent from all eternity. Thus 
he believed that while man’s body, formed from the ground, 
is mortal, his uncreated rational soul is immortal. Virtue is 
the tree of immortal life. And as salt—symbol of the perpetuity 
of all things—is a preservative, so is the soul as relates to man.
But sin changed a happy and immortal life into a wretched 
and mortal one for the body. The death threatened was two­
fold—of the man, and of the soul. The death of man, he states, 
is the separation of the soul from the body; and the death of 
the soul is its seduction by evil and corruption. To die is 
actually to live—in a doomed relationship. But the original 
Genesis episode of the Garden of Eden was an allegory, accord­
ing to Philo.
The ethereal heavens are the fatherland of all the rational 
souls. And upon the death of the body the rational soul returns 
to the realm of the unbodied, among the stars, which also are 
or have souls. As to the punishment of the wicked, Philo is 
sometimes hazy and sometimes contradictory. But man’s free 
will and personal choice justifies any due punishment.
According to Philo, there is (1) no formal general judg-
PHILO FUSES PHILOSOPHY WITH JUDAIC DOCTRINE 725
wearisome speculations that wrought such confusion, first among his own people and later 
among the Christians. Only by grasping just what Philo said and did can we see how, why, 
and when a large segment of the church went astray on the origin, nature, and destiny of man.
726
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
ment, (2) no resurrection of the body, but (3) everlasting 
punishment of the wicked. Such are the three summarizing 
conclusions concerning Philo, according to R. H. Charles.9
To Philo the body is the source of evil—the corpse, the 
coffin, the tomb of the soul. But, as noted, the unbodied soul 
does not die. It returns to the heavens, among the stars, whence 
it came. It is inextinguishable and deathless. The ladder of 
Jacob’s dream, reaching from earth to Heaven, is the airway 
extending from earth to Heaven for these immortal souls— 
some of whom descended to earth to dwell in mortal bodies. 
Such a concept is, of course, definite pre-existence of a sort.
Philo believed in appointed, contrasting localities (“above” 
and “below”) as the abode of the disembodied spirits of good 
and wicked men. The good dwell in the heavenly regions; the 
bad are banished to the nethermost part of Hades, with the 
incurably evil to Tartarus. Philo is at times contradictory in 
this area, but he clearly indicates that death is not the end of 
punishment—it is only the beginning.
6. 
Philo’s Responsibility 
in 
the Great Departure.— 
Philo’s bold but subtle allegorical expositions were impressed 
not only upon his own age but upon succeeding centuries. 
His influence upon the Alexandrian Christian school of the­
ology was profound. Clement of Alexandria, and particularly 
Origen, as well as other Latin Fathers, cited him freely and 
approvingly. And his allegorical principle of interpretation of 
Scripture soon became an accepted form of Biblical exegesis 
in a large segment of the Christian Church. Philo did for 
Jewry what Origen did later for Christianity.
Philo’s actual perversion of Bible truth through this alle­
gorical method is sensed only as one sees how he cast away 
the true witness of the Inspired Word by vitiating its true 
meaning through adoption of the philosophical vagaries of 
Plato, not only in accommodated form but in the actual 
superseding of the verities of Holy Scripture. Despite his
8 Charles, The Doctrine of a Future Life, p. 314.
brilliance, his learning, and his tremendous influence, Philo 
unquestionably did more than any other single individual of 
the Hebrew race to set aside the original teachings of Holy 
Writ on the origin, nature, and destiny of man. One can 
only add, fearful will be his responsibility.
But only as we get back to the premises upon which Philo 
postulated his conclusions are we in a position to evaluate 
the soundness—or the unscripturalness—of his conclusions. 
Only as we examine his foundations are we able to judge the 
trustworthiness of the superstructure he built thereupon. And 
this we must now do because of the tremendous influence 
Philo exerted, first upon his own people and then upon the 
beliefs of a large segment of the early Christian Church. And 
even beyond these his influence was felt upon the teachings 
of Islam.10
III. Scope and Significance of Philo’s Innovation
1. 
Contrives “Agreement” of Biblical and Philosophi­
cal 
“T
ruth.”—The allegorical method, developed into a 
system by Philo, was the interpretation of a text in terms of 
another concept, at the same time discarding the literal, histori­
cal element. Historical narratives were thus neutralized as 
merely parabolic or figurative. But this device antedated Philo. 
In Jewish tradition the Jew had not considered himself bound 
to take Scripture literally—free interpretation being followed 
in the Oral Law.
This was accentuated when Judaism came in contact with 
Greek philosophy and was strengthened by the translation of 
the Septuagint. And now this principle of free, unfettered 
interpretation was developed by Philo into an actual philo­
sophical system of allegorical interpretation that brought him 
to positions startlingly similar to many of Plato’s postulates, 
which he followed.
PHILO FUSES PHILOSOPHY WITH JUDAIC DOCTRINE 727
10 Wolfson, op. cit., vol. 1, p. 159.
728
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
There was this distinct difference however: As already 
noted, Greek philosophers, like Plato, did not regard their 
writings as inspired revelations. They considered them more 
as anticipations of truth. Philo, on the other hand, regarded 
Scripture as an inspired revelation—as knowledge and truth 
revealed by God. But, he reasoned, the truth of inspiration 
must be in agreement with the truth of philosophy and reason, 
for truth is truth wherever found. And the fact that the 
Greeks had discovered by reason what the Jews had derived 
by revelation, showed that it must have been a gift from God.
Therefore, he concluded, there must be underlying agree­
ment between the two—if only it could be discovered. And that 
basic accord was secured by Philo through the deliberate alle- 
gorization of Scripture. Anything contrary to reason was deftly 
explained away under this effective procedure.
2. 
Strikes 
at Origin 
and Destiny 
of 
Man.—On the 
existence and unity of God, the creation and unity of the world, 
and the revelation and abiding character of the law there was 
no problem. The subordination of philosophy to Scripture 
here was the subjection of reason to faith. But from there on 
subtle but grave departures began to obtrude. Philo assumed 
that Scripture has a twofold meaning, external and internal— 
(1) the literal or seeming, and (2) the underlying or real, 
the allegorical meaning, perceived by the initiated, being its 
true intent. This latter artifice Philo followed without reserve. 
It was his chosen method for reconciling the outwardly variant 
positions.
The result was a Neoplatonic and Neo-Pythagorean con­
cept of Creation. The historicity of the Genesis story was thereby 
dismissed as a “myth,” “mythical nonsense,” and “folly.” 11 In 
this way Philo took the terms of Scripture, voided their estab­
lished meaning, and gave them a philosophical turn. Thus 
he struck a body blow at the divine and only authoritative 
revelation of the origin, nature, and destiny of man.
h Ibid., p. 121.
3. 
Genesis Narrative of Creation Vitiated.—As just 
noted, this stroke was directed particularly at the inspired 
record of the origin and destiny of man. Everything—names, 
numbers, events, sequence, historical narration—was all sub­
jected to relentless allegorization. The creation of the world 
in six days, the creation of the lower animals, the bringing into 
existence of Adam, the formation of Eve, the Garden of Eden, 
the tree of life, the four rivers, the talking serpent, the tempta­
tion and the Fall, the expulsion from Eden, the garments of 
skin—all came under the devastating sweep of allegorization, 
as being “greatly at variance with truth.”12
Through the allegorical method the “true knowledge” 
was extracted from the “letter” of the account. The result was 
revolutionary, as Philo plays upon the two accounts of the 
creation of man (of Gen. 1:27 and 2:7), setting one against the 
other.
While this is a grave indictment, it is fully borne out by 
the facts. The amount of Hellenistic cosmogony and meta­
physics that Philo reads out of (or rather into) the first three 
chapters of Genesis is utterly amazing. “Days,” he says, do not 
represent time, which (following Plato) came only with the 
movement of heavenly bodies in space. The number of days 
is merely “ideal,” not a restricted space of time. Actually, Philo 
held that all things came into existence simultaneously. “ ‘It 
is quite foolish to think that the world was created in six days 
or in a space of time at all.’ ”
That obliterated the days of Creation week.
The elements were, he held, eternally existent. The “six” 
days simply meant creation or formation according to a plan, 
a pattern.13 The numerological significance of “one” to “seven” 
is played up. Man was made in the image of God, resembling 
God, and aspiring to association with God. But as in Plato’s 
Timaeus (69c), man was not made by God alone, or directly, 
but by assistants. “Let us make man” (Gen. 1:26) is cited as
PHILO FUSES PHILOSOPHY WITH JUDAIC DOCTRINE 729
730
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
proof.14 So, following Plato again, God was relieved from the 
causation of evil.
In the second story of Creation and the Fall, man is made 
of “mother earth” and spirit. Fashioned of the best materials, 
man was infused with the “breath of God,” and became one 
with the heavenly intelligences. As to the “mythical” formation 
of Eve out of the side of Adam, literalism here is characterized 
by Philo as unworthy.15 The “tree of life” is piety, greatest 
of all virtues, by which the soul is established as immortal.
The downfall of man came with the creation of woman, 
and physical desire. The serpent is a symbol of “pleasure,” 
while the speaking serpent is dismissed as a myth. The “gar­
ments” of skins were to point out “frugality,” and as more noble 
than a purple robe.18 God made a body for Adam wherein He 
clothed the mind as with a garment of skin.17 God’s purpose, 
Philo held, was to present a grand object lesson.
4. 
Like All Living Creatures Man Has “Animal” Soul. 
—Philo held that there are three classes of “living beings”— 
“animals, men, and incorporeal souls.” 18 After discussing “ir­
rational [or animal] souls” (the souls of “lower animals”— 
“fishes, birds, and land-animals”), he describes these created 
“besouled” creatures, or “living souls,” as having “sensation, 
imagination, impulse.” 19 These irrational souls are “earthlike,” 
“corporeal.”20 “The irrational soul is corruptible . . . and 
mortal . . . , whereas the rational soul or mind is incor­
ruptible . . . and immortal.”21
Philo even follows Plato in holding that the animal, or 
irrational soul of man, with its body, was created by a sub­
ordinate god, or “secondary deities”—God’s co-workers, some­
thing like the Gnostic Demiurge concept.22 The term soul 
might therefore mean either an “irrational” or a “rational” soul 
or both.23
» Ibid., 
pp. 269, 270, 274, 286, 387.
15 Ibid., 
pp. 120, 121. 
111 Ibid., pp. 
121, 122. 
” Ibid., p. 118.
« Ibid., p. 366.
18 Ibid., 
pp. 385, 386. 
20 Ibid., pp. 386, 387. 
21 Ibid., pp. 395, 396.
23 Ibid., pp. 386, 387; see also pp. 270, 274, 286.
23 Ibid., p. 362.
PHILO FUSES PHILOSOPHY WITH JUDAIC DOCTRINE 731
Philo expressly states that man also possesses this irrational 
soul, with its “substance,” in the corporeal form. Sometimes 
he suggests that the life “blood” or “breath” is the “essence” 
of the irrational soul.24 He also calls the soul the “seed,” or the 
“principle of the generation of animals”—in which animal 
life differs from plants. And Wolfson interestingly observes: 
“The three views which he [Philo] happens to mention can 
be identified with three views known in Greek philosophy.” 26 
Philo elsewhere speaks of the irrational soul as the “nutritive” 
and “sensitive” faculties, or the “seven faculties, namely the 
five senses, speech, and generation.”28 So, Philo held that 
“irrational souls” were created with bodies, and “rational souls” 
without bodies.27
5. 
Man Also Has Immortal “Rational Soul.”—Accord­
ing to Philo, while animals have only an “irrational,” or animal, 
soul (shared by man), man also has, in addition, a “rational 
soul or mind.” Thus Philo says: “ ‘I . . . am many things, soul 
and body, and of soul there is a rational part and an irrational 
part.’ ” 28 Man is thus a duad. And again like Plato in Timaeus, 
Philo holds that the rational soul was “formed by God Him­
self,” coming direct from God to all men. And he declares 
that it is the “ ‘image of God.’ ” He says the “ ‘human 
mind’ ” is a “ ‘fragment of that divine and blessed soul from 
which it cannot be separated.’ ”29 Again following Plato 
(Timaeus, 4Id), Philo says that the number of rational souls 
is “ ‘equal in number to the stars,’ ” but “prior to their descent 
into bodies they had their abode in the air.” 30
The rational soul descends and enters a body that is 
under the dominance of the irrational soul, and thus sojourns 
in a land “ ‘not its own.’ ” 31 Consequently there is a battle of 
the two souls, with man’s free will deciding the outcome—plus 
divine grace.32 Hence there is justification of punishment for
« Ibid., p. 387. 
23 Ibid., p. 389.
* Ibid., p. 388. 
”Ibid., p. 361.
28 Ibid., p. 389. See also p. 362.
26 Ibid., pp. 389, 390; cf. Charles, Doctrine of a Future Life, p. 473.
30 Wolfson, op. cit., vol. 1, p. 390.
33 Ibid., p. 456.
32 Ibid., p. 431.
732
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
man’s wrong decisions and conduct.33 The body is ever the 
foe of the soul.
6. 
Curious Theory of “Unbodied Souls.”—But that is 
not all. Wolfson summarizes Philo’s curious teaching on “un­
bodied souls or angels,” with the ethereal heavens as their 
“storeroom”:
“Of the rational incorporeal and immortal souls created by God 
and stored away in the air not all descend into bodies. These incorporeal 
souls, he says, ‘are arranged in companies that differ in rank.’ The dif­
ference between these companies of incorporeal souls is that some of 
them are ‘endowed with a diviner constitution’ or ‘are of a perfect purity 
and excellence,’ and hence ‘have never deigned to be brought into union 
with any of the parts of earth,’ or ‘have no regard for any earthly quarter,’ 
or ‘have never felt any craving after the things of the earth.’ ”34
This, Wolfson observes, frankly reflects Plato’s position 
in his Timaeus and his Phaedrus, as regards individual “un­
bodied souls” that mount upward with wings. But some, losing 
their wings, take upon themselves “ ‘an earthly body.’ ” To 
Plato, in the Phaedrus (246a, c), “where the souls are said to 
be uncreated,” the difference between “the two groups of 
incorporeal souls” must have existed from eternity. And in 
the Timaeus (41d, e), “where the souls are said to be created,” 
their descent is attributed to fate. But to Philo, the souls are 
created,35 and the differences result from God’s free determining 
will.
Philo holds that those incorporeal rational and immortal 
souls which do not descend into bodies—in other words, be­
come incarnated—are “what Scripture calls angels, though 
some philosophers call them demons.” The Greek term angelos 
means “heavenly messenger.” And again there is further sim­
ilarity to Plato,38 who also holds that demons are souls (Phae­
drus 246a, d, e). And Philo declares that these statements 
about angels and demons are not myths.37
7. 
Role of Unbodied Soul-Angels.—According to Philo 
the original abode of these incorporeal unbodied souls—as 
angels (or demons) invisible to us—is “ ‘in the air.’ ” That 
is, they “ ‘range through the air’ ” and inhabit the ethereal 
heavens. But this too is patterned after Plato.38 Plato also has 
those angels conducting men to the judgment after death, but 
Philo does not mention such a function.39 In fact, he does not 
teach a general and final judgment.40 He does speak, however, 
of the return of immortal souls to the divine or heavenly 
world to dwell among the angels.41
These incorporeal-soul-angels, according to Philo, are 
“instruments of divine providence,” exercising care over the 
world as a whole and over mankind in particular. They have 
“ ‘charge and care of mortal man.’ ” They are messengers and 
intermediates, or “ ‘middle creatures.’ ” This contention Philo 
supports by Jacob’s dream of the ladder, with the angels 
ascending and descending.42 They are God’s “ ‘lieutenants,’ ” 
he states, His servants, ministers, “powers,” His “‘divine army.’”
He interprets “ ‘Lord of Sabaoth,’ ” as “ ‘Lord of angels,’ ” 
or “ ‘Lord of the powers.’ ” Hence the angels are a “ ‘most 
sacred company.’ ” 43 And these intermediaries are necessary, 
according to both Plato and Philo, because God does not 
mingle or converse with man,44 but is remote from him. So 
they are part of God’s plan and provision for directly gov­
erning the world.
And, according to Philo, these incorporeal-soul-angels 
sometimes appear to man, as in the cases of Hagar, Abraham, 
Isaac, Jacob, Moses (Gen. 16; 18; 22; 28; 32; Ex. 3; 14).“ 
Furthermore “punitive” angels bring judgments—as on Sodom 
and Gomorrah. And there are also “evil,” or “fallen,” angels. 
These are also called “Sons of God” in Genesis 6, angels who
38 In support Wolfson here cites numerous source statements from the writings of each. 
See pp. 369, 370.
38 Ibid., p. 371.
40 Charles, Doctrine of a Future Life, p. 314.
41 Wolfson, op. cit., vol. 1, p. 372.
43 Ibid., p. 372.
PHILO FUSES PHILOSOPHY WITH JUDAIC DOCTRINE 733
734
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
revolted under Satan," and who wrought confusion with the 
“daughters of men.”
8. Definition and Function of Rational Soul.—Accord­
ing to Philo, this rational soul is not corporeal (blood, etc.) 
but “incorporeal.” " While Plato places its seat in the “head” 
(Timaeus 69e; 90a), Philo says it might also be in the “heart.” 
There is, he says, a reciprocal relation between the irrational 
and the rational soul, or souls." But Philo also connects the 
mind of man with the Logos, as does Plato (Timaeus 46d).
Philo further distinguishes between the two “breaths”— 
just “breath” for the irrational creatures, and the “breath 
of life” that God breathed into Adam. The latter is “ ‘not air 
in motion’ ” but a “ ‘divine power,’ ” which Moses denominated 
the “ ‘image,’ ” a “ ‘divine and invisible breath.’ ” Philo says 
the “rational faculty ... is a ‘fragment of the universal soul.’ ” 
This “ ‘divine spirit,’ which God breathed into Adam” is an 
“ ‘effulgence of the blessed and thrice-blessed nature of God.’ ” "
9. Immortality Defined as “Eternal Persistence.”— 
Then Wolfson immediately notes: “Besides irrationality and 
rationality, corporeality and incorporeality, these two souls of 
men are distinguished one from another by mortality and 
immortality.” 80
“The irrational soul is the corruptible and mortal soul 
whereas the rational soul is the incorruptible and immortal 
soul.” But this distinction likewise reflects the view of Plato 
('Timaeus 69c). And like Plato, Philo says that “the souls 
which are immortal ‘soar back to the place whence they came.’”“ 
But deviating from Plato, Philo considered the immortal ra­
tional soul as “ungenerated” (cf. Phaedrus 246a). And accord­
ing to Wolfson: “In Philo, because of his denial of a universal 
soul, immortality means the eternal persistence of the indi­
vidual soul as a distinct entity82
18 Ibid., pp. 382-385. 
« Ibid., p. 391.
« Ibid., p. 392.
* Ibid., pp. 394, 395.
*> Ibid., p. 395.
“ Ibid., p. 396.
52 Ibid. (Italics supplied.)
10. Resurrection 
and 
Immortality 
of Soul.—In the 
time of Christ, and thus of Philo, the two beliefs of the resur­
rection of the body and the immortality of the soul were 
already in vogue in Judaism. The resurrection was stressed 
primarily among the Palestinian Jews, with Innate Immor­
tality among the Hellenistic Jews. There was constant dis­
cussion over the divergent viewpoints involved. Echoes of 
this appear in the Wisdom and other apocalyptic writings, 
particularly in The Wisdom of Solomon (4:1). In the light 
of this Wolfson comments:
“It is not surprising therefore that Philo should also look for a 
scriptural proof-text in support of the belief in the immortality of the 
soul. The proof-text which he produces is the verse in which God says 
to Abraham, ‘But thou shalt go to thy fathers nourished with peace, in 
a goodly old age.’ Commenting on this verse, Philo says: ‘He here clearly 
indicates the incorruptibility of the soul, when it transfers itself out of 
the abode of the mortal body and returns as it were to the metropolis 
of its fatherland, from which it originally migrated into the body,’ for 
‘what else is this but to propose to him and set before him another life 
apart from the body?' ” “
This, of course, involves a sort of transmigration of souls, 
but not involving the lower animals. As to the resurrection 
aspect, Charles comments,
“As matter was incurably evil there could of course be no resur­
rection of the body. Our present life in the body is death; for the body 
is the ‘utterly polluted prison of the soul.’ ”54
11. Definitive 
Meaning 
of 
“Fatherland” 
of 
Soul.— 
Philo discusses three possible meanings of “fatherland” in 
Scripture, as intimated by the term “thy fathers” (Gen. 15:15), 
to which the rational soul returns. He rejects three views 
already current among Hellenistic Jews, adopted from Greek 
philosophy. These involve, first, “ ‘the sun, moon and other 
stars’ ”—that the soul will “upon the death of the body mount 
to heaven and there assume the spherical shape of stars,” con­
tinuing in that condition until the general “conflagration.”
PHILO FUSES PHILOSOPHY WITH JUDAIC DOCTRINE 735
“ Ibid., pp. 397, 398.
M Charles, Doctrine of a Future Life, p. 314.
736
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Support of such a view was sought in the verse “And they 
that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; 
and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever 
and ever” (Dan. 12:3). Three of the current apocalyptic writ­
ings so affirmed—2 Baruch 51:10, “And they shall be made 
equal to the stars”; 4 Ezra 7:97, “Their face is destined to 
shine as the sun, . . . destined to be made like the light of 
the stars”; and Enoch 104:2, “Ye shall shine as the lights of 
heaven.” 65
The second concept was that immortal souls ascend to 
Heaven, where they live for a certain period of time among 
the “ideas,” evidently based on Plato (Republic 6:509, 510; 
7:517; 10:614 
The third is that upon the death of the 
body the rational soul of each individual is “reabsorbed into 
the universal soul, that is, the primary fire or ether, of which 
it is only a part”—an Aristotelian view.67 But none of these 
was acceptable to Philo. Souls do not become stars, for stars 
are made of the elemental fire, whereas souls are immaterial. 
For the same reason they are not resolved into the primary 
fire or ether.
Nor could he accept the view that souls go back to Heaven 
to dwell among mere “ideas,” for ideas are not in the heavens 
but in the world of intelligence. Wolfson says Philo’s view, 
repeatedly stated, was that—
“the souls, on departing from the bodies, do indeed go back to heaven, 
but there they rejoin that company of souls which have never descended 
into bodies, namely, angels.”68
12. 
Souls Return to Realm of “Unbodied.”—So, accord­
ing to Philo, to be “gathered to his people” is simply a euphe­
mism for death, the “people” being the “people of God,” the 
angels. So he concludes, they are “equal to the angels.” Thus:
“ ‘We who are here joined to the body, creatures of composition and 
quality, shall be no more, but shall go forward to our rebirth to be 
among the unbodied.’ ” 69
55 Wolfson, op. cit., vol. 1, pp. 398, 399.
58 Ibid., pp. 399, 400.
"r Ibid., p. 400.
88 Ibid., pp. 400, 401.
68 Ibid., pp. 401, 402.
Thus the view of Philo that these “immortal souls” find 
their final abode in the heavens by the side of the “angels,” 
accords with the view of Plato in the Phaedrus, that immor­
tal souls soar to the outermost heavens, the “infinite void” 
which surrounds the world. The same view is found in the 
inter-Testament apocalyptic writings, as “They shall be made 
like unto angels” (2 Baruch 51:10), and, “Ye shall become 
companions of the hosts of heaven” (Enoch 104:6). So Heaven, 
the home of the angels, is the ultimate abiding place of the 
immortal souls. Thus Abraham and Jacob were “added to the 
people of God.” Elijah also was “carried up with a whirlwind” 
into Heaven, to be among the angels.80
13. Merges Immortality and Resurrection.—Philo uni­
formly speaks of the immortality of the soul rather than the 
resurrection of the body, and never as distinguished from im­
mortality. Thus he drew upon the “traditional vocabulary of 
resurrection” to set forth his view of immortality. His distinc­
tive mark of resurrection was a “new life,” a “ ‘recovery of 
life,’ ” and was so used in 2 Maccabees 7:9, 23. So Philo 
describes immortality as a “new birth,” turning a corporeal 
resurrection into something incorporeal.81 Thus in this area 
Philo echoes the thoughts and words of Plato—all souls return 
to the place whence they come.
14. Endless Punishment of the W
icked.—Plato had held 
that the rational soul is by its very nature indestructible, and 
cannot be destroyed by the wickedness of the body. Thus the 
soul of the wicked was believed to be “indestructible in the same 
sense as the soul of the righteous.” Plato had likewise taught that 
all that the wickedness of the body can do to the soul is to 
cause it to go through certain stages of reincarnation in beasts
(Timaeus 42b ff.; Phaedrus 249b), or to pass through a cer­
tain period of purification in a kind of Purgatory (Phaedrus 
249a; Laws 905a ff.).
PHILO FUSES PHILOSOPHY WITH JUDAIC DOCTRINE 737
«o Ibid., pp. 402, 403.
24
61 Ibid., pp. 404, 405.
On the other hand, the Stoics held that the soul ceases 
to exist immediately upon the death of the body, and is at once 
absorbed in the universal soul (Diogenes 7:156). Others held 
that such souls continue to exist, but after a period of time 
perish, together with their bodies.®2 Philo refers to these views, 
and in certain places seems to leave the question open. Here 
is one such statement:
“ ‘When we die, is it [the soul] extinguished and destroyed together 
with our bodies, or does it continue to live a long time?’ ”63
It should be noted that in Judaism those who believed in 
immortality “speak of it as a reward reserved only for the right­
eous but denied to the wicked.” Thus the Palestinian author of 
the Psalms of Solomon says, “ ‘The interitance of sinners is de­
struction and darkness’ ” (15:11 [10], cf. 14:6 [9]), and “ ‘sinners 
shall perish forever’” (15:15 [13]; cf. 15:13 [12]). Philo simi­
larly says that “ ‘awaiting those who live in the way of the 
impious will be eternal death’” {Post. 11:39).®® But many 
students of the Hellenistic Jewish literature believe that “in­
asmuch as the belief in the immortality of the soul must have 
come to them from Plato, like Plato, they must also believe in 
its indestructibility.” 65 However, Wolfson rightly observes that—
“the mere fact that Philo is in agreement with Plato as to the immortality 
of the soul does not necessarily mean that he must also be in agreement 
with him as to its indestructibility. Throughout his philosophy, as we have 
seen so far and as we shall see again, Philo constantly modifies Plato’s 
philosophy by introducing into it some new element. The new element 
which he has introduced into the Platonic doctrine of the immortality 
of the soul is the possibility of its destruction in the case of the wicked, 
a possibility which logically follows from his belief that its immortality 
in the case of the righteous is due only to an act of divine providence.” 00
Wolfson refers to the fact that Philo argues that nothing 
in the world is really perishable, inasmuch as the individual 
belongs to the Eternal. Philo discusses the views of Aristotle, 
Plato, and the Stoics with regard to this. But Philo does not
738 
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
°* Ibid., pp. 407, 408.
83 Ibid., p. 408.
M Ibid., p. 409.
86 Ibid., p. 410.
88 Ibid.
PHILO FUSES PHILOSOPHY WITH JUDAIC DOCTRINE 739
use the Aristotle emphasis of the “immortality of the race,” 
but rather the “immortality of the human soul.” He speaks of 
“ ‘the true Hades’ ” (Hades standing in the Septuagint for the 
Hebrew Sheol).87 In another place he says:
“ ‘He [God] banishes the unjust and ungodly soul from himself to 
the furthest bounds and disperses it to the place of pleasures and lusts 
and injustices; that place is most fitly called the place of the impious' ” 
(Congr. 1L57).68
But Wolfson comments further that in addition to punish­
ment in this life, “Philo also believed in the punishment of 
the wicked after death.” 00
15. 
Attested by Scholarly Authorities.—Despite the 
challenges of some, Philo undeniably taught that the torment 
of the wicked is to be eternal. And our findings are confirmed 
by several of the outstanding authorities on Philo. On this 
point R. H. Charles is positive.70 And here is Philo’s own un­
equivocal declaration:
“He who is cast forth by God is subject to eternal banishment. For 
to him who is not as yet firmly in the grip of wickedness it is open to 
repent and return to the virtue from which he was driven, as an exile 
returns to his fatherland. But to him that is weighed down and enslaved 
by that fierce and incurable malady, the horrors of the future must needs 
be undying and eternal: he is thrust forth to the place of the impious, 
there to endure misery continuous and unrelieved.”71
James Drummond, principal of New College, London, and 
later of Oxford, summarized Philo’s teaching on this point 
in the closing paragraphs of his two-volume classic:
“Death is not, as men suppose, an end of punishment. . . . What, 
then, is this death-penalty? It is to live always dying, and to endure, as 
it were, death endless and unending.”72
And H. A. A. Kennedy, professor of New Testament, 
New College, Edinburgh, in his able Philo’s Contribution to 
Religion, likewise concurs as he epitomized Philo’s position
” Ibid., p. 412.
08 Ibid., p. 42.
09 Ibid., note 131.
70 See Charles, Doctrine of a Future Life, p. 314.
71 Philo, “On the Cherubim.” 1:139, in LCL, Philo, vol. 2, p. 9.
72 James Drummond, Philo Judaeus, vol. 2, pp. 322, 323.
740
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
on the punishment of the wicked in this way: “Living in a 
continuous death, enduring, in a sense, a death which is im­
mortal and endless.” 73
Such was the series of revolutionary premises that led 
to Philo’s conclusion. To accept the latter, one must logically 
be prepared to follow the former to be consistent.
16. 
Twin Streams Merge at Alexandria.—From the fore­
going evidence it is therefore apparent that the allied Innate- 
Immortality and Eternal-Torment dogmas, pertaining to the 
origin, nature, and destiny of man, did not first come to light 
in the Christian Church of the second century a.d. Rather, 
they had appeared—even then in derived form (from Plato­
nism—in the Alexandrian segment of Judaism back in the 
second century B.C., more than three hundred years prior.
These revolutionary teachings broke forth, as already 
seen, in various apocalyptic writings—apocryphal, pseudepi- 
graphical, and now finally in advanced form in Philo—from 
whom they flowed on into the Christian Church, which was 
already imbibing the same Platonic philosophy direct from 
its pagan fountainhead. These paralleling streams of Platonic 
teaching now met, merged, and gained the ascendancy in the 
thinking of Clement and Origen and the great Alexandrian 
Catechetical School, having as one of its cardinal principles 
the Innate-Immortality-of-the-soul doctrine, promulgated cen­
turies before by Plato the Athenian philosopher.
73 H. A. A. Kennedy, Philo’s Contribution to Religion, p. 136.
CHAPTER 
FORTY-THREE
Dead Sea Scrolls—Permeated 
Throughout With Conditionalism
The celebrated Dead Sea scrolls, retrieved from the silence 
of centuries in the now-famous caves of the cliffs and ravines 
near Khirbet Qumran, at the northern end of the Dead Sea, 
likewise have a definite bearing upon our quest. The Qumran 
scrolls comprise portions of numerous books of the Old Testa­
ment canon, together with a number of apocryphal and pseu- 
depigraphical writings, commentaries, and special treatises.
Some of these tightly rolled manuscripts—truly treasures 
of the wilderness—were found stored away in tall clay jars 
(at least those of Cave I) for safety.1 They were discovered 
in the first cave in 1947 by a Bedouin shepherd lad looking 
for his goats (with subsequent recoveries and excavations in 
ten other nearby caves). Their genuineness and antiquity have 
now been acknowledged with virtual unanimity by the world’s 
great archeologists.2 These scrolls comprise a series of finds 
without precedent.
With the exploration of these additional caves it became 
apparent that this collection of scrolls had been the treasured 
central library of the community’s headquarters, which has 
since been excavated. Archeological evidence, consisting of
1 Finds in caves subsequent to Cave I were not stored in jars, but scattered-—indicating 
the haste with which these other precious scrolls were secreted in caves, as contrasted with the
care bestowed on the scrolls placed in Cave I.
2 Based on T. H. Gaster, The Dead Sea Scriptures; F. M. Cross, The Scrolls From the
Judaean Desert, The Ancient Library at Qumran and Modern Biblical Studies; F. F. Bruce.
Second Thoughts on the Dead Sea Scrolls; H. H. Rowley, The Covenanters of Damascus ana 
the Dead Sea Scrolls; Millar Burrows, The Dead Sea Scrolls, and More Light on the Dead Sea 
Scrolls; and other book and periodical sources.
741
742
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
scroll wrappings, coins,3 and pottery,4 clearly of the second and 
first centuries b.c. and the first century a.d., all helped to deter­
mine the dating. The radio-carbon test, applied to the 
decomposed cloth in which the scrolls were bound, likewise 
contributed to reducing a probability of dating.5 Thus the 
earlier battle of the scrolls has been largely resolved. (For 
chronological placement and category of the scrolls see Tabular 
Chart D, page 658.)
I. Timing and Teaching of Essene Brotherhood
The date of the composition of the principal non-Biblical 
scrolls, the work of unnamed writers, determined by the afore­
mentioned evidences, may be assigned to the late second and 
first centuries B.C., and first century a.d. Therefore they fall 
largely within the inter-Testament period.6 They are evidently 
from the headquarters library of what would appear to be a 
quasi-ascetic Essene7 brotherhood at Qumran. And most of 
them were obviously hidden in the caves for safekeeping when
3 A convincing summary of coin findings, made by Dr. Leona Running of the faculty of 
Andrews University, drawn from Père de Vaux’s reports in Revue Biblique, covering the five 
excavations, shows that the coins are dated from the time of Antiochus VI (in 136 b.c.), on 
into the Christian Era. They bear the imprint of a score of monarchs, the last being Agrippa II 
(c. a.d. 86).
4 Pottery found in the caves and the Khirbet, and in the earth fill of the tombs, ties 
these evidences all together, under the dating furnished by the coins, and within the period 
indicated by the radio-carbon test of the linen.
5 The total evidence has thus enabled the paleographers and archeologists to date the 
Qumran manuscripts “within the interval of a half century.’’ See Cross, op. cit., p. xii.
8 Gaster places the dates of composition between 170 b.c. and a.d. 68. See his preface,
p. vii.
7 The Esscnes (probably meaning “pious ones”) were a semi-ascetic sect, not mentioned 
in the Bible or Talmud, but referred to by Philo, the elder Pliny, and Josephus. They evidently 
originated in the second century b.c.. came to an end in the first century a.d. At the beginning 
of the Christian Era they numbered about four thousand.
COURTESY, AMERICAN SCHOOLS 
OF ORIENTAL RESEARCH
Dead Sea Scrolls at Qumran 
Yield Their Witness. Left — 
Entrance 
to 
Cliffside 
Cave; 
Center—One 
of 
the 
Tightly 
Rolled Scrolls; Right—Section of 
Scroll Originally Stored in Clay
DEAD SEA SCROLLS—PERMEATED WITH CONDITIONALISM 743
destruction of the center by the Romans under Vespasian was 
imminent.
1. Views of the People of the Scrolls.—In addition 
to their important contribution in shedding light on the trans­
mission of the Old Testament text, this body of writings 
represents the views of a pre-Christian Jewish community, or 
brotherhood, that had given up the world and sought to find 
God in the desert of Judea.8 Gleams of a highly developed 
Messianic hope appear, and mention is made of a Teacher of 
Righteousness, to bring the new age to birth. Signs to be seen 
in the last generation are listed.8 The tone and concept of the 
writings are wholly in conflict with those of their contempo­
raries—Philo of Alexandria and Josephus of Palestine. There 
were some differences, however, between the people of the 
Qumran scrolls and the traditional concept of the Essenes, as 
evidenced by the sources.10 This was evidently due to variant 
views held by the various groups of Essenes.
2. Like Waldenses of Medieval Times.—The people of 
the scrolls considered themselves the “remnant,” the “elect,” 
the true Israel, the “Sons of Truth,” continuing God’s covenant 
and seeking to re-emphasize the teachings of their forefathers in 
the days of Moses. They claimed understanding and vision, 
and felt themselves opposed by Belial and his forces, by men 
of corruption and lies, and the “Sons of Darkness.” 11 They 
sought to escape the political disturbances of the times and the 
venality of the Jerusalemite priests. To avoid pollution, they 
shunned contact with other Jews.
Above all, they sought to interpret the meaning of the 
present world order and the new order coming. They believed 
a great crisis hour to be approaching, when the great “cycle 
of the ages” was about to “complete its revolution.” 12 A final
8 They are charged with celibacy by Josephus. But in the texts of Qumran, women and 
children are mentioned, and in the extensions of a supplemental cemetery the skeletons of 
women and children are found. See Cross, ob. cit., p. 72.
0 F. F. Bruce, Second Thoughts on the Dead Sea Scrolls, chaps. 7, 8.
10 F. M. Cross, Ancient Library at Qumran, p. 71.
11 Caster, ob. cit., pp. 328-331, 335-337.
1S Ibid., p. 7.
744
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
war was to be fought—“The War Between the Sons of Light 
and the Sons of Darkness”—and there would be a titanic 
struggle of the two spirits. The people of Qumran represented 
a revolt against doctrinal departures, and a return to the primi- 
tive Hebrew faith. And in this respect they might be likened to 
the Waldenses of medieval times in the Christian Era, as will 
shortly become evident.
3. 
Approaching End of Present Age.—Their Manual of 
Discipline (or Rule of the Community), their Book of Hymns, or 
Psalms of Thanksgiving, and their War of the Children of 
Light With the Children of Darkness, together with their 
descriptions of the “Final Age,” all bear on the nature and 
destiny ofpman. The scrolls parallel and incorporate many of 
the Conditionalist apocryphal and pseudepigraphical teachings 
of the inter-Testament period that we have just surveyed. And 
they are distinctly apocalyptic in structure.
They believed in a “final conflagration” similar to that 
set forth in the Sibylline Oracles (of c. 140 B.C.), and held in 
common some of the teachings of the pseudepigraphs, such as 
the Conditionalist Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch and The 
Slavonic Book of Enoch. Their teachings on the approaching 
renewal of all things were similar to those of the Book of Jubi­
lees. Evidently the Essenes were largely the producers and 
bearers of the apocalyptic literature of Judaism in this inter- 
Testament period.13
Their eschatological views dwelt on the culminating events 
of the ages—the outcome of death, judgment, the end of the 
present order and establishment of the new. These were obvi­
ously among their chief concerns. Josephus calls them “fatal­
istic.” 14 It is evident that the brotherhood sought to maintain 
the “true” faith in an age of manifest apostasy and confusion, 
before the scenes of final judgment should overtake mankind. 
They have somewhat of a predestinarian tone.
13 Ibid., p. 147.
14 Flavius Josephus Antiquities xiii. 5.9, in The Works of Flavius Josephus, p. 264.
DEAD SEA SCROLLS—PERMEATED WITH CONDITIONALISM 745
4. Major Emphasis Is on Last Things.—In T. H. Gaster’s 
fifteen-page Analytical Index, four pages are taken up with the 
“Last Things,” or eschatological doctrines (pp. 337-340).15 His 
documented analysis indicates that the brotherhood divided 
history into two eras—the “Era of Wrath” or Wickedness, and 
the “Era of Favor.” 19 The “Requital” is called the “Final Era,” 
“Time of Visitation Inquisition,” “Final Judgment,” and “Day 
of Requital,” when “Spirits and angels also will be judged.” 
It is also a time of “conflagration” and of “War against Belial.”17
Among the “Rewards” are listed “Renewal of the World,” 
“Eternal Peace,” “Sevenfold Light,” et cetera.18 “God records 
deeds of men for reward or punishment”; when the righteous 
will acquire a “crown of glory” and a “robe of majesty.” 19 Cross 
points out the impressive fact that these Essenes—
“search the Scriptures and interpret their prophecies eschatologically as 
several scholars have pointed out. Essene exegesis has no real parallel 
either in Rabbinic Judaism, or in Philonic Judaism. Their interpretation 
is neither legalistic nor allegorical. But it falls precisely into the pattern 
of the New Testament’s use of the Old Testament. In both, exegesis is 
‘historical’ (i.e., eschatological), and pneumatic.” 20
Theirs constitutes a unique contribution in a grave 
transition hour.
5. Prominent Place Given to Angels.—According to the 
same Analytical Index, their “Angelology” was elaborate. Angels 
are variously called “divine beings,” “host of heaven,” “host 
of the holy ones,” “eternal host,” “sons of heaven.” Particular 
angels are designated as “Prince of Lights,” “Angel of Dark­
ness,” “Angel of Truth,” “Angel (s) of the Presence,” “Angels 
of Destruction,” and the “Angel of Adversity.” And there are 
guardian angels, protective angels, and participants in the final 
eschatological war.21
15 Dr. Theodor H. Gaster, expert in the period during which the scrolls were written,
is professor of comparative religions at Dropsie College, Philadelphia, and visiting professor of
history of religions at Columbia University. Dr. Gaster works in twenty-nine languages and 
dialects.
18 Gaster, op. cit., p. 337.
« Ibid., pp. 337, 338.
18 Ibid., p. 339.
10 Ibid., p. 340.
20 Cross, Ancient Library at Qumran, p. 163.
21 Gaster, op. cit., pp. 340-342.
746
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
II. Comprehensive Witness of Scrolls on Man’s 
Nature and Destiny
It is now desirable to check the Qumran scrolls system­
atically with a view to tracing their unique witness on Condi- 
tionalism. We shall accordingly follow this aspect through 
consecutively, with documentation. If there is some repetition 
of thought in the several parts, this cumulative witness will 
but enforce the preponderance of the position maintained.
1. Sinners “Perish”; Righteous “Destined” 
for “Life 
Eternal.”—The “Zadokite [or Damascus] Document”—another 
copy of which had previously been discovered in 1896 in a 
Cairo synagogue, and dated about 176 b.c.—which is here 
cited, speaks (i, i-ii, 12) of God’s sparing a “remnant,” not 
consigning them “to utter extinction”22 (The Gaster transla­
tion is followed in all quotations.)23 In contrast, on “God’s 
judgment on the wicked” (ii, 2-13, 14-iii, 12), the Document 
speaks of their “pre-determined” end, and how the ancient 
sinners “perished,” and “became as though they had never 
been.” 24 On the contrary, of the “righteous remnant” (iii, 12- 
iv, 6) it says, “They that hold fast unto Him are destined for 
life eternal.”25 This position is sustained throughout the 
scrolls.
2. Righteous Stand in God’s Presence Forever.—In the 
“Hymn of the Initiants” (Manual of Discipline, cols, x-xi), 
exulting in the “Most High” as the “Fountain of all knowledge, 
Spring of holiness, Zenith of all glory, Might omnipotent,” 28 
the writer declares that “with God lies the judgment of all 
living, and He it is will award each man his deserts.” Note is 
then taken of the “Day of Requital” (note 23: “Doomsday”) 
for the reprobate.27 However, for the righteous God has—
22 Ibid., p. 61.
23 Dr. Caster’s translations are recognized as “free” and popular rather than exactingly
literal but they are the best available.
DEAD SEA SCROLLS—PERMEATED WITH CONDITIONALISM 747
“chosen to posses [jtc] them for ever. He has given them an inheritance in 
the lot of the Holy Beings, ... a fabric of holiness, a plant evergreen, 
for all time to come.” 28
On the contrary, the writer says his sins condemn him to 
“communion with ... all that walk in darkness.” He adds, “For 
a mortal’s way is [not] of himself,” the “judgment lies with 
God.” 29 And this is in contrast with “the favor which Thou hast 
assured to all the mortal elect, to stand in Thy presence for 
ever.” 30 Then he asks, “What is mere mortal man amid Thy 
wondrous works?” And he answers, “He is but a molded shape, 
a thing nipped out of the clay, whose attachment is but to the 
dust.” 31
3. Man 
Created 
for Eter
nity.—In the first psalm of 
thanksgiving (I, 5-39), God is portrayed as, in creation, calling 
into being “spirits immortal” in “the form of holy angels,” 
assigned to guide in the preservation of the order of the uni­
verse.32 “So too” with “man,” he observes; he was “shapen of 
clay”—a favorite expression. He too was created “for all the 
days of time and for ages infinite”—“for all the years of eter­
nity.” 33 But, alas, he became sinful and polluted, “a spirit 
errant and wayward,” and thus coming under judgment. Then 
come the interesting words:
“All things are inscribed before Thee in a recording script, for every 
moment of time, for the infinite cycles of years. . . . No single thing is 
hidden, naught missing from Thy presence.” ®*
But through God’s “lovingkindness” provision is made for 
the “spirit of man” to be “cleansed” of sin’s “taint,” that God’s 
“wonders may be shown forth.” 35 There will be a “just sentence 
upon him.” 38
4. No “Escape” for W
icked in “Final Doom.”—In Hymn 
6 (III, 19-36), the hymnodist thanks God because He has “taken 
a spirit distorted by sin, and purged it of the taint of much
28 Ibid., p. 120. 
as ¡bid., pp. 124, 125.
29 Ibid. 
3« Ibid., p. 125.
30 Ibid., p. 121. 
35 ¡bid., p. 126.
31 Ibid., p. 122. 
3o ¡bid., p. 125.
32 Ibid., p. 124.
748
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
transgression, and given it a place in the host of the holy 
beings,” and ‘‘made a mere man [“molded of clay”] to share 
the lot of the Spirits of Knowledge.” 37 But he notes how, for 
those caught in the “nets of wickedness” and “corruption,” 
there is—
“no hope of escape; when the hour of judgment strikes, when the lot of 
God’s anger is cast upon the abandoned, when His fury is poured forth 
upon dissemblers, when the final doom of His rage falls on all worthless 
things; when the torrents of Death do swirl, and there is none escape.” 38
Reference is then made to “rivers of Belial”:
“Rivers that are like fire which sweeps with flaming sparks devouring 
all that drink their waters—a fire which consumes all foundations of clay, 
every solid bedrock; when the foundations of the mountains become a 
raging blaze, when granite roots are turned to streams of pitch, when the 
flame devours down the great abyss, when the floods of Belial burst forth 
unto hell itself.” 39
Then, he continues, “God thunders forth,” and—
“the hosts of heaven give forth their voice, and the world’s foundations 
rock and reel; when warfare waged by the soldiers of heaven sweeps 
through the world and turns not back until final doom—warfare the 
like of which has never been.” 40
III. Fate of Wicked Is Utter Extinction
1. 
Wicked to Be “Found No More,” “Cut Off,” Wiped 
Out.—In Hymn 8 (IV, 5-40), the dread fate of the wicked 
transgressors is further rehearsed: “Thou wilt sentence all men 
of deceit to be cut off, and all the prophets of error will be 
found no more.” 41
Contrariwise: “They that are pleasing to Thee shall stand 
in Thy presence for ever, and they that walk in the way Thou 
desirest rest firm for all time.” 12
But of “froward men,” God passes “sentence on them 
that they be cut off.” 13 Then the hymnodist adds by way of con­
” Ibid., p. 138. 
« Ibid., p. 144.
» Ibid., p. 139. 
« Ibid.
38 Ibid., pp. 139, 140. 
« ibid p. 145.
40 Ibid., p. 140.
DEAD SEA SCROLLS—PERMEATED WITH CONDITIONALISM 749
trast, “Righteousness lies not with man, nor perfection of con­
duct with mortals. Only with God On High are all works of 
righteousness.” He will “bring unto perfection the life of mortal 
man; that all His works may know how mighty is His power, 
how plenteous His love to all who do His will.” **
But of “wicked men” who oppose His “covenant” the 
writer declares:
“For Thou wilt wipe out all sin, and in Thy bounty it lies to purify 
man from guilt. Man alone cannot do as Thou hast done; for Thou it 
is didst create both the righteous and the wicked.” 48
2. Burned 
Until 
They 
Be 
“Destroyed.”—The same 
paralleling theme is continued in Hymn 10 
(V, 20-VI, 35). 
The “rivers of Eden,” with their “evergreen” boughs, thrive 
“beyond [all bounds],” 46 but the “[plant of Beli]al,” has its 
roots sunk down “into hell.” “In its [fiery] sparks all [infamous] 
men shall be burned; it shall be as a flame devouring the guilty, 
until they be destroyed ” "
The hymnodist closes with a portrayal of the “hosts of 
wickedness” battling the “Warrior” of Heaven, who brings 
forth “His weapons of war.” His legions go forth, “[and there 
shall be no es]cape, for the guilty impulse of men. They shall 
trample it to destruction,” 18 and none shall escape. They shall 
be “cut off when the battle is joined with the presumptious 
[sic].” 19
3. Righteous “Never Die”; Wicked “Wither.”—In Hymn 
14 (VIII, 4-36), the figure is changed. Men are likened to 
“trees.” The righteous “stand planted . . . trees that never die,” 
with roots sunken in the stream of living water.50 But in contrast:
“[The trees of the wicked shall be felled] and sink like lead in 
mighty waters; and a fire shall go forth, and they shall wither. But the 
orchard which I have planted shall bloom for ever.”81
And he adds, in Hymn 15 (IX, 2-X, 12), that as man is 
brought “unto judgment,” those who have “forfeited” the
** Ibid., p. 146. 
« Ibid., p. 157.
45 Ibid. 
«> Ibid., p. 158.
48 Ibid.. p. 155. 
so ¡bid., p. 165.
47 Ibid., p. 156. 
6i Ibid., p. 166. (Brackets in original.)
righteous provisions of God “[are doomed to perdition].”" 
Then he observes, “What is man, mere earth, kneaded out of 
[clay,] destined to return unto the dust.” 53
4. 
Angels Brought to Judgment and H
ell.—In Hymn 
16 (X, 14-XI, 2) he adverts to the fallen angels:
“Howbeit, when I hear how Thou judgest even Thine angels so 
mighty in strength, how that Thou arraignest even the Holy Host, my 
heart is sorely racked, my loins are all a-quake, my sighing reaches down 
into the nethermost abyss and penetrates withal into the chambers of 
hell. . . . For how much more upon man will Thy sentence go forth? 
And will not Thy judgment be wreaked upon all Thy works?” M
Then he joyously declares in Hymn 17 (XI, 3-14) that 
“Thou hast granted it unto man [“molded of clay”] to be 
purged of transgression,” and “to share the lot of Thy Holy 
Beings, to the end that this worm which is man may be lifted 
out of the dust to the height of eternal things,” to join the 
“choir invisible, to be for ever renewed with all things that 
are.” 55
IV. Eternal Redemption and Utter Extinction
1. “Dust” Return 
to “Dust.”—And in Hymn 19 (XI, 
27-XII, 35) the hymnodist repeats an oft-used phrase, “Behold, 
I was taken from dust, nipped out of clay.” But, he continues, 
because of pollution, “that which is molded of clay must needs 
return to dust at the end of its [term,] [and lie again] in the 
dust whence it was taken.” Then he says that the “holy [angels,] 
the everlasting [spirits,] the reservoirs of glory,—even they can­
not tell forth all Thy glory. . . . How much less, then, he who 
returns to his dust?” 56 That is the natural lot of a “creature 
of clay.”
2. “Perdition Eternal” 
vs. “Enduring” 
for All T
ime. 
—In Column XIII, 1-21, the hymnodist asserts:
750 
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
™Ibid., p. 170.
“ Ibid., p. 178
M Ibid., pp. 172, 173. 
f4 Ibid., p. 176.
68 Ibid., p. 184. (Brackets in original.)
“Upon all things that defy Thee Thou bringest perdition eternal. 
So, if mortal men keep faith with Thee, behold, Thou crownest their 
heads with glory everlasting.”67
Then he meditates upon “the hosts of Thy spirits, the 
congregation of Thy Holy Beings,” and God’s creative and 
sustaining power, declaring, “Thou art a God everlasting,” 
and “[that yet the time will come] [when Thou wilt reward the 
righteous,] and the wicked will be utterly [doomed.].” 58
3. Iniquity Cannot Exist in God’s Presence.—The theme 
runs on throughout the remaining hymns. Column XIV, 1-27, 
speaks of “men of truth and sons [of light],” to be “for all 
generations of time and for all the [ages to come.].”69 He 
asserts that “Thou wilt bring eternal doom on all frowardness 
and transgression.” 60 But the Lord forgives “them that repent 
their transgression, but visitest the iniquity of the wicked.” 91
In Column XV, 9-26, the hymnodist asserts that “not by 
the hand of flesh can a mortal order his way.” 92 God “created 
the righteous, ... to heed Thy covenant and walk in Thy 
ways.” He opened “all the straitness of his soul to everlasting 
salvation and perpetual peace unfailing.” But the wicked are 
reserved “for the day of slaughter,” and “great judgments” will 
come upon them.93 He concludes by saying that “Thou art 
a God of truth and [hatest]94 all wrongdoing; and no iniquity 
shall exist in Thy presence.” 95
4. “Mortal Flesh” Redeemed Forevermore.—The clos­
ing Hymn (Columns XVII, 1-XVIII, 30) deals, along with other 
themes, with “divine forgiveness” and “Thanksgiving for divine 
grace.” Though “fire” that devours to the “nethermost hell” 
is the doom that awaits the wicked, the “redeemed” will “serve 
Thee in constancy,” and “their seed” shall be “ever in Thy 
presence.” 90 And the hymnodist implores, “Redeem [my soul,] 
and let the wicked be brought to an end!” 97
DEAD SEA SCROLLS—PERMEATED WITH CONDITIONALISM 751
Ibid., p. 185. 
*» Ibid., p. 189.
58 Ibid., pp. 186, 187. (Brackets in original.) 
01 Ibid., p. 190.
w Ibid., p. 188. (Brackets in original.) 
62 Ibid., p. 191.
Ibid., p. 192. .
64 Alternate reading, “wilt destroy,” in footnote.
<*Ibid., p. 193. 
<" Ibid., p. 197. 
07 Ibid., p. 198.
752
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
In closing, he extols God, who has “done these things,” 
and he asks, “For what is mortal flesh [that Thou shouldst 
so exalt it] and work such wonders with it?” 08 And he repeats 
the thought and phrase “mortal flesh,” and renders praise that 
God redeemed and transformed him, that he “may stand [be­
fore Thee] evermore unshaken in the glow of Perfect Light, 
till the end of time, where [no] darkness is for ever, and where 
all is peace unbounded until the end of time.” “
V. Wicked Cease and Wrong Disappears Forever
1. W
icked W
ill Cease to Exist.—Turning to the “Com­
mentary on Psalm 37” (Fragment A: col. i), verse 10—“Yet 
a little while, and the wicked shall not be. Though I look well 
at his place, he shall not be”—the commentator in the Qumran 
scroll says, “They shall cease to exist, and no wicked man shall 
be found on earth.” 70
2. Final Clash 
of Good and Evil.—The “Triumph of 
God” in the final age portrays “The War of the Sons of Light 
and the Sons of Darkness.” In the Prologue (i, 1-17), the battle 
it pictured as between the “Sons of Light” and the “host of 
Belial.” 71 As to the forces engaged in that final clash the writer 
says, “For [with Thee] in heaven are a multitude of holy beings, 
and armies of angels are in Thy holy abode, to [serve as] Thy 
[legionaries]; and down on earth Thou hast [likewise] placed 
at Thy service the elect of an holy people.” Then he speaks 
of the “charter of [Eternal] Life—an assurance that throughout 
all the epochs of time Thou wilt be their king.” 72 Next, in 
contrast with the “Angel of Light,” and his “spirits of truth” 
he speaks of Belial, the “angel of hostility,” and his evil “angels 
of destruction,” following the “laws of darkness.” 73
3. 
“Everlasting 
Redemption” 
vs. 
“Annihilation.”—
08 Ibid., 
p. 201. (Brackets in original.) 
71 Ibid., pp. 281, 282.
88 Ibid., 
p. 202. (Brackets in original.) 
72 Ibid., p. 2%.
70 Ibid., 
p. 259. 
73 Ibid., p. 298. (Brackets in original.)
DEAD SEA SCROLLS—PERMEATED WITH CONDITIONALISM 753
Then, in “Preparations for Battle” (xv, 1, 2), after speaking 
of the “time of trouble for Israel,” and of the “[visitajtion 
of war upon all nations,” the writer adds: “They that have 
cast their lot with God shall [be blessed] with everlasting re­
demption, but annihilation shall overtake all the wicked na­
tions.” 74
Similarly, in the “New Covenant” (Column 1), in con­
trasting the “wicked” and the “righteous,” the further words 
appear, “[Thou wilt make] an end of all that oppress us.” 73
4. 
Wrong Will Disappear 
Forever.—And finally, in 
The Coming Doom the writer closes by declaring:
“Wrong is going to depart before Right, as darkness departs before 
light. As smoke disappears and is no more, so will Wrong disappear for­
ever. But Right will be revealed like the sun. . . . The thing is certain 
to come. The prophecy is true, and by this you may know that it will 
not be revoked.” 70
Such is the sustained Conditionalist emphasis of these 
remarkable scrolls of Qumran written in a time of change 
and uncertainty in other sections of Jewry. The Old Testament 
refrain echoes and re-echoes throughout these writings in direct 
antithesis to the contemporary contentions of Philo of Alex­
andria, noted exponent of Immortal-Soulism for all and Eternal 
Torment for the incorrigibly wicked. The contrast could not be 
more complete or vital. Two schools of thought prevailed as the 
period of the Old Testament gave way to the New.
5. Significance of the Great Digression 
in Jewry.— 
Thus we rest our case after presenting the fateful intrusion 
of Platonic philosophy into the Alexandrian wing of the Jewish 
Church, nevertheless paralleled by the refreshing fidelity of 
others in Palestine to the historical positions of the Old Testa­
ment Scriptures on the true nature and destiny of man. The 
great departure has been witnessed. The split over basic con­
cepts concerning the soul has become a reality—not only perma-
7< Ibid., p. 301.
75 Ibid., p. 311. (Brackets in original.)
78 Ibid., p. 313.
nently affecting the Jews but soon destined tragically to in­
fluence the rapidly expanding Christian Church as well.
Alexandria, scene of the Jewish departure, is before too 
long to become the spawning ground of a similar devastation 
of faith on the part of a large segment of the Christian Church. 
The new concepts were introduced by converts from the ranks 
of Neoplatonic philosophy, trained in or influenced by the 
Alexandrian ideology and appeal. These they brought with 
them into the church they had espoused. And these converts 
soon became the leaders in the digression. It is a story without 
a parallel in the annals of two great related churches. It is 
the record of the successful impact of a fascinating fallacy that 
captivated the mind and has so changed the course of thought 
as to become predominant throughout the Christian Era. It 
presents a virility unmatched in the annals of these paralleling 
religious movements.
754 
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
PART IV 
Historical Conflicts Compass the 
Early Centuries 
(A.D. 150 to A.D. 500)
Positions of Subapostolic and Ante-Nicene 
Fathers, and Post-Nicene Developments 
Eventuate in a Theological Trilemma
Subapostolic Writers Consistently 
Conditionalist
CHAPTER 
FORTY-FOUR
I. Significance of Testimony of Apostolic Fathers
The term Apostolic Fathers, coined later, embraces those 
Christian writers of the subapostolic age who lived nearest to, 
or whose lives partly paralleled, the last of the apostles. They 
are usually listed as Clement of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch, 
the writer of The Didache and of the Epistle of Barnabas, 
Hermas of Rome, Polycarp of Smyrna, and Papias. And to these 
is sometimes added the writer of The Epistle of Mathetes to 
Diognetus and that of the Homily of Clement. The time spread 
is about the first half of the second century.
True, the writings are fragmentary. Some are lost, but 
others are preserved in whole or in part, though oft in tampered 
form. The precise authorship of certain extant treatises such 
as The Didache is not known. Nevertheless they reveal the 
faith of the writer at that time, and reflect with some fidelity 
views current in that early period. They are therefore of defi­
nite value in our quest, for they are the most primitive writings 
of early Christian witness that have been preserved, and 
constitute all of the available writings of the earlier successors 
of the apostles. Their contrast with the inspired writings of 
Scripture is, of course, tremendous.
Theirs was the hazy period of early dawn, before the 
amplified literature of the early philosophers of the church 
had developed. The writings of the Apostolic Fathers were 
largely letters. But they form the connecting link between the
757
Chart F
THREE CONCEPTS OF LIFE AND DEATH AMONG EARLY CHURCH WRITERS
I. 
CONDITIONAL IMMORTALITY
1. 
Eternal Death of Wicked
II. 
UNIVERSAL INNATE IMMORTALITY
2. 
Endless Torment of Wicked 
3. Universal Restoration of Wicked
APOSTOLIC 
FATHERS
(Death
Date)
A.D.
1
c.
100
CLEMENT of Rome
2
c.
107
Ignatius of Antioch
3
c.
120
The Didache (Palestine)
4
c.
140
Barnabas of Alexandria
5
c.
154
Hermas (Rome)
6
c.
155
Polycarp of Smyrna
7
c.
130
Epistle to Diognetus
8
c.
165
JUSTIN MARTYR 1 of Samaria
9
c.
172
Tatian 1 of Assyria
10
c.
180
Theophilus of Antioch
1 1
c.
190
Melito of Sardis
12
c.
196
Polycrates of Ephesus
13
202
IRENAEUS of Lyons
14
15
16
17
18
19
20 
21
ANTE-NICENE 
FATHERS
(Church Predominantly Greek)
(Death 
Date) 
A.D.
190
220 
c. 240 
c. 236
(Death 
Date) 
A.D.
ATHENAGORAS of Athens 
Pseudo-Clementines 
Minucius Felix of Africa 
TERTULLIAN of Carthage 
Hippolytus of Portus Romanus
258 
Cyprian of Carthage
280 
Novation of Rome 
330 
Arnobius of Sicca
Clementine Homilies
c. 220 
CLEMENT2 of Alexandria
254 
ORIGEN of Alexandria
c. 270 
Gregory Thaumaturgus of Neo- 
Caesarea 
309 
Pamphilus of Caesarea 
c. 282 
Theognostus and Pierius 
(Alexandria)
1 Predominantly Conditionalist, but with some contradictory expressions.
2 Changed from Conditionalist to Immortal-Soulist.
POST-NICENE 
FATHERS
(Church Predominantly Latin)
22
330
Lactantius of Nicomedia
23
340
Eusebius of Caesarea
24
373
Athanasius1 of Alexandria
c. 373
Titus of Bostra
25
379
Basil of Caesarea
26
c. 390
Diodorus of Tarsus
27
398
Didymus of Alexandria
28
397
Ambrose of Milan
c. 395
Gregory of Nyssa
29
c. 401
Nemesius of Emesa
30
407
Chrysostom of Constantinople
31
420
Jerome of Bethlehem
32
428
Theodore of Mopsuestic
33
430
AUGUSTINE of Hippo
VARIANT POSITIONS OF TRILEMMA ON HUMAN DESTINY AND FUTURE PUNISHMENT
This chronological and categorical table indicates the approximate dating and variant views on the nature and destiny of man held by approximately 
forty leading Church Fathers—Apostolic, Ante-Nicene, and Post-Nicene—down to Augustine. It thus classifies and groups the three conflicting postulates 
on human destiny and the future punishment of the wicked completely developed by the close of the third century.
The table discloses the fact that the dogma of universal Innate Immortality was not introduced until toward the close of the second century a.d.—ten 
writers of the first school being on record before the introduction of the second school, in the third century. It identifies those responsible for first fasten­
ing upon the church the Platonic dogma of the deathlessness of all souls, and because of this the corollary of endless life in torment for the incorrigibly 
wicked. It likewise shows how the Origenistic third school of Universal Restorationism did not appear until a half century later. Thus the fatal gap between 
the original positions of the primitive faith and these later innovations becomes apparent.
Conclusions and Observations: 1. Tertullian and Augustine in particular, in maintaining the position of the Endless Torment of the wicked, held 
that they will be cast into eternal fire for punishment, which is scriptural. But, at the same time holding to the Platonic philosophy of inherent indefea­
sible immortality for all men, they erred in teaching that the wicked will burn on in conscious torment, forever without end. Thus they flouted the Bible 
declaration that after due and just punishment the wicked will be utterly consumed, pass out of existence, and cease to be.
2. On the other hand, Origen and his followers, holding to the same general Platonic premise of universal Innate Immortality, taught that God will 
not permit sin and sinners to continue on defiantly forever—which position is likewise borne out by Scripture. But they likewise erred by introducing 
Universal Restorationism as the means of accomplishing this end. They thereby equally left the Divine Word for human invention and Platonic philosophy, 
and promised life where God had threatened death. Moreover, such a position involves a forced salvation—coercing the will of free moral agents to 
conform to universal righteousness.
3. It remains to be added that the Augustinian theory finally prevailed and became the “orthodox” dogma of the dominant medieval Roman Catholic 
Church. And it was likewise retained by a majority of the Protestant bodies that emerged during the Protestant Reformation.
4. Always, through the centuries, there have been holders of the original Conditionalist Immortality and final destruction of the wicked positions of 
the earliest church writers, the Apostolic Fathers, and Justin Martyr and Irenaeus. These positions continued to strengthen up until Lactantius. And these 
continuing witnesses have steadily grown in number and volume from Reformation days onward, climaxing with major developments of the nineteenth 
and twentieth centuries.
[Some reserve must be made concerning a few writers, indicated by a superior figure (*), who were predominantly Conditionalist, but whose writings include expressions not 
always consistent therewith.]
Rome Ruled the World From 
Her 
Seven-hilled 
Splendor 
When the Followers of Christ 
Spread Their Message of Life 
Through a Risen Saviour.
apostles and the Ante-Nicene Fathers. They were, moreover, 
written in the time of accelerating speed in the spread of the 
church, and embraced the time of the early martyrs under the 
inhuman cruelties of pagan persecution, from Domitian on­
ward.
They constitute, as it were, the lingering echoes of apos­
tolic teaching, but in progressively distorted form. Such legends 
as that of the fabled phoenix were by this time beginning to 
appear—the phoenix being a sacred bird in Egyptian mythol­
ogy, supposed to live for five hundred years. And, at the 
expiration of its life, it allegedly made a nest of twigs on which 
it died by burning itself alive. Then from the ashes, according 
to mythology, there arose another phoenix, young and beauti­
ful. Thus it was that the phoenix came to be taken as an early 
symbol of immortality and the resurrection.
The church of this period, it is to be noted, was expanding 
while the might of Roman dominion was at its widest and 
loftiest sway. Thus the full, oppressive weight of pagan perse-
liSpSpf
760
Rome and the Caesars Provided the Setting of Christ’s Life and the Beginning 
of the Christian Church and Its Message of Life in Christ. Here are Nero, 
Augustus, and Diocletian.
cution and philosophy was exerted upon the expanding church, 
and an inescapable conflict developed. The Early Church was 
distinctly premillennialist in her expectancy of the Second Ad­
vent, which was ever her ardent hope and anticipation, to be 
inseparably accompanied by the literal resurrection of the 
saints and the establishment of the kingdom of God. Such is 
her eschatology.
The two ways, as they are called, are constantly set forth, 
and the endings of the ways, life and death—with eternal life 
and immortality as the gift of God for the redeemed, and 
restricted to believers; and the contrary doom of death and 
everlasting destruction for the impenitently wicked. This pat­
tern, or emphasis, is woven consistently throughout the writings 
of the Apostolic Fathers, which we now examine.
761
762
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Note: At the very outset of the excerpts to follow from 
the various Church Fathers, we would repeat that, as with the 
apocryphal and pseudepigraphal writers of the inter-Testament 
period, we are not here offering a new and critical translation 
of these Early Christian Church writers. Rather, we are using 
standard acceptable translations as the basis for ascertaining 
their testimony and drawing sound conclusions therefrom, 
premised on their recorded teachings as to the nature and 
destiny of man. Occasionally, alternative translations are used 
for clarification. But these are taken from other recognized 
renderings.
II. Clement of Rome—Neither Innate Immortality 
Nor Eternal Torment
The earliest allegedly authentic writings of the subápos- 
tolic church period that has come down to us is an epistle 
by Clement of Rome. Though his life is shrouded in obscurity, 
he was an early presiding presbyter or overseer, afterward 
called bishop, of Rome. He is identified by such third-century 
writers as Tertullian and Origen as Paul’s companion at 
Philippi (Phil. 4:3), and therefore a contemporary of John 
the apostle. According to Eusebius, Clement died in the third 
year of Trajan,1 i.e., about a.d. 100.
In this transitional period the church at Rome held an 
important but not yet overshadowing place, such as it later 
came to occupy. Two epistles are extant under Clement’s name. 
The First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians, written to a 
sister church in the name of the church at Rome, is very 
generally accredited as genuine—the “ ‘one acknowledged epis­
tle,’ ” according to church historian Eusebius. He states that 
it was held in high esteem and “ ‘was publicly used in a great 
many churches.’ ”2 It was probably penned about a.d. 95, says
1 Eusebius. The Church History of Eusebius, book 3, chap. 34, in The Nicene and Post- 
Nicene Fathers (hereafter abbreviated NPNF), 2d series, vol. 1, p. 166.
2 Ibid., chap. 16, p. 147.
SUBAPOSTOLIC WRITERS CONDITIONALISTS 
763
Westcott,3 soon after the persecution under Domitian. The 
epistle comprises fifty-nine short chapters, and may be said to 
reflect the subapostolic age.4 On the contrary, the Second Epis­
tle is universally recognized as apocryphal, and will therefore 
not concern us.
1. Clement on the Nature and Destiny 
of Man.— 
Because of the unique early position of Clement—apparently 
the initial writer available after the passing of the apostles— 
we must survey his presentation in some detail. First of all, 
we must ascertain his eschatological positions, for they will 
automatically reveal his views concerning the nature and 
destiny of man. (See Tabular Chart—Three Concepts of Life 
and Death Among Early Church Writers—on page 758, for 
Clement’s place in the triple categories into which the Apostolic, 
Ante-, and Post-Nicene Fathers group themselves.)
2. Second Advent and Resurrection Hope Dominant. 
—The Second Advent expectancy marks this treatise. Here 
is a characteristic reference, showing the Advent hope to be 
in the very forefront of Clement’s thinking:
“Of a truth, soon and suddenly shall His [Christ’s] will be accom­
plished, as the Scripture also bears witness, saying, ‘Speedily will He come, 
and will not tarry;’ and, ‘The Lord shall suddenly come to His temple, 
even the Holy One, for whom ye look.’ ” 6
And connected inseparably with the Advent is the resur­
rection, to which Clement attaches great importance. Thus 
he discloses his understanding of the eschatological order of 
events. This assurance of the resurrection he seeks to buttress 
from nature:
“Let us consider, beloved, how the Lord continually proves to us 
that there shall be a future resurrection, of which He has rendered the
3 Brooke Foss Westcott, A General Survey of the History of the Canon of the New 
Testament, pp. 23, 24.
4 The only complete edition of the Fathers is the Latin and Greek series of J. P.
Migne. Various English translations are available—-J. B. Lightfoot, E. J. Goodspeed, Kirsopp 
Lake, W. K. L. Clarke, and the recent Roman Catholic translation by Francis X. Glimm. 
In studying the Apostolic Fathers we shall, however, use that of Alexander Roberts and James 
Donaldson in the standard Ante-Nicene Fathers series, which are available everywhere.
6 The First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians, chap. 23, in The Ante-Nicene 
Fathers (hereafter abbreviated ANF), vol. 1, p. 11.
764
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Lord Jesus Christ the first-fruits by raising Him from the dead. Let us 
contemplate, beloved, the resurrection which is at all times taking place.® 
Day and night declare to us a resurrection. The night sinks to sleep, and 
the day arises; the day [again] departs, and the night comes on. Let us 
behold the fruits [of the earth], how the sowing of grain takes place. 
The sower goes forth, and casts it into the ground; and the seed being 
thus scattered, though dry and naked when it fell upon the earth, is 
gradually dissolved. Then out of its dissolution the mighty power of the 
providence of the Lord raises it up again, and from one seed many arise 
and bring forth fruit.”7
Again, our Maker will “raise up again those that have 
piously served Him,” and “ ‘Thou shalt raise up this flesh of 
mine,’ ” according to promise.8
3. Theme Persists Throughout Genuine Epistle.—In 
chapter twenty-five of the epistle the fable of the curious and 
fanciful bird the phoenix 9 is introduced, taken from Herodo­
tus and Pliny. It is given as symbolizing the resurrection, and 
thus indicates the weird pagan imaginings that were even then 
beginning to appear in Christian Church thinking.10 But in 
chapter twenty-seven the Biblical resurrection is further stressed 
by Clement, and the Second Advent is referred to in chapter 
thirty-four. “Life in immortality” is presented as the gift of 
God in chapter thirty-five. Punishment “with death” is men­
tioned in chapter forty-one, and in chapter fifty we read this 
promise:
“For it is written, ‘Enter in thy secret chambers for a little time, 
until my wrath and fury pass away; and I will remember a propitious 
day,11 and will raise you up out of your graves.” 13
Those are the high points.
4. Advent Note Even 
in Spurious Second Epistle.— 
Even in the so-called Second Epistle, or Homily, with its un­
known author, the Advent note still echoes, though the epistle
6 Glimm’s tr. adds, “and regard the seasons.”
7 Ibid., chap. 24, pp. 11, 12. (Brackets in original.)
8 Ibid' chap. 26, p. 12.
9 ANF, vol. i, p. 12, note 2.
10 Mosheim and Neander think this mythical material may be a later interpolation.
11 Glimm’s tr.. “the good day.”
ls The First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians, chap. 50, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 18.
SUBAPOSTOLIC WRITERS CONDITIONALISTS 
765
is without authority: “Let us then wait for the kingdom of 
God, from hour to hour, in love and righteousness, seeing 
that we know not the day of the appearing of God.” 13
We will now trace what Clement of Rome teaches in the 
authentic First Epistle in regard to immortality and punish­
ment—with perishing, destruction, and death for the wicked, 
and salvation and life and immortality for the redeemed as 
the gift of God, for which reward we must wait.
5. Significant Silences in Clement’s Witness.—Scholarly 
Anglican Prebendary Henry Constable rightly calls attention 
to Clement’s “silence on certain points.” Clement “never 
speaks of the immortality of the soul,” u either in thought or 
in phrasing, nor of eternal punishing, both of which concepts 
abound in later church writers, such as Tertullian (d. c. 240) 
and Augustine (d. 430). Clement says that man is a “mortal 
creature, consisting only of dust and ashes—his life as but 
the life of one day.” 15 This is significant. But he is far more 
than negative.
6. Immortality a “Gift” of God, to Be Sought For.— 
Clement sets forth immortality as one of God’s glorious gifts 
to the redeemed. “Life in immortality,” as he phrases it, is a 
gift of God to the righteous. And it is “prepared for such as 
wait for Him.” To gain it we must “earnestly strive” for it, 
“in order that we may share in His promised gifts.”18 Clement 
did not believe that the wicked either possessed Immortality 
by nature or should ever obtain it.
As to zde (“life,” or “existence”), Clement likewise uses 
it only in the sense of existence. He speaks of the “ ‘life of man 
which may last but for a day.’ ” It is not mere “happiness,” or 
“well-being,” as contended by a later school of writers. With
13 The Second Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians, chap. 12, in The Apostolic Fathers 
(tr. by Kirsopp Lake), vol. I, p. 147, Loeb Classical Library.
14 Henry Constable, The Duration and Nature of Future Punishment, p. 168.
15 Ibid. See The First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians in ANF, chaps. 38, 39, 17, 
vol. 1, pp. 15, 9. 10.
19 The First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians, chap. 35, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 14.
766
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Clement, “righteousness is not life, but the way to life.” 17 And 
it is God’s will that we should “taste of immortal knowledge,” 
“the knowledge of immortality.” 18
7. Death Is Cessation of All Life.—Clement presents 
“death” (thanatos) as the lot of all mankind. He sets it forth 
as the deprivation of life, the cessation of the faculties, the 
ending of all activities. All men are subject to its claims, 
except such as Enoch, who was exempted by translation, for, 
as Clement says, “death was never known to happen to him.” 19 
But from Abel on to Christ and the martyrs, all suffered death.90 
Christ, as our Saviour and substitute, was “brought down to 
death.” Again, “His soul was delivered to death, and He was 
reckoned among the transgressors, and He bare the sins of 
many.”21
And when Clement discusses that death which is the ulti­
mate fate of the wicked, he clearly states that they will ulti­
mately be deprived of all existence, and become nonexistent. 
He does not refer to a merely spiritual death in sin, or of 
endless life in everlasting misery, as was later projected by 
Tertullian and Augustine.
8. Wicked to Perish, Be Destroyed, Cease to Exist.— 
As to the future punishment of the wicked, Clement uses such 
terms as teleutad (to “finish,” “accomplish,” “end”), and thus 
“to die,” as the end or loss of human existence. He goes on to 
state that death was visited upon the people of Jericho, and 
death came to the army of Pharaoh in the Red Sea. That is 
the death that comes upon all men through sin.
Again and again Clement uses the terms “perish” and 
“destruction” 29 as the equivalent of “punished with death” 23 
for the fate of the wicked. He frequently quotes from the
17 Constable, op. cit., p. 169. See The First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians, chaps. 
16, 17, 48, in AMF, vol. 1, pp. 9, 10, 18.
18 The First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians, chap. 36, in ANF, vol. 1, pp. 14, 
15, note 1.
18 Ibid., chap. 9, p. 7.
20 Ibid., chaps. 4, 16, pp. 6, 9.
21 Ibid., chap. 16. p. 9.
22 Ibid., Chaps. 12, 39, 51, 55, pp. 11, 15, 19, 20.
23 Ibid., chap. 51, p. 16.
Old Testament—the New Testament was not yet assembled— 
citing how “transgressors” are to be “destroyed from off the 
face of the earth”; how the prophet looked for the wicked and 
“behold, he was not” (chap. 14); how evildoers are to be “cut 
off,” along with “the remembrance of them from the earth” 
(chap. 22); how God will “destroy them,” literally they are 
to “be wiped out,” and God will “blot out” even “their name 
from under heaven” (chap. 53). That was Clement’s belief. 
It is sketchy, and not amplified, as with other writers soon to 
follow. But his witness is consistent and conclusive, and is signif­
icant because of its timing.
9. 
Constable’s Summary of Clement’s Views.—We can 
do no better than to quote Anglican Prebendary Constable’s 
conclusions, back in 1886, after completing his painstaking 
examination of this epistle of Clement:
“There can be no doubt then of Clement of Rome’s view of future 
punishment. By his silence and by his words he tells us what it was. With 
him there was no immortality for any but the redeemed of Christ. End­
less life was, with him, only for those who would use it to the glory of the 
Giver. For all others there was, after resurrection and judgment, the sen­
tence to a second death, the loss of existence for ever, from which they 
were never to be recalled to another life, another probation, another 
opportunity of salvation.” 24
Clement clearly believed that immortality was conditional 
—to be bestowed on the righteous only.
It will be essential for us to watch the sequence and rela­
tionships of the last events, or eschatology, held by each of these 
Apostolic Fathers, for therein lies the clue to their views of 
the nature and destiny of man. In this way the concepts of 
Clement of Rome, though fragmentary, become unmistakable. 
The others will unfold in similar but clearer pattern.
III. Ignatius of Antioch—Immortality Solely for Saints;
Sinners to Perish
Presumably next in timing among the Apostolic Fathers 
comes Ignatius, surnamed Theophorus (d. c. a.d. 107), bishop
SUBAPOSTOLIC WRITERS CONDITIONALISTS 
767
24 Constable, op. cit., p. 170.
768
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
of Antioch, who suffered martyrdom by being thrown to wild 
beasts in the Flavian Amphitheater at Rome during the latter 
half of Trajan’s reign (a.d. 98-117). He was converted to the 
Christian faith in maturity, but the rest of his personal life 
is wrapped in obscurity.
More controversy has centered around Ignatius’ writings 
than around those of any other Apostolic Father. Of the fifteen 
epistles attributed to him eight are universally rejected as 
spurious. Those we will ignore. The remaining seven—to the 
Ephesians, Magnesians, Trallians, Romans, Philadelphians, 
and Smyrnaeans, and to Polycarp—are all in short and long 
Greek forms. It is generally believed that the longer versions 
have obviously been corrupted by later hands, so the shorter 
versions are here used.
But even they are doubtless “not free from interpola­
tion.” 20 For example, the episcopacy is given an emphasis 
wholly out of keeping with the known church polity of the 
early second century.28 There is also a Syriac version of three 
epistles—the Ephesians, Romans, and Polycarp—which is 
helpful for comparison.
With this introduction we turn to the genuine Ignatian 
letters. (Ignatius’ timing and category appear on Tabular 
Chart E, page 758.) For convenience we will note Ignatius’ evi­
dence by individual epistles.
1. 
To the Ephesians: Immortality Is “Gift” of Christ. 
—In The Epistle to the Ephesians Ignatius expresses conscious­
ness and concern over the approaching latter-day crises lying 
before the church. Thus: “The last times are come upon us. 
Let us therefore be of a reverent spirit.” He urges the men 
of Ephesus to “stand in awe of the wrath to come,” and 
admonishes, “Let us be found in Christ Jesus unto the true
23 “Introductory Note to the Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians,” in ANF, vol. 1, p. 47.
28 On the matter of interpolation, sound advice is given by the late Archbishop Dr. 
William Temple. He states that we should beware of accepting, or of reading into these early 
writings, concepts that were not introduced into the Christian creed for another century 
or so. Therefore statements or expressions that were common parlance later, but were foreign 
to the second century, may well be regarded as later interpolations. That is good counsel.
Clement 
of 
Rome— Barnabas — Contrasts 
Immortality a Gift for Eternal Life With 
the Righteous Only; Eternal Death; Satan, 
Final Death the Dep- Sinners, and Evil to 
rivation of Existence 
Be Destroyed, 
for the Wicked.
Ignatius of Antioch— 
Immortality Solely for 
Saints; Death for Sin­
ners 
Means 
Ceasing 
to Be.
Polycarp — Resurrec­
tion Is Sole Gateway 
to Immortality; There­
fore 
Resurrection 
Pivotal.
Note on Portraits of Church Fathers Here Reproduced
While actual portraits, busts, or statues of the Church Fathers 
of the early centuries have only rarely been preserved, traditional 
likenesses based upon the descriptions left by contemporaries do 
exist. While they are but artists’ conceptions, they help to person­
alize these often-noted men who were the leading figures in the 
conflict over truth, with its swaying battle lines and ultimate 
crystallization into three rival schools of thought on the nature 
and destiny of man.
We present them for what they are worth, that we may better 
visualize the principal personalities in the struggle that was tre­
mendously real and determinative in that formative period of the 
early centuries, and that profoundly affected the life of the church 
across the entire Christian Era. These are largely drawn from 
Andre Trevet’s remarkable book of portraits, with biographical 
sketches, printed back in 1584.
life.” 27 We shall see how this continuing theme of life in Christ 
runs as a golden thread throughout his epistles. He refers, for 
example, in chapter three, to Jesus Christ as “our inseparable
27 The Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians, chap. 11, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 54. (Italics 
supplied.)
25 
769
770
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
life.” 28 This he enlarges upon in chapter seventeen by declar­
ing that our Lord was anointed “that He might breathe 
immortality into His Church” He warns against the “prince 
of this world” leading any “away captive from the life which 
is set before you.” And he asks, “Why do we foolishly perish, 
not recognising the gift which the Lord has of a truth sent 
to us?” 29
In chapter eighteen Ignatius alludes to the provision of the 
cross as being “to us salvation and life eternal.”30 And in chap­
ter nineteen he tells of “God Himself being manifested in 
human form for the renewal of eternal life. . . . Henceforth 
all things were in a state of tumult, because He meditated 
the abolition of death.” 31 Then in chapter twenty he interest­
ingly refers to “breaking one and the same bread, which is the 
medicine of immortality, and the antidote to prevent us from 
dying, but [which causes] that we should live for ever in Jesus 
Christ.”32 Life, eternal life, is his burden.
In all of this Ignatius stresses the fact that the gift of 
Immortality comes only through Christ, whereas death is the 
inevitable portion of the sinner. He says, in chapter sixteen, 
that the person who “corrupts by wicked doctrine the faith 
of God” shall, thus defiled, “go away into everlasting33 fire, and 
so shall every one that hearkens unto him.” 34
The unquenchableness of the fire does not, however, in­
volve the later Augustinian conception of endless existence 
in torment of all who are cast into it. That dogma of the in­
defeasible immortality of the wicked as well as the righteous 
was an innovation not introduced for another century. So, 
in writing to the Ephesians, Ignatius holds that “immortality”
28 Ibid., chap 3, p. 50. Note: Variant forms of division—into short chapters (AMF), 
into chapters and verses (Lightfoot), and merely into numbered sections (Glimm)—may cause 
some confusion. We follow the ANF style—chapters only.
29 Ibid., chap. 17, p. 56. Glimm reads, “incorruptibility” for “immortality.”
30 Ibid., chap. 18, pp. 56, 57. (Italics supplied.)
31 Ibid., chap. 19, p. 57. (Italics supplied.) Lightfoot reads, “as he designed to 
abolish death.”
32 Ibid., chap. 20, p. 58. (Brackets in original, italics supplied.)
33 Lightfoot tr., “unquenchable fire.”
34 Ibid., chap. 16, p. 56.
SUBAPOSTOLIC WRITERS CONDITIONALISTS 
771
and “eternal life” for the righteous are the exact opposites 
of “perishing” for the wicked.
2. To the Magnesians: Death Is Ceasing to Be.—At the 
very outset of Ignatius’ Epistle to the Magnesians (in Ionia, 
Asia Minor) he speaks of Christ as “the constant source of 
our life.”36 He then sets forth the two basic alternatives in 
chapter five:
“Seeing, then, all thi?igs have an end, these two things are 
simultaneously set before us—death and life; and every one 
shall go unto his own place.” 38
And he adds, concerning the “unbelieving,” and those 
Christians “not in readiness to die into His passion,” that “His 
[Christ’s] life is not in us.”37 In chapter ten he makes the 
unequivocal statement, “For were He to reward us according 
to our works, we should cease to be.” 38 This comports with 
Ignatius’ message to the Ephesians, that when the sinner is 
rewarded according to his deeds he will then cease to exist. 
Thus there will be an end of all things—except of those who 
partake of the proffered life in Christ.
3. To the Trallians: Life Through Christ’s Death. 
—In the introduction to his Epistle to the Trallians (in Caria, 
Asia Minor, southeast of Ephesus), Ignatius speaks of Jesus 
Christ, “who is our hope, through our rising again to Him,” 
or “in the resurrection which is by Him.” 39 In this new treatise 
he continues to write in harmony with his previous declarations, 
as when he states in chapter two, concerning “Jesus Christ, 
who died for us,” that “by believing in His death, ye may escape 
from death.” " And again in chapter four, “I restrain myself, 
lest I should perish through boasting.” 41 And finally, in chapter
35 The Epistle of Ignatius to the Magnesians, chap. 1, in 
ANF, vol. 1, 
p. 59.
w Ibid., 
chap. 5, p. 61. (Italics supplied.) Glimm’s tr., "to his appropriate place.”
37 Ibid., note 3 reads, “after the likeness of His passion.”
38 Ibid., 
chap. 10, p. 63. J. M. Denniston renders it, 
“We are no more” 
(ouk
etiesmen) (The Perishing Soul, pp. 296, 297).
39 The Epistle of Ignatius to the Trallians, Introduction, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 66. (Italics 
supplied.)
40 Ibid., chap. 2, p. 66. (Italics supplied.)
41 Ibid., chap. 4, p. 67. (Italics supplied.)
772
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
nine, that as the Father quickened Christ, so “after the same 
manner His Father will so raise up us who believe in Him 
by Christ Jesus, apart from whom we do not possess the true 
life.” 42 Life, then, is only in Christ, and those who do not 
possess this life are to perish.
4. To the Romans: Resurrection Follows Sleep of 
Death.—Chapter one of Ignatius’ Epistle to the Romans, which 
is titled “As a Prisoner, I Hope to See You,” was written as he 
was heading toward Rome, that great city, for his approaching 
martyrdom. Yet he welcomed such a fate, declaring, “It is good 
to set from the world unto God, that I may rise again to Him.” 43 
The resurrection was his unfailing star of hope. And in chapter 
four, upon going to his death, to be “ground by the teeth of 
the wild beasts,” which would become his tomb, Ignatius states 
significantly that he will then “have fallen asleep [in death].” 44 
Such was his concept of death.
In chapter six he declares, “It is better for me to die in 
behalf of Jesus Christ, than to reign over all the ends of the 
earth.” 45 And finally, in chapter seven he states that he has 
no pleasure in “corruptible food, nor in the pleasures 
of this life,” but in the “bread of God,” or “bread of life,” 
and the “drink of God, namely His blood, which is incor­
ruptible love and eternal life.” 46
5. Epistle to Polycarp: Sleep, Resurrection, Immortal­
ity.—Finally, in The Epistle of Ignatius to Polycarp, bishop 
of the Smyrnæans, in chapter two Ignatius exhorts his fellow 
bishop to “be sober as an athlete of God: the prize set before 
thee is immortality and eternal life, of which thou art also 
persuaded.” 47 In chapter three Ignatius urges Polycarp to 
“weigh carefully the times. Look for Him who is above all
42 Ibid., chap. 9, p. 70. (Italics supplied.) Lightfoot, "without whom we have no 
true life.”
43 The Epistle of Ignatius to the Romans, chap. 2, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 74. (Italics sup-
plied.)
44 Ibid., chap. 4, 
p. 75. (Brackets in the original; italics supplied.)
45 Ibid., chap. 6, 
p. 76.
46 Ibid., chap. 7, p. 77. (Italics supplied.)
47 The Epistle of Ignatius to Polycarp, chap. 2, in ANF, 
vol. 1, p. 94. (Italics supplied.)
SUBAPOSTOLIC WRITERS CONDITIONALISTS 
773
time, eternal and invisible, yet who became visible for our 
sakes”—through the incarnation, and who is coming again.“ 
Then he adds in chapter six, on “The duties of the Christian 
Flock,” this comprehensive portrayal of the essence and unity 
of Christian life:
“Labour together with one another; strive in company together; run 
together; suffer together; sleep together [in death]; and awake together 
[in the resurrection], as the stewards, and associates, and servants of 
God.” 46
That was Ignatius’ eschatological concept and sequence— 
the latter days, the Advent, the resurrection, immortality.
6. 
Gift of God Versus W
ages of Sin.—That is the burden 
of Ignatius’ testimony. His continuing theme is the gift of life 
and immortality for the saved in Christ, with perishing and 
ceasing to exist for the lost, outside of Christ. There is no 
reference to this theme in his epistles to the Philadelphians and 
Smyrnaeans. But in these five epistles cited he is utterly silent 
in regard to any Innate Immortality of the soul or anything 
akin thereto. Instead, the declarations of these separate treatises 
are a unit in setting forth immortality and incorruptibility as 
conferred in, and only through, Christ. It is not ours intrinsi­
cally. This he states constantly. But it is to be sought for and 
obtained.
As to the death of the wicked, even Dr. Edward Beecher, 
the Restorationist, admits that “in some cases the idea of 
annihilation is suggested.” “ Yes, but it is more than suggested, 
it is asserted. However, the better terms are “destroyed,” 
“perished,” “ceasing to exist.” That from Ignatius.
48 Ibid., chap. 3, p. 94.
49 Ibid., chap. 6, p. 95. (Italics supplied.) The Syriac reads, “rise together” (ANF, 
vol. 1, p. 100).
50 Edward Beecher, History of Opinions on the Scriptural Doctrine of Retribution, p. 283.
CHAPTER 
FORTY-FIVE
mmortality Bestowed at Advent; 
Wicked Destroyed
I. Didache—Follows Standard Pattern on the Two Ways
Still another early depiction of the now frequently stressed 
two ways—the “way of life” and the “way of death” in Christian 
conduct—was The Didache or The Teaching of the Twelve 
Apostles. This ancient Christian treatise,1 dealing with early 
Christian order, beliefs, and worship, was still used as late as 
the fourth century. It was a discipline, employed in catecheti­
cal instruction, to prepare new converts for baptism.
The Didache is quite similar in emphasis and somewhat 
in phrasing to The Epistle of Barnabas. Both writers obviously 
drew from a common source, building on and expounding 
the current beliefs and practices for the subapostolic age. The 
treatise was “food for lambs,” not for those “of full age.” In 
size it is about the same as the Sermon on the Mount, and is 
couched in the simple language of that transitional period from 
New Testament usage to ecclesiastical Greek.
The Didache corresponds in teaching not only to The 
Epistle of Barnabas but to The Shepherd of Hermas, as well as 
to The Apostolic Constitutions. It is referred to by various early 
Christian writers, including historian Eusebius (d. c. a.d. 340). 
Athanasius (d. 
a.d. 373) states that it comprised reading 
for catechumens of Gentile birth. The purity of the text cannot 
be determined. There are doubtless some corruptions. Its
1 The document was recovered by Greek Patriarch Philotlieos Bryennios of Nicodemia, 
in the library of the Jerusalem Monastery of the Most Holy Sepulchre at Constantinople.
774
IMMORTALITY BESTOWED AT ADVENT 
775
timing is reckoned as approximating that of Barnabas, and is 
now placed at about a.d. 120. Its origin was possibly Egypt or 
Syria. (See Tabular Chart F, on page 758.)
The Didache was not prepared for ecclesiastical centers, 
but more for remote sections. There are frequent Old Testa­
ment references, with citations from the Gospels, as the New 
Testament was not yet compiled. There is marked similarity 
in eschatological outline to Paul’s Thessalonian letters. And it 
is in definite conformity with apostolic teaching, representing 
a viewpoint that erelong came to be abandoned under the 
impact of the Neoplatonic pressures. Hence it differs from the 
recorded positions of the church generally, as held in post- 
Nicene times. But it was still the apostolic voice echoing in 
subapostolic times.
II. Eschatological Concept of Early Church in Outline
1. 
The 
Common 
Theme 
of 
Subapostolic 
Age.—In 
harmony with characteristic subapostolic-age emphasis, the 
common theme of The Didache, or The Teaching, is the 
portrayal of the “two ways, one of life and one of death.” 
The unity of the treatise is thus preserved, and the last chapter 
discloses the inevitable ending of the two ways—for the good 
it is life, for the wicked it is death. Following is an epitome 
of this early manual for baptismal instruction.
In essence, the “way of life” leads to readiness for the 
last events—the Second Advent, the resurrection, and the 
eternal kingdom. In contrast, the “way of death” leads to the 
final destruction of the impenitently wicked. Those who 
follow the way of life will practice the love of God to their 
fellow man, participate in the ordinances of baptism and the 
Lord’s Supper, which point to “life eternal,” and engage in 
prayers and meditation, awaiting the return of the Lord. 
There is no admixture of Jewish Philonian or Greek Alex­
andrian philosophy, and nothing remotely resembling the later 
Innate-Immortality-of-the-soul concept either in phrase or
776
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
thought, and its later common corollary, the Eternal Torment 
of the impenitent.
The eschatology of The Didache involves the living sur­
vival of a certain number of believers and the resurrection of 
the rest. Eternal life is conceived of as independent of the 
body. After the great apostasy the world passes through trial 
by fire, and the righteous are saved. These are the destined 
endings of the two ways.
2. Involvements of the “Way of Life.”—Here are the 
exact citations. The opening sentence of chapter one reads:
“There are two ways, one of life and one of death; but a great differ­
ence between the two ways. The way of life, then, is this: First, thou 
shalt love God who made thee; second, thy neighbour as thyself.”2
Then follow the main points of the Sermon on the Mount. 
The Teaching passes from the positive to the negative, and 
grosser and lesser sins are forbidden. After the listing of various 
precepts, chapter four ends, “This is the way of life” (“Bar­
nabas, ‘the way of light,’ ” note 29).3
3. “Way of Death” Contrasted With “Eternal Life” 
Provision.—Chapter five opens with “And the way of death 
is this.” Barnabas’ paralleling statement of the second way is 
intensified to the “way of eternal death.” 4 Twenty-two sins are 
then listed in The Didache, which the righteous are to avoid. 
After warning against false teachers, there is admonition to 
baptize in “living water” (note 18: “Probably running water”), 
and to participate in the Lord’s Supper. This prayer for the 
church, which is to be “gathered together from the ends of the 
earth into Thy kingdom,” is then suggested, beginning:
“We thank thee, holy Father. . . . Thou, Master, almighty, didst 
create all things for Thy name’s sake; Thou gavest food and drink to 
men for enjoyment, that they might give thanks to Thee; but to us 
[followers of Christ] Thou didst freely give spiritual food and drink 
and life eternal through Thy Servant [Jesus Christ].”5
2 The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, chap. 1, in ANF, vol. 7, p. 377.
3 Ibid., chap. 4, p. 378.
IMMORTALITY BESTOWED AT ADVENT 
777
The prayer draws toward its close with:
“Remember, Lord, Thy Church, to deliver it from all evil and to 
make it perfect in Thy love, and gather it from the four winds, sanctified 
for Thy kingdom which Thou hast prepared for it.” 9
It closes with the appeal “Let this world pass away,” and 
an admonition to repentance and holiness.7 Then it adds, 
“Maran atha”—“our Lord cometh.”
4. Perils of Coming Apostasy Portrayed.—The closing 
chapter (sixteen), on “Watchfulness; The Coming of the 
Lord,” begins with the words:
“Watch for your life’s sake (note 2; “over your life”). Let not your 
lamps be quenched, nor your loins unloosed; but be ye ready, for ye 
know not the hour in which our Lord cometh.”8
The warning is given that “the whole time of your faith 
will not profit you, if ye be not made perfect in the last time.” 
That is a continuing theme.
We next read:
“For in the last days false prophets and corrupters shall be multiplied, 
and the sheep shall be turned into wolves, and love shall be turned into 
hate; for when lawlessness increaseth, they shall hate and persecute and 
betray one another, and then shall appear the world-deceiver as Son of 
God, and shall do signs and wonders, and the earth shall be delivered 
into his hand and he shall do iniquitous things which have never yet 
come to pass since the beginning.” 9
5. Eschatological Outline of Last Things.—And now 
follows the outline of the last things, in time’s last hour, from 
The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles. First, the time of trial:
“Then shall the creation of men come into the fire of 
trial, and many shall be made to stumble and shall perish; 
but they that endure in their faith shall be saved.” 10
Finally comes the climax, at the Second Advent, presented 
in these words:
“And then shall appear the signs of the truth [of “the personal 
advent”]; first, the sign of an outspreading in heaven (note 6: “Hitch-
« Ibid.
T Ibid.
8 Ibid., chap. 16, p. 382.
• Ibid.
10 Ibid.
778
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
cock and Brown, Schaff and others, prefer ‘opening’ ”); then the sign 
of the sound of the trumpet; and third, the resurrection of the dead; 
yet not of all,11 but as it is said: The Lord shall come and all His saints 
with Him (note 17: "Probably it is based upon the Pauline eschatology”). 
Then shall the world see the Lord’s coming upon the clouds of heaven.” 12
That is all. The treatise ends abruptly, with the Advent 
expectancy. But it reflects the apostolic teaching in the sub- 
apostolic age. It fits the pattern—the Apostolic Fathers present 
life only in Christ for the righteous, or Conditional Immortal­
ity, and eternal death for the wicked.
III. Barnabas—Contrasts Eternal Life With Eternal Death
Virtually no scholar ascribes The Epistle of Barnabas 
(c. a.d. 130-c. 140) to the apostle Barnabas, friend and com­
panion of the apostle Paul. Rather, it is credited to another of 
the same name. The internal evidence has always been conclu­
sively against the older view. The writer was possibly a Jewish 
Christian of Alexandria, for the Barnabas epistle is mentioned 
by Clement of Alexandria and by Origen, also of Alexandria, 
and its tendency to allegorize fits into the Alexandrian scene.13
Although the author cannot be identified with any cer­
tainty, the epistle itself comes to us from high antiquity. It 
soon obtained a recognized place, and was read aloud in public 
worship in some of the early churches, according to Eusebius, 
who ranks it along with such writings as The Shepherd (or 
Pastor) of HermasP Jerome also notes it. So The Epistle of 
Barnabas must be surveyed, since it belongs in the category 
of the Apostolic Fathers. (See Chart F, page 758, for category 
and time sequence.)
The first part of the epistle is directed against Judaizing,
11 Giimm adds, “men.” S. D. F. Saimond observes: “The resurrection of the dead, 
which, however, is not of all 
men. but of the saints” (Christian Doctrine of Immortality, p. 596).
12 The Teaching of 
the Twelve Apostles, chap. 16, in ANF, vol. 7, p. 382.
13 A. H. Newman says, “We cannot avoid the supposition that the epistle was written 
by a man who had come under the influence of the Alexandrian philosophy, probably of the 
earlier forms of Gnosticism 
as well” (A Manual of Church History, vol. 1, pp. 221, 222).
14 Eusebius, 
Church History, book 3, chap. 
25, 
in NPNF, vol. 
1, 
p. 
156.
IMMORTALITY BESTOWED AT ADVENT 
779
and is designed to show the abolition of Judaism by means of 
the spiritual institutions of Christianity. The writer’s grasp of 
Daniel’s outline prophecies, in chapter four of the epistle, is 
rather remarkable for the time, especially his understanding 
of Daniel 7—the four world powers, the ten divisions of the 
fourth empire (Rome), followed by the coming of the “Black 
One,” or lawless one, prior to the Second Advent and imminent 
day of the Lord.15 The resurrection, at the Advent, is portrayed 
as the gateway of the Christian hope and expectation. Thus 
is revealed the writer’s understanding of the order of last 
events. This hope was subsequently lost through the allegori- 
zation of the prophecies, the resurrection, and the Advent, 
under Origen, as will be seen later.
In the field of our quest it is Barnabas’ emphasis on life 
and death, with the punishment of the wicked depicted as 
eternal, and his portrayal of the two ways—the way of light 
and the way of darkness—and their inevitable endings that 
concern us. This concept of the two ways now becomes the 
pattern woven all through the remaining writings of the 
Apostolic Fathers. Let us now trace Barnabas’ views in sequence 
throughout the twenty-one chapters. The phrasing is some­
times involved but the intent is unmistakable.
IV. Coming Destruction of Satan, Sinners, and All Evil
1. 
Basic Contrast Between Life and Death.—In chap­
ter one mention is made of “hope for the life which He has 
promised.”18 In chapter two the admonition appears, “We 
ought therefore, brethren, carefully to inquire concerning our 
salvation, lest the wicked one, having made his entrance by 
deceit, should hurl us forth (note 6: “literally, ‘sling us out’ ”) 
from our [true] life.”17
15 On Barnabas’ interpretation of prophecy, see L. E. Froom, The Prophetic Faith 
of Our Fathers, vol. 1, pp. 209-211.
la The Epistle of Barnabas, chap. 1, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 137. Lightfoot tr., “the life 
which is to come.”
17 Ibid., chap. 2, p. 138. (Brackets in original.)
Chapter five tells of the sufferings and death of Christ, 
and how God has “not left us without understanding in regard 
to things which are to come.” And Barnabas adds that “the 
man perishes justly, who, having a knowledge of the way of 
righteousness, rushes off into the way of darkness.”18 Then 
he portrays the part that Christ played in the conflict:
"And He (since it behoved Him to appear in flesh), that He might 
abolish death, and reveal the resurrection from the dead, endured [what 
and as He did], in order that He might fulfill the promise made unto the 
fathers, and by preparing a new people for Himself, might show, while 
He dwelt on earth, that He, when He has raised mankind, will also 
judge them.” 19
But the wicked, he affirms, who “contend” with God and 
“oppose” Him, “ ‘shall all wax old, like a garment, and the 
moth shall eat you up.’ ”20
2. 
Life Through Christ; Death Through Sin.—Chapter 
seven (on “Types of Christ”) says that Christ, who is also our 
judge, was stricken that He might give us life:
“If therefore the Son of God, who is Lord [of all things], and who 
will judge the living and the dead, suffered, that His stroke might give 
us life, let us believe that the Son of God could not have suffered except 
for our sake.” 21
Chapter eight (“The Red Heifer a Type of Christ”) states 
“that [through the cross] those believing on Him shall live for 
ever.” 22 And he adds, in chapter nine, “Who is he that wishes 
to live for ever? By hearing let him hear the voice of my 
servant.” 23 That is man’s part. Then in chapter ten, passing 
to the various precepts and prohibitions of Moses, Barnabas 
says, “He means, ‘Thou shalt not join thyself or be like to 
such men as are ungodly to the end, and are condemned 
(note 11: “condemned already”) to death.’ ” 24 Next, in chapter 
eleven, Barnabas speaks of the water of life, the river, and
780 
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
38 Ibid., chap. 5, p. 139. (Italics supplied.)
38 Ibid. (Parenthesis and brackets in original; italics supplied.)
20 Ibid., chap. 6, p. 140.
21 Ibid., chap. 7, p. 141. (Brackets in original; italics supplied.)
22 Ibid., chap. 8, p. 142. (Brackets in original; italics supplied.)
23 Ibid., chap. 9, p. 142.
21 Ibid., chap. 10, p. 143.
IMMORTALITY BESTOWED AT ADVENT 
781
the trees whose leaves never fade, and comments, “ ‘And whoso­
ever shall eat of these shall live for ever.’ This meaneth: Who­
soever, He declares, shall hear thee [Jesus] speaking, and 
believe, shall live for ever.” “Whosoever” is unconditional, but 
assures immortality for all such as hear and heed. In contrast 
the ungodly are like the “chaff, which the wind sweeps away 
from the face of the earth.” 25 That is the tenor of his paralleling 
series of contentions.
3. Death From Sin Involves Destruction.—In chapter 
twelve Barnabas states that it was because of Israel’s sins that 
“they were delivered to death.” He then tells how, when Moses 
stretched forth his hands, victory for Israel resulted, but “when 
again he let down his hands, they were again destroyed.” And 
why? “That they might know that they could not be saved 
unless they put their trust in Him.” 28 That was the condition 
of their salvation—trust in Him, or conditional salvation. Then 
Barnabas makes this application: “Moses makes a type of Jesus, 
[signifying] that it was necessary for Him to suffer, [and also] 
that He would be the author of life [to others].” 27
That is, Jesus died to save men consigned to death.
4. Two Ways: of “Darkness” and of “Light.”—Coming 
now to “The Second Part of the Epistle,” dealing specifically 
with “The Two Ways,” Barnabas says, in chapter eighteen, 
that good and evil angels guard the two ways:
“There are two ways of doctrine and authority, the one of light, 
and the other of darkness. But there is a great difference between these 
two ways. For over one are stationed the light-bearing angels of God, but 
over the other the angels of Satan. And He indeed (i.e., God) is Lord for 
ever and ever, but he (i.e., Satan) is prince of the time of iniquity."28
Here time and eternity are placed in antithesis—the 
eternal God, in contrast with Satan, who is limited to “the 
time of iniquity” that will end.
Next, in chapter nineteen (“The Way of Light”) Bar-
25 Ibid., chap. 11, p. 144. (Italics supplied.)
28 Ibid., chap. 12. pp. 144, 145.
27 Ibid., p. 145. (Brackets in original; italics supplied.)
28 Ibid., chap. 18, p. 148. (Italics supplied.)
nabas warns, “Thou shalt not join thyself to those who walk in 
the way of death,” 29 or darkness. And in chapter twenty (“The 
Way of Darkness”) he declares such a path to be the “way of 
eternal death.” Note the exact phrasing:
“But the way of darkness is crooked, and full of cursing;30 for it 
is the way of eternal death with punishment, in which way are the things 
that destroy the soul.”31
He proceeds to enumerate these “things.”
Dr. Petavel well comments:
"It should be observed that when the word eternal qualifies an act, 
the eternity is the attribute not of the act itself, but of the result of the 
act. It then denotes the perpetuity of the effect produced by the act or 
by the agent.” 32
5. 
“Eternal Death”: Synonym for Second Death.—The 
phrase “eternal death” appears in chapter twenty for the first 
time as a synonym for the second and definitive death. It is 
“eternal death with punishment.” Here distinction is to be 
made between punishment by deprivation of life and mere 
punishment by pain through the senses. “Eternal death with 
punishment” (meta timorias) obviously involves an infliction 
of suffering preceding death, and the end of being. And this 
statement by Barnabas is immediately followed by the conclu­
sion, in chapter twenty-one, which opens with:
“It is well, therefore, that he who has learned the judgments of the 
Lord, as many as have been written, should walk in them. For he who 
keepeth these shall be glorified in the kingdom of God; but he who 
chooseth other things [condemned in the previous chapter] shall be 
destroyed [apoleitai] with his works. On this account there will be a 
resurrection, on this account a retribution."33
To perish with his works is clearly to exist no more. The 
works are destroyed by coming to an end. Thus also with the 
worker of iniquity.31
782 
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
29 Ibid., chap. 19, p. 148.
80 Glimm’s tr., “accursed.”
31 The Epistle to Barnabas, chap. 20, p. 149.
32 Petavel, The Problem of Immortality, p. 194.
33 The Epistle of Barnabas, chap. 21, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 149. (Italics supplied.)
34 “The strong shall be as tow, and the maker of it as a spark, and they shall both 
burn together, and none shall quench them” (Isa. 1:31).
IMMORTALITY BESTOWED AT ADVENT 
783
6. 
To “Perish” Is to Exist No More.—Following this 
declaration of destruction Barnabas immediately declares: “For 
the day is at hand on which all things shall perish with the evil 
[one]. The Lord is near, and His reward.” 35
Satan, sinners, and all things will then be destroyed 
together. So Barnabas appropriately admonishes: “And be ye 
taught of God, inquiring diligently what the Lord asks from 
you; and do it that ye may be safe in the day of judgment.” 38
V. Eight Logical and Inescapable Conclusions to Be Deduced
That is the total testimony of Barnabas, witness of the faith 
of the church at this early period. This survey has covered the 
passages relating to our quest. Here follows a series of logical 
conclusions deduced from the foregoing evidence, both as to 
clear affirmation and significant omission.
1. In the entire epistle Barnabas does not once hint, 
either by phrase or thought, that man has an innately immor­
tal soul.
2. He never once states or infers anything about endless 
suffering or torment for the wicked. On the contrary, they are 
to die, perish, be destroyed, be blown away as the chaff, and 
eaten as by moths.
3. He speaks of the rleep of the dead, the coming of the 
Lord, the resurrection an/ endless life of the righteous, and 
definitive retribution of t.ir wicked. Even Dr. Edward Beecher, 
the restorationist, grudgingly admits that “what he [Barnabas] 
says may be understood of the annihilation of the wicked.” 87
4. Barnabas speaks of “life”—the hope of the “life which 
is to come”—and of some who “shall live for ever,” i.e., such 
as “hear the voice of my servant,” and of Satan depriving others 
of that life.
5. “Death” for the unrepentant sinner is a “punishment”
33 Ibid. (Brackets in original; italics supplied.)
38 Ibid.
37 Beecher, History of Opinions, p. 281.
784
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
that is eternal—equivalent to the “destruction” of the soul. 
By “destroy” he expressly meant to die, to perish, to bring to 
an end—hence “eternal death.”
6. As the sinner is “destroyed together with his works ” 
which definitely come to an end, so the sinner also comes to an 
end, after appropriate punishment ceasing to be.
7. Satan, the wicked one and prince of evil, is to be 
destroyed along with “all things” evil. But Satan is set forth 
as existing only for a “time,” the “time of iniquity.” In con­
trast with the Lord, who is from “everlasting to everlasting 
Satan is simply “the prince” of this passing world of time.
8. Thus the ungodly not only “perish” but “justly perish,” 
whereas the righteous will be eternally saved and glorified by 
the resurrection at the coming of the Lord, when they will 
receive incorruptibility.
Such was the Conditional Immortality voiced by Barnabas.
CHAPTER 
FORTY-SIX
mmortality a Gift; Death Is Utter 
Destruction
Hermas—Portrays Issues of Eternal Life and 
Utter Destruction
Next in probable order of time comes The Shepherd 
(or Pastor) of Hermas (c. a.d. 154),1 a popular collection of 
allegorical instructions—five so-called visions, twelve command­
ments, and ten similitudes, or parables, that were in circulation 
in the second, third, and fourth centuries. It is first mentioned 
in the Muratorian Fragment (c. a.d. 170) as written “very 
recently in our times,” and is noted by various Ante- and Post- 
Nicene church writers. More than that, it was read in public 
worship in the churches.2 Originally written in Greek, it was 
soon translated into Latin and Ethiopie, and is included in 
the Codex Sinaiticus.
The Pastor of Hermas was the initial effort at Christian 
allegory, and occupies a position similar to that of Bunyan’s 
Pilgrim’s Progress in modern times. It contains little dogmatic 
teaching, but throws light on the then-current beliefs of the 
church. Hermas also touches on prophecy, alluding to the 
coming conflict between a persecuting beast and a woman in 
white, symbolic of the church—evidently patterned after Reve­
lation 12.3 He warns of coming tribulation for the church, and 
gives assurance of ultimate victory.
1 “Introductory Note to The Pastor of Hermas,” in ANF, vol. 2, pp. 3-8. Goodspeed 
places it around 100.
2 Eusebius, Church History, chap. 3, in NPNF, vol. 1, p. 135.
3 On Hermas’ interpretation of prophecy see L. E. Froom, Prophetic Faith, vol. 1, pp. 
213, 214.
785
786
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
The writer likens the growth and perfection of the church 
to the building of a tower, with stones of character. And he 
adds, “When the tower is finished and built, then comes the 
end.” Following that is the coming world for the righteous, 
with destruction for the incorrigible sinner. Such, in a word, 
is the eschatology of Hermas. (See Table F, on page 758, for 
chronological placement and grouping.)
I. Two Destinations Portrayed in Multiple Forms
The treatise is distinctive in form and content. From 
beginning to end the “way of life” and the “way of death” 
are placed in paralleling contrast—the righteous living unto 
God and destined to eternal life, or life in the world to come; 
and the sinner doomed to death, loss of life, utter destruction, 
with God having power to save or destroy. We will follow the 
witness of Hermas through the three curious categories— 
visions, commandments, and similitudes—on the issues of life 
and death. First come the visions,4 stressing not only the 
proffered life but the utter destruction for the unrepentant 
sinner.
1. Eternal Life and Eternal Destruction.—In Vision 
Second, Hermas launches the continuing contrast. Wickedness, 
evil, and wrong “worketh death,” whereas those who are 
“saved” will “abide unto eternal life.” He adds, “Blessed are 
all they who practise righteousness, for they shall never he 
destroyed.”5 Those are the basic contrasts—eternal life and 
utter destruction. The pattern varies, but not the principle 
and the outcome. The emphasis all the way through is on 
life—life in Christ, resurrected life, eternal life.
2. Past Saints Have “Fallen Asleep.”—In Vision Third 
(“Concerning the Building of the Triumphant Church”),
4 Eusebius states that the Pentecostal prophetic gift was not considered as extinct, but
had a mission to rebuke carnality and worldliness. Some invoked Paul’s statement “Despise 
not prophcsyings; prove all things.”
6 The Pastor of Hermas, Vision 2, chap. 3, in ANF, vol. 2, p. 12. (Italics supplied.)
IMMORTALITY A GIFT; DEATH UTTER DESTRUCTION 787
Hermas portrays a great tower, with Christians as the com­
ponent stones, and the unfit cast out permanently, unless 
reclaimed by repentance. The polished “square white stones, 
which fitted exactly into each other,” are Christian leaders— 
“apostles, bishops, teachers, and deacons.” Some of them, he 
says, have “fallen asleep, and some still remain alive.” *
After describing those rough, crooked, ill-shaped stones 
that were “cast far away,” as not fit for the building,7 Hermas 
asserts that nevertheless all the faithful will inherit eternal 
life.8 And when the tower is “finished, there will not be more 
room for any one, but he will be rejected.” 9 Then the unrepent­
ant hypocrites and sons of iniquity that “cannot be used” 
are cut off and “cast far away.” 10 Finally, he declares, “When 
the tower is finished and built, then comes the end.” And he 
adds, “I assure you it will be soon finished.” 11
Some profess to see in this the germ of the doctrine of 
Purgatory, or claim that it teaches restoration for penitents 
in the nether world, by means of “remedial punishment.” But 
that is not the case—as the repentance is for those in this 
life, who are not yet cast into the fire as finally impenitent. 
It therefore refers only to this life. Repentance and delivery 
from punishment are possible, but only in this life.
S. 
Persecution and Trium
ph of Church Symbolized.—
 
Like the other Apostolic Fathers, Hermas similarly touches 
on prophecy. In Vision Fourth (“Concerning the Trial and 
Tribulation That Are to Come Upon Men”), Hermas pictures 
a symbolic “representation of the tribulation that is to come.” 
He sees a “monstrous beast,” noisy and powerful, stirring up 
a terrific dust. Fiery locusts issue from its mouth.32 Next, Hermas 
sees a woman “clothed entirely in white,” which represents 
the “church.”13 This beast, Hermas says, portrays the “great 
tribulation that is to come.” 14
a Ibid., Vision 3, chap. 5, p. 14. (Italics supplied.)
7 Ibid., chap. 6, p. 
15. 
11 Ibid., chap. 8, p. 16.
8 Ibid., chap. 8, p. 
15. 
12 Ibid., Vision 4, chap. 1, pp. 17, 18.
9 Ibid., chap. 5, p. 
i4. 
13 Ibid., chap. 2, p. 18.
10 Ibid., chap. o, p. 14. 
34 Ibid., chap. 3, p. 18.
788
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Hermas is curious as to the colors he has seen. It is 
explained that the black stands for the present world, “the 
world in which we dwell.” The “fiery and bloody points out 
that the world must perish through blood and fire.” But 
the white is “the age that is to come, in which the elect of 
God will dwell,” who are “elected by God to eternal life 
18 
All this was part of the curious symbolism of the tribulation 
and triumph—and eternal life.
4. Righteous Have Life; Wicked No Life.—In “Book 
Second.—Commandments,” after admonishing all to have 
faith in God, Hermas assures us that if we have faith in Him 
and keep His precepts, we shall “obtain life.” 19 On the con­
trary, he that doeth wickedly “works death for himself.”17 
And he repeats, that if we “hear and keep” His commandments 
we shall “live to God,” 18 live in the world to come. Then 
comes the climactic statement:
“They only who fear the Lord and keep His commandments have 
life with God;19 but as to those who keep not His commandments, there 
is no life in them.”20
Hermas clearly does not hold to inherent, indefeasible 
immortality for the wicked.
5. Wicked Are to Perish at Last.—Again, in Command­
ment Twelfth, Hermas thrice warns against “wicked desire,” 
declaring it is “wild, and is with difficulty tamed.” He contends 
it is ruinous, destructive. It “consumes” those who are not of 
“good desire,” and are “entangled” with “this world.” “These 
it delivers up to death” and “slays” even “the servants of 
God.”81 He declares that those who “are mastered” by evil 
desires “will perish at last,” because these desires are “fatal.” 22 
And finally he admonishes us to “fear Him who has all power,
38 Ibid.
10 Ibid., Commandments 1,3, in ANF, vol. 2, pp. 20, 21. 
37 Ibid., Commandment 4, chap. 1, p. 21.
18 Ibid., chap. 2, p. 22.
39 Dressel tr., “shall live for ever.”
20 Hermas. Commandment 7, p. 25.
21 Ibid., Commandment 12, chap. 1, p. 28.
22 Ibid., chap. 2, p. 28.
both to save and destroy, and keep His commandments, and 
ye will live to God”23
6. Righteous in Life to Come; Wicked Consumed.— 
“Book Third.—Similitudes” is largely illustrations or parables, 
such as the lesson of the trees, the tower, et cetera. In Similitude 
Third, in “Winter Green Trees Cannot Be Distinguished From 
Withered,” leafless trees. So in this world the just cannot 
always be distinguished from the unjust, for they may look much 
alike here. But in the summer “Living Trees Are Distinguished 
From Withered by Fruit and Living Leaves.” The shepherd 
told him that “ ‘Those’ . . . ‘which are budding are the 
righteous who are to live in the world to come.' ” 24 Thus the 
“fruits of the righteous” are manifest.
But the unfruitful sinners, like the “withered trees, . . . 
shall be burnt as wood.” The “sinners shall be consumed 
because they sinned and did not repent,” and likewise the 
heathen who “knew not Him who created them.” But if we 
“serve Him” we shall “bear fruit for the life to come.”25 
And in Similitude Fifth he adds that we are to keep the 
flesh “pure and stainless,” for “if you defile your flesh” you 
will “not live.” 28 Burning here certainly denotes suffering, but 
not endless suffering.
7. Wicked Destined to Everlasting Ruin.—Similitude 
Sixth touches on voluptuousness that brings death and corrup­
tion. Those with whom there is “no return to life through 
repentance” only add to their sins and blaspheme the name 
of the Lord. Such “are appointed unto death.” They have been 
“perverted from the truth.” But even among those steeped 
in corruption there is “hope of repentance, by which it is 
possible to live.” Thus again the contrasts are brought into 
view—a hope of “renewal” for some; but for others “death 
has everlasting ruin.” 27 There are punishments and tortures
24 Ibid., chap. 6, p. 30.
24 Ibid., Similitude 4, in ANF, vol. 2, p. 33. (Italics supplied.)
28 Ibid.
28 Ibid., Similitude 5, chap. 7, p. 36.
27 Ibid., Similitude 6, chap. 2, p. 37.
IMMORTALITY A GIFT; DEATH UTTER DESTRUCTION 789
790
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
for sin, but he is describing “tortures such as occur during 
life.” And of such as respond to God’s overtures, he says, “For 
the rest of the days of their life they are subject to the Lord 
with pure hearts.” 28 This is all during life, and before death. 
No probation after death is here offered, as some have professed 
to see.
8. Punishment Is Proportionate to Sin.—As to the dura­
tion of the punishment of the wicked, in chapter four Hermas 
asked the tall shepherd whether those who engage in sin are 
“tortured for the same period of time that they have indulged 
in luxury and deceit.” “ And the answer is, Longer—the time 
of indulgence is short, but that of punishment is long. But that 
neither involves nor implies endless suffering. Having life, 
they gave themselves “over to death”; and the warning is “If 
they continue in them, and do not repent, they bring death 
upon themselves.” 30
And in Similitude Eighth, under the simile of a tree and 
withered branches, he adds that “ ‘repentance involves life to 
sinners, but non-repentance death.’ ”31 Among the repentant, 
then, is found the “life of the Lord,” but among “transgressors, 
death.” 32 Such half-withered branches “lost their lives through 
the wickedness which they committed.” 33
9. Incorrigibly Wicked “Die for Ever.”—The parable 
of the tower is again referred to, in Similitude Ninth. The 
tower is “the Church,” 31 “ ‘founded on the word of the almighty 
and glorious Name, and it is kept together by the invisible 
power of the Lord.’ ”35 That tower “will be finished.” Hermas’ 
former recital of the used and rejected stones will be recalled. 
Hermas now adds that those “ ‘who have known God, and 
have seen His mighty works, and still continue on in evil, 
shall be chastised doubly, and shall die for ever.’”33
28 Ibid., chap. 
3, p. 37. 
31 Ibid., chap. 6, p. 41.
29 Ibid., chap. 
4, p. 37. 
32 Ibid., chap. 7, p. 42.
30 Ibid., chap. 
5, p. 38. 
33 Ibid., chap. 8. p. 42.
34 Ibid., Similitude 9, chap. 13, p. 48; cf. Vision 3, chap. 3, p 13.
33 Ibid., Vision 3, chap. 3, p. 14.
38 Ibid., Similitude 9, chap. 18, p. 50.
10. 
Conclusions From Notable Silences in Hermas.— 
Such is the testimony of The Shepherd of Hermas on the nature 
of man—with life as the reward of repentance and obedience, 
and death as the punishment for sin. There is no hint of 
consciousness between death and the resurrection—rather, 
man “sleeps.” There is not, however, complete constancy. There 
is nothing of the soul going to Heaven or Hell at death. 
Instead, that concept does not appear in Christian literature 
for another fifty years. There is nothing of Eternal Torment 
of the damned—only utter destruction after just retribution 
in proportion to transgression.
There is nothing of an immortal soul or any undying 
spirit—neither of those terms or concepts had as yet been 
introduced into Christian literature. Hermas believed expressly 
in the mortality of man, the sleep of the dead, immortality 
as the gift of God for the righteous, and that utter, final, and 
irrevocable destruction is the lot of the unrepentant wicked 
—a death in which there is no life, or return to life.
II. Polycarp—Resurrection Is Immortality’s Sole Gateway
Soon after the middle of the second century the series 
of Apostolic Fathers ends with the venerable Polycarp (d. a.d. 
155), martyred bishop of Smyrna. According to Irenaeus, 
Tertullian, and Eusebius, he was a disciple of the apostle John 
and also the teacher of the noted Irenaeus. Under Marcus 
Antoninus a storm of persecution broke out in Smyrna, which, 
swelling into a tempest, engulfed Polycarp in the seventh year 
of the emperor’s reign. His last prayer at the stake, as he was 
burned for his faith, is recorded by Eusebius. It tells of his 
unwavering belief in the resurrection of the soul, as well as 
of the body.
Of Polycarp’s personal life little is known. Irenaeus states 
that he not only was a disciple of John but was acquainted 
with many who knew Christ. Polycarp was bishop of Smyrna 
when Ignatius was bishop of Antioch. It was from him that
IMMORTALITY A GIFT; DEATH UTTER DESTRUCTION 791
792
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Polycarp had received a letter shortly before he was to suffer 
death at Rome. And during his brief sojourn in Rome, Poly­
carp bore witness to the apostolic doctrine, and attempted to 
stay the encroaching heresies.
Of various letters written by Polycarp only one has been 
preserved—his short Epistle to the Philippians. The church 
at Philippi was the first of the European churches to be 
founded, and was greatly beloved by Paul. This epistle is 
acknowledged by all as authentic, both from external and 
internal evidence.37 A major portion of it was incorporated 
by Eusebius in his Church History.38 In Jerome’s time Polycarp 
was publicly read in some of the churches.
III. Conditional Resurrection the Determining Factor
The entire epistle, which is interwoven with references 
to more New Testament writings than any other work of this 
early age, has been preserved only in Latin. The Greek text 
ends in chapter nine. The letter is not primarily doctrinal, 
but is a general exhortation to godliness in all the relation­
ships of life. Polycarp speaks in general terms of the reward 
of the righteous and the punishment of the wicked, emphasizing 
redemption only through Christ and stressing the resurrection 
from the dead at the Second Advent and the subsequent 
reigning of the saints with Christ.
Polycarp felt strongly that denial of the incarnation is “of 
the devil.” More than that, Polycarp declares that he who 
says “there is neither a resurrection nor a judgment, he is the 
first-born of Satan.” 30 But, severe though his strictures were, 
there is nowhere any intimation either of belief in the eternal 
suffering of the lost or of Restorationism—neither of which 
innovation was introduced until three quarters of a century 
after the death of this last of the Apostolic Fathers.
37 See Irenaeus, Against Heresies, book 3, chap. 3, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 416; Eusebius, 
Church History, book 4, chap. 14, in NPNF, 2d series, vol. 1, pp. 187, 188.
38 Eusebius, op. cit., book 4, chap. 15.
38 The Epistle of Polycarp, chap. 7, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 34.
IMMORTALITY A GIFT; DEATH UTTER DESTRUCTION 793
1. Ignatius’ Admonitions Regarding Immortality.—It 
is to be remembered that Polycarp was the recipient of an 
epistle from his fellow bishop Ignatius of Antioch—likewise 
a believer in Conditional Immortality—reminding Polycarp 
that he is, as it were, an “athlete of God,” striving for the 
“prize set before thee” of “immortality and eternal life.” ** 
Then he urges Polycarp to remember his oneness with his 
fellow laborers in the gospel, listing five features in which 
they are to maintain their unity:
“Labour together with one another; strive in company together; run 
together; suffer together; sleep together [in death]; and awake together 
[in the resurrection], as the stewards, and associates, and servants of God.” 41
That is clear—sleeping in death until awakened on the 
resurrection morn by the Life-giver.
Polycarp’s own testimony may well be read in the light 
of Bishop Ignatius’ admonitions, to which he subscribed. They 
were obviously at one in belief as to the nature and destiny 
of man. Though fragmentary, these many parts present a 
rather clear over-all picture.
2. Resurrection Pivotal in Man’s Future.—In Polycarp’s 
own view the resurrection was pivotal in relation to the future 
destiny of man. In chapter two of his Epistle to the Philippians, 
after urging belief in our Lord Jesus Christ, who was Himself 
raised from the dead, glorified, and enthroned in the heavens, 
Polycarp tells of His second advent—and with it of our own 
consequent resurrection:
“He comes as the Judge of the living and the dead. His blood will 
God require of those who do not believe in Him. But He who raised 
Him up from the dead will raise up us also, if we do His will and walk 
in His commandments, and love what He loved.” 42
The crucial “if” makes it conditional, and the condition 
is clearly declared.
40 Epistle of Ignatius to Polycarb, chap. 2, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 94.
41 Ibid., chap. 6, p. 95.
42 The Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians, chap. 2, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 33. (Italics 
supplied.)
794
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
3. 
Sole 
Basis 
of 
Hope for 
“Future 
World.”—The 
relationship of the resurrection to our reign with Christ in 
the “future world,” conditioned on our relationship to Him 
in this “present world,” is presented in chapter five:
“If we please Him in this present world, we shall receive also the 
future world, according as He has promised to us that He will raise us 
again from the dead, and that if we live worthily of Him, ‘we shall also 
reign together with Him’ [2 Tim. 2:12].”43
The repetition of the “if” clearly indicates emphasis on the 
concept of conditional resurrection at the time of the Second 
Advent. This constitutes the very essence of Conditionalism. 
Only the righteous come forth at the resurrection of the just. 
Not all are saved. Not all have incorruption conferred upon 
them. Not all have a part in the “future world.” That is for 
the righteous alone. Polycarp does not here deal with the 
eventual resurrection of the wicked.
4. 
Strictures 
on 
Deniers 
of 
the 
Resurrection.— 
Polycarp’s only reference to the prophesied “antichrist” (1 John 
4:3) appears in chapter seven in connection with a denial of 
the resurrection, where he uses severe strictures in describing 
such perverters of the gospel. Warning of the dangers of the 
time he says:
“ ‘For whosoever does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the 
flesh, is antichrist;’ and whosoever does not confess the testimony of the 
[suffering on the] cross, is of the devil; and whosoever perverts the 
oracles of the Lord to his own lusts, and says that there is neither a 
resurrection nor a judgment, he is the first-born of Satan.” 44
But there is no consignment to Eternal Torment. Such 
are the teachings of the last of the Apostolic Fathers, pressing 
insistently on the literal resurrection, soon to come under 
attack. Possibly in studying the current trends, Polycarp had 
a premonition of coming departures.
5. Resurrection “Both of Soul and Body.”—In addi­
tion, we should note the references in The Epistle Concerning
43 Ibid., chap. 5, p. 34. (Italics supplied.)
44 Ibid., chap. 7, p. 34.
IMMORTALITY A GIFT; DEATH UTTER DESTRUCTION 795
the Martyrdom of Polycarp, sent forth from the church at 
Smyrna, one of the seven churches of Asia Minor, to Philo- 
melium (Phrygia). It is generally regarded as authentic, though 
there are certain extravagant apocryphal supplements appended 
at the close. This epistle gives a firsthand account of the circum­
stances attending the martyrdom of Polycarp, and is evidently 
the earliest of the martyrologies. The authentic main portion 
is also preserved by Eusebius as the oldest record of a martyr­
dom that he knew. The prayer of Polycarp at the stake is 
pertinent to our quest. His dying belief and hope in the resur­
rection is again stressed, with a unique emphasis. Here are 
his words, after referring to “the righteous who live before 
Thee”:
“ ‘O Lord God Almighty, die Father of Thy beloved and blessed 
Son Jesus Christ, ... I give Thee thanks that Thou hast counted me 
worthy of this day and this hour, that I should have a part in the 
number of Thy martyrs, in the cup of thy Christ, to the resurrection of 
eternal life, both of soul and body, through the incorruption [imparted] 
by the Holy Ghost.’ ” 45
He clearly linked the resurrection of both soul and body 
with the resurrection unto eternal life.
6. 
No Allusion to Eternal Torment.—In the Smyrnaean 
epistle reference is made to Polycarp’s “blameless life,” and to 
his being “crowned with the wreath of immortality,”49 and 
having by patience “overcome the unjust governor, and thus 
acquired the crown of immortality.” 47 The epistle contains this 
allusion to the destiny of the wicked in quoting Polycarp’s 
reply to the proconsul:
‘‘But Polycarp said [to the proconsul], ‘Thou threatenest me with 
fire which burneth for an hour, and after a little is extinguished, but 
art ignorant of the fire of the coming judgment and of eternal punish-
45 The Encyclical Epistle of the Church at Smyrna Concerning the Martyrdom of the Holy 
Polycarp, chap. 14, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 42. (Brackets in original; italics supplied.) Eusebius’ 
version reads, “in the immortality of the Holy Spirit” (Church History, book 4. chap. 15, 
in NPNF, 2d series, vol. 1, p. 191). Glimm reads, “in the incorruptibility of the Holy Ghost” 
(The Apostolic Fathers, in The Fathers of the Church series, p. 158).
48 The Martyrdom of Polycarp, chap. 17, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 42.
47 Ibid., chap. 19, p. 43.
796
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
ment, reserved for the ungodly. But why tarriest thou? Bring forth 
what thou wilt.”48
So he went to his death. But there is not a word about 
Eternal Torment. He never intimates the endless existence 
of the lost in eternal suffering. Eternal punishment is not 
eternal punishing. That is the testimony of Polycarp.
IV. Epistle of Mathetes to Diognetus—“Immortal Soul” 
and “Eternal Fire” Problems
At this point note must be taken of pertinent statements 
in the not too well known Epistle of Mathetes to Diognetus 
(c. a.d. 130). Some place it in the early third century. Moehler 
called it a “brilliant gem of Christian antiquity.” It was an 
answer from an unidentified Christian—who was a master of 
Greek style—to an inquiry from the distinguished pagan 
Diognetus, believed by some to have been the tutor of Marcus 
Aurelius.49 Diognetus had asked a series of questions: What 
God do the Christians trust in? Why do they “despise death”? 
What is the explanation of their mutual love? What is their 
mode of worship, and what is the difference between Christian 
beliefs and those of the Greeks and Jews?90
This epistle may be considered a connecting link between 
the shorter exhortations of the Apostolic Fathers and the 
elaborate apologies of Justin Martyr and his successors. It was 
at one time wrongly attributed to Justin. It emphasizes godly 
living rather than dogmatic beliefs. Yet it combats with vigor 
the twin errors of the Jews and the Greeks, and shows famili­
arity with Pauline and Johannine teachings. It is believed 
to have been written in the mid-second century, and is therefore 
placed at the close of the line of Apostolic Fathers. (See Tabular 
Chart F, on page 758.)
18 Ibid., chap. 11, p. 41. It should be noted that this statement is received at fourth 
hand, according to Cave (Life of Polycarp, chap. 6)—through Euaristus, Caius, Socrates, and 
Pionius, and is therefore none too trustworthy as to exact phrasing.
19 See Christian Charles Bunsen, Hippolytus and His Age, vol. 1, p. 188; also Wil­
liam F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and 
Other Early Christian Literature.
00 The Epistle of Mathetes to Diognetus, chap. 1, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 25.
IMMORTALITY A GIFT; DEATH UTTER DESTRUCTION 797
Mathetes’ well-phrased answer—which might well have 
sufficed for a formal written defense presented to a judge— 
comprises ten chapters, plus two at the close recognized by all 
as a later spurious appendage. It is an earnest vindication of 
Christianity, a book of Christian evidences. In chapter two 
it portrays the vanity of worshiping idols, which are deaf, 
blind, insensible, without life or locomotion—and are corrupt­
ible. Then in chapter three the writer discusses the sacrifices 
of the Jews, and the Creator, “who stands in need of nothing.” 
Their meats, ceremonial sabbaths and new moons, and circum­
cision are now useless.51
1. Put to D
eath; 
Restored Through 
Resurrection.—
 
Chapter five deals with the paradoxical life of the Christians. 
As do other citizens, they dwell in their native lands, yet are 
“foreigners” and “sojourners.” They are regarded as aliens by 
the Jews, and are persecuted by the pagans. But there is no 
marked difference.
“They are in the flesh, but they do not live after the flesh. They 
pass their days on earth, but they are citizens of heaven. They obey 
the prescribed laws, and at the same time surpass the law by their lives. 
They love all men, and are persecuted by all. They are unknown and 
condemned; they are put to death, and restored to life.”62
This restoration, or coming to life, refers, of course, to 
the resurrection at the last day. And Mathetes adds, “When 
punished, they rejoice as if quickened into life.” 53 The blessed 
hope of the Second Advent was ever before them.
2. The Relationship of Soul and Body.—In chapter six 
Mathetes puts “The Relation of Christians to the World” 
in this way:
“What the soul is in the body, that are Christians in the world. The 
soul is dispersed through all the members of the body, and Christians 
are scattered through all the cities of the world. The soul dwells in the 
body, yet is not of the body; and Christians dwell in the world, yet are 
not of the world.”54
61 Ibid., chaps. 3, 4, p. 26.
62 Ibid., chap. 5, p. 27. (Italics supplied.)
53 Ibid.
54 Ibid., chap. 6, p. 27.
798
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Then he adds, “The flesh [the world] hates the soul [the 
Christians], and wars against it.” Nevertheless, “the soul loves 
the flesh that hates it.” 05 That is why the Christians, although 
they are punished through persecution, “increase in number 
daily.” “
3. First Use of “Immortal Soul” in Christian Writings. 
—And now follows apparently the first use of the expression 
“immortal soul” in a Christian work. It is, however, used in a 
conditional sense; otherwise it would be in conflict with other 
clear statements in the same treatise. According to two scholarly 
investigators, Dr. Emmanuel Petavel, of the University of 
Lausanne, and Prof. Charles F. Hudson, of Cambridge, Massa­
chusetts, this is, indeed, the first use in any early Christian work 
of the phrase “immortal soul.” 67 Here is the statement, continu­
ing the figure of soul and body:
“The immortal soul dwells in a mortal tabernacle; and Christians 
dwell as sojourners in corruptible [bodies], looking for an incorruptible 
dwelling (note 10: “literally, ‘incorruption’”), in the heavens.”68
4. Christ Sent as “God” and “Saviour”; Comes Later as 
Judge.—In chapter seven (“The Manifestation of Christ”) 
Mathetes tells how God sent not an angel or other emissary 
to this earth, but sent as His Messenger the “very Creator and 
Fashioner of all things.” He came not to inspire “terror” but 
to proclaim “clemency.” The Father sent Christ “as a king 
sends his son,” as a Saviour, “seeking to persuade, not to com­
pel.” He came not as a judge. But Mathetes adds, “He will 
yet send Him to judge us, and who shall endure His appear­
ing?” 09 Thus the solemnity of the Second Advent is introduced.
5. 
Every 
Blessing 
Conferred 
Through 
Christ.—In 
chapter eight (“The Miserable State of Men Before the Com­
ing of the Word”), after touching on the “vain and silly
<* ibid.
58 Ibid., note 11.
57 Petavel, The Problem of Immortality, p. 236, note 5; see also C. F. Hudson, 
Debt and Grace as Related to the Doctrine of a Future Life, p. 298.
58 The Epistle to Diognetus, chap. 6, in AMF, vol. 1, p. 27. (Brackets in original.)
5B Ibid., chap. 7, p. 27.
IMMORTALITY A GIFT; DEATH UTTER DESTRUCTION 799
doctrines” of the “philosophers,” Mathetes tells how the true 
and living God, the “friend of mankind,” sent all blessings in 
Christ:
“He revealed and laid open, through His beloved Son, the things 
which had been prepared from the beginning. He conferred every bless­
ing (note 5: “literally, ‘all things’ ”), all at once upon us, so that we 
should both share in His benefits, and see and be active [in His service].” 80
6. 
Christ, Incorruptible and Immortal; Man, Corrupt­
ible and Mortal.—Discussing, in chapter nine, “Why the Son 
Was Sent So Late,” Mathetes says that God sought to convince 
mankind “of our [man’s] unworthiness of attaining life through 
our own works.” Life must come through the “kindness of 
God.” Christ came to make “manifest” that “in ourselves we 
were unable to enter into the kingdom of God,” but that “we 
might through the power of God be made able.”61 When 
“wickedness had reached its height,” its “reward” became clearly 
revealed as “punishment and death.” Then, in this connection 
we are declared corruptible and mortal, and lost without Christ. 
Here is his comprehensive description of praise, contrasting 
the immortal Christ:
“He Himself took on Him the burden of our iniquities, He gave 
His own Son as a ransom for us, the holy One for transgressors, the 
blameless One for the wicked, the righteous One for the unrighteous, 
the incorruptible One for the corruptible, the immortal One for them 
that are mortal. For what other thing was capable of covering our sins 
than His righteousness? By what other one was it possible that we, the 
wicked and ungodly, could be justified, than by the only Son of God? 
O sweet exchange! O unsearchable operation! O benefits surpassing all 
expectation! that the wickedness of many should be hid in a single 
righteous One, and that the righteousness of One should justify many 
transgressors!” 82
Thus man became “convinced . . . that our nature was 
unable to attain to life,” and the Saviour was revealed as the only 
One “who is able to save.” And so God leads us “to esteem Him 
[Christ] our Nourisher, Father, Teacher, Counsellor, Healer,
00 Ibid., chap. 8, p. 28. (Brackets in original.)
61 Ibid., chap. 9, p. 28. (Italics supplied.)
02 Ibid.
800
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
our Wisdom, Light, Honour, Glory, Power, and Life” 63 He 
is the source of our life and immortality.
7. 
Eternal Fire; Both a Process and a Termination.— 
Continuing the theme in chapter ten (“The Blessings That 
Will Flow From Faith”), Mathetes declares that God “made 
the world” for man, whom He loved, and gave him “reason 
and understanding,” imparting the privilege of looking up­
ward to God, and promising him a “kingdom in heaven,” 
which He will give “to those who have loved Him.” Mathetes 
then says that when we see the “deceit and error of the world” 
and “suffer punishment,” we while still on earth shall “know 
what it is to live truly in heaven.” And now comes his key 
statement on the destruction of the wicked by eternal fire:
“Thou shalt despise that which is here esteemed to be death, when 
thou shalt fear what is truly death, which is reserved for those who shall 
be condemned to the eternal fire, which shall afflict those even to the 
end that are committed to it. Then shalt thou admire those who for 
righteousness’ sake endure the fire that is but for a moment, and shalt 
count them happy when thou shalt know [the nature of] that fire.” “
Hudson observes, “This cannot denote the common view 
of punishment without end.” Rather, it means the fire that “will 
exterminate.”05 Mathetes evidently believed in the consistency 
of two ideas that are often held to be incompatible—the 
thought of “eternal fire” as a punishment, and the thought 
of that punishment’s ultimately having an “end” The differ­
ence lies between the expression “even to the end,” or until 
the end, and that which would be without, an end—a condition 
that Mathetes neither states nor implies. Here a work of 
inexorable destruction is portrayed, and its final result. To 
Mathetes, “destroy” obviously indicates both a process and a 
termination. Mathetes adds that those who are martyred here 
“endure the fire that is but for a moment,” in contrast with
03 ibid.
81 Ibid., chap. 10, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 29. (Brackets in original; italics supplied.)
Hudson’s translation reads: “ ‘When thou canst despise that which appearetb to be 
death here; when thou dreadest that which really is death, a death which is kept in store 
for those who will be condemned to that eternal fire which will punish unto the end [mechri 
telous] those whom it receiveth’ ” (Debt and Grace, p. 299. Italics supplied).
65 Hudson, op. cit., p. 299, note 1.
the fire that is for the wicked,66 and which ends in their 
destruction.
That is all, and that is his climax. The witness is frag­
mentary, but it is clearly indicative of Mathetes’ continuance 
of the Apostolic Fathers’ positions.
V. Summarizing Conclusion Concerning the Apostolic Fathers
It has often been asserted that the dogma of the Innate 
Immortality of the soul and the Eternal Torment of the 
wicked, as later taught by Tertullian and finally established 
by Augustine, was always the position of the Early Christian 
Church. But the scholarly investigations of Henry Constable, 
Anglican Prebendary of Cork, Ireland, led him to reply with 
positiveness, “We wholly deny it.” And after his exhaustive 
study of the Apostolic Fathers, Constable declared that they 
were just as much opposed to the everlasting-torment theories 
of Augustine as to the theories of Origen and his universal- 
restoration concept. Here is the key statement of Constable’s 
sweeping conclusion:
“From beginning to end of them [the Apostolic Fathers] there is not 
one word said of that immortality of the soul which is so prominent in 
the writings of the later fathers. Immortality is by them asserted to be 
peculiar to the redeemed. The punishment of the wicked is by them 
emphatically declared to be everlasting. Not one stray expression of theirs 
can be interpreted as giving any countenance to the theory of restoration 
after purgatorial suffering. The fire of hell is with them, as with us, 
an unquenchable one; but its issue is, with them as with Scripture, 
‘destruction,’ ‘deadi,’ ‘loss of life.’ ”07
Constable even went so far as to issue this challenge to 
his contemporaries, which appears in each of the six editions 
of his major treatise, “We challenge our opponents to contro­
vert our view of them in a single particular.” 68 And it should 
be added that no one during his lifetime, when discussion 
over the question was rife, ever undertook to disprove his 
contention.
06 The Epistle to Diognetus, chap. 10, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 29.
67 Constable, The Duration and Nature of Future Punishment, p. 167.
“ Ibid.
IMMORTALITY A GIFT; DEATH UTTER DESTRUCTION 801
26
802
CONDITIONAL1ST FAITH
On the point of the total destruction of the wicked, 
Constable’s general conclusion, based on thorough research, 
and covering the Apostolic Fathers as a whole, is:
“Every one of the men who were contemporaries of the apostles, 
and have left to our time any of their writings, agree with our view of 
future punishment as consisting in the destruction of the ungodly, their 
becoming as a thing of nought.”68
In similar vein is the testimony of the scholarly Dr. Petavel:
“The apostolic Fathers never speak of a native immortality: an 
immortal life is in their view the exclusive privilege of the redeemed. 
The punishment of the rejected consists in a gradual destruction of their 
being, which finally becomes total. This punishment is called eternal, 
as being definitive and irremediable; we have already shown in the 
Scripture this use of an adjective, qualifying not the momentary action 
but the permanent results of the action. Neither do the apostolic Fathers 
speak of a universal salvation; they teach that the unquenchable fire will 
consume its victims; in a word, they all with one accord appear to be 
Conditionalists.” 70
With the findings of these two specialists the findings of 
our own independent researches are in complete accord.
*> Ibid., p. 170.
70 Petavel, op. cit., pp. 229, 230.
CHAPTER 
FORTY-SEVEN
Justin Martyr Augments 
Subapostolic Conditionalism
I. Ante-Nicene Period Infiltrated by Platonic Immortal-Soulism
As already noted, the earliest literature of the Apostolic 
Fathers will be searched in vain for the telltale phrases of 
the Neoplatonic dogma—“immortal soul,” “eternal spirit,” 
“eternal suffering,” and such—that now begin to appear with 
increasing frequency in this new ante-Nicene period. The 
Apostolic Fathers were all Conditionalists, as also were Justin 
Martyr of Samaria, Tatian of Assyria, Theophilus of Antioch, 
Irenaeus of Lyons, Novatian of Rome, Arnobius of Sicca, and 
evidently others of the crucial era we are now entering. 
These likewise maintained the postulate that man is mortal, 
with Immortality as a gift from God for the righteous only.
1. 
Frontal and Flanking A
ttacks Develop.—The ante- 
Nicene period extends from Justin Martyr, about a.d. 150 on 
to a.d. 325, the date of the Nicene General Council. This was 
the period of the phenomenal spread of Christianity through­
out Europe, Africa, and Asia Minor, and its inevitable struggle 
with Judaism and heathenism—and all this amid persecutions 
by the Roman state. It was a crisis hour for the church, a 
time of transition in which grave perversions began to appear.
Vicious frontal attacks upon Christianity and the Scrip­
tures were made by Celsus and others. These called forth 
the vigorous defensive literature of church leaders—apologies 
frequently addressed to the emperors. During this period a host 
of martyrs were put to death in one of the most moving
803
804
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
spectacles of Christian heroism of the centuries. However, ere­
long veneration for their noble sacrifice degenerated into wor­
ship of saints and reliance on relics purporting to have 
meritorious value. And in time the exaltation of the clergy 
was followed by the development of a dominating episcopate.
But far more serious to Christian beliefs were the inroads 
made by the flanking attacks of mystical philosophy. As heresies 
began to appear, controversies inevitably developed with those 
trained in the schools of Athens or Alexandria. Curiously 
enough, the arguments of philosophy were first brought for­
ward ostensibly that men might not be blinded by the sudden 
light of Scripture.1 Various writers began to stress variant 
viewpoints, differing from all others. Doctrinal beliefs had not 
yet been crystallized, and there was diversity of view, with 
liberty of conviction accorded those who differed.
2. 
Gnosticism Undermines Teaching of Resurrection. 
—During this time Gnosticism, a far-flung religio-philosophical 
movement, came into prominence, followed by the Manichaean 
philosophy. The apostle Paul had warned against gnosis (knowl­
edge), falsely so-called 
(1 Tim. 6:20). The Gnostics drew 
their speculations from a mingling of Oriental paganism, 
Alexandrian philosophy, and Christian sources. They sought 
to construct a theory of the universe, with ultimate harmony 
restored by destruction of all matter. They claimed a secret 
knowledge inaccessible to the uninitiated. It was a mystic 
religion, seeking assurance of a fortunate destiny for the soul 
after death. They segregated men into three classes—the third 
group being wholly material, and thus beyond salvation, be­
cause they had no spark of the “divine” within them.
It was based largely on an Oriental Dualism, with the 
two antagonistic worlds of good and evil, light and darkness, 
divine and material—the material being the seat of evil. It 
taught a series of emanations from the Supreme Being, which
1 B. F. Westcott, A General Survey of the History of the Canon of the New Testa­
ment, pp. 63-65.
were half angelic and half demonic. And it was strongly 
influenced by Greek Platonism.
Thus “Christian” Gnosticism sought to combine the 
teachings of the historical Jesus with “enlightenment” derived 
from heathen poets and philosophers. But the essence of the 
Gnostic notion of redemption was liberation of the spirit from 
its connection with matter, thus affecting the whole concept 
of the resurrection. The Gnostics did not attempt to form a 
separate ecclesiastical organization, but penetrated into exist­
ing church circles. And the peak of Gnosticism was reached 
in the latter part of the second century.
3. 
Neoplatonic 
Mysticism 
Supplants 
Literalism.— 
While the early successors of the apostles gave clear expression 
to the apostolic hope and expectation—the literal second 
coming of Christ, accompanied by the literal resurrection of 
the dead—Greek concepts regarding human survival and 
inherent immortality now began to intrude into certain 
patristic writings. Indeed, the subtle sophistries that made the 
Innate Immortality of the soul the central feature of Greek 
thought, made steady encroachment upon the church until 
under Origen, the Neoplatonic philosopher of Alexandria, it 
triumphed in open subversion of the literal second coming 
of Christ and of the literal resurrection of the dead cherished 
by the apostles. This is clearly stated by Dr. John Laidlaw, 
in his Cunningham Lecture, at the Free Church College of 
Edinburgh, in 1877:
“Gradually, in Christian schools, the Greek influence prevailed, and 
even in the Christian Church the idea of the soul’s immortality for long 
[centuries] took the place of the Scripture doctrine of a future life.”2
4. Release of the Soul From the Body.—Thus the 
philosophical concept of an “immortal essence” in man was 
substituted for that of complete redemption for which Holy 
Writ instructed the believer to wait and to yearn. The Christian 
hope came gradually to be superseded by “the hope of release
JUSTIN MARTYR AUGMENTS CONDITIONALISM 
805
2 John Laidlaw, The Bible Doctrine of Man, p. 233.
806
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
from the body at death, instead of the body’s redemption and a 
perfected salvation for the whole nature of the man.” 3 It was 
a tangent path that led farther and farther away from the 
road trodden by the Apostolic Fathers and a smaller group 
of the Ante-Nicene Fathers as well. It was a distinct departure.
5. Immortal-Soulism Well-nigh Extinguishes Blessed 
Hope.—As a result, an admixture of the two concepts began 
to appear in a majority of the writings of the Fathers of this 
period. And contrariwise, the light of the blessed hope dimmed 
steadily, until it was virtually extinguished in the Dark Ages, 
when the teaching of Innate Immortality, with its fanciful 
accessories, came to hold well-nigh complete sway.
Conflicting claims have been put forth concerning the 
testimony of these ante-Nicene witnesses. To claim that the 
entire body of Early Church writings constitutes a case for 
Conditionalism would be to contravene the simple facts of 
historical record. And similarly, for proponents of Innate 
Immortality loosely to make similar claims of uniformity for 
Immortal-Soulism is equally contrary to fact. Two schools of 
thought definitely existed side by side. Testimony for both 
positions is clearly on record,4 for both views were struggling 
for supremacy—the apostolic view, which insisted on the 
Second Advent and the resurrection, and the Greek concept, 
based on the postulate of the soul’s inherent immortality. These 
conflicting positions we must now trace.
6. Writers 
Segregate 
Themselves 
into 
Three-way 
Split.—The ante- and post-Nicene writers thus divide them­
selves into two opposite schools of thought and teaching. A 
minority continued to hold to the earlier Conditional-Immor- 
tality position, while the majority became committed to the 
new universal Innate-Immortality concept. But this larger
3 Ibid.
4 Another confusing factor that must be frankly recognized is the changing views 
of individuals over a period of years. Early concepts were sometimes in conflict with later 
convictions. There is no way of harmonizing the two except by recognizing the simple fact 
that they changed their minds—sometimes one way, sometimes the other. Otherwise there 
is irreconcilable inconsistency, conflict, and nullification of testimony.
JUSTIN MARTYR AUGMENTS CONDITIONALISM 
807
group, holding the dogma of inherent and indefeasible 
immortality for good and evil alike, soon split into two oppos­
ing groups:
(1) A majority, who championed the related dogma of 
the Eternal Torment of the immortal wicked; and (2) those 
who adopted the postulate of the ultimate universal restoration 
of all the indefeasibly immortal wicked.
These variant groups, with their conflicting concepts of 
life and death, are listed for convenient over all view in chrono­
logical and categorical order and grouping in the Tabular 
Chart on page 758. Personal conclusions may be drawn by the 
reader. The documented evidence appears throughout these 
chapters. Summarizing charts appear periodically to aid in ob­
taining an accurate over-all view.
II. Justin Martyr—Champions and Amplifies 
Apostolic Conditionalism
Following close upon the last of the Apostolic Fathers, 
Justin Martyr introduces a new group of able church leaders 
and writers, beginning in the middle of the second century. 
These are the Ante-Nicene Fathers—that is, dated before the 
Council of Nicea in a.d. 325. During this second period, or 
epoch, despite the penetrations of pagan Platonic philosophy, 
a notable line of witnesses—Justin, Tatian, Theophilus, 
Polycrates, Irenaeus, Novatian, and Arnobius—continues to 
hold to the apostolic position on the nature and destiny of man.
First in the series was Justin M
artyr, or Justin the Philos­
opher (c. a.d. 106-c. 165), foremost apologist of the second 
century who was finally beheaded for his testimony. He was 
probably a Roman citizen, although born in Samaria. He 
received a liberal Hellenic education. Then, traveling exten­
sively, he made the rounds of the leading systems of philosophy 
—Stoic, Aristotelian (Peripatetic), Pythagorean, and Platonic 
—ever searching for truth, particularly that he might find
Justin Martyr—Denies Sepa­
rate 
Immortality 
of Soul; 
Teaches Final Annihilation 
for Wicked.
the true relation between God and man, and the true nature 
and destiny of man.
Platonism, with its impressive concepts of truth, beauty, 
and goodness, fascinated him for a time. But the inescapable 
truth of the Old Testament—the New was not yet compiled 
and in general circulation—together with the fearlessness of 
the Christians in the presence of death, led him to find in 
Christ what he had failed to find in Plato. Thenceforth, from 
his conversion (c. a.d. 130), he devoted his life to the defense 
of Christianity when it was being fiercely assailed. He sealed 
his testimony with his blood when the public profession of 
Christianity was a crime, as it was still legally proscribed.6
1. 
Dawn of a New Era in Christian History.—Justin’s 
conversion marked the dawn of a distinctly new era in Christian 
history, as he became the first of the Christian apologists whose
5 According to Eusebius, during the reign of Antoninus Pius the philosophers, partic­
ularly the Cynics, plotted against Justin’s life, and brought about his martyrdom in the reign 
of Marcus Aurelius, the Chronicon Paschale giving the date of a.d. 165. (See Eusebius, Church 
History, book 4, chap. 16, note 4, in NPNF, 2d scries, vol. 1, pp. 193-195.)
808
JUSTIN MARTYR AUGMENTS CONDITIONALISM 
809
works have come down to us, initiating a literature that forced 
the truths of Christianity upon the attention of a pagan world 
—despite its hostilities, its blazing fagots, and the casting of 
Christian believers to the lions. Justin addressed his First 
Apology to Antoninus Pius 
(a.d. 138-161) about 147 or 155, 
and his Second Apology was released upon the accession of 
Marcus Aurelius, in a.d. 161. It was addressed to the Roman 
Senate.
In these Justin effectively exposed the foolishness of human 
wisdom, the weakness of the Socrato-Platonic philosophy, and 
the impotency of paganism. He discomfited philosophy with 
its own weapons, exposing the sham and absurdity of its super­
stitions, while boldly defending his adopted faith. His polemi­
cal pen was busy combating Marcion the Gnostic, Trypho the 
Jew, and others. Regrettably, a number of his writings have 
been lost.
Leaving Palestine, Justin became an itinerant missionary- 
evangelist, heralding Christianity as the only way of assured 
salvation. He then lived for a time in Ephesus, later returning 
to Rome, where he evidently settled as a Christian teacher. 
He was not a bishop, but through his writings many were led 
to embrace Christianity. And as a result many died heroically 
and sublimely for their Lord and faith.
2. 
Champions the Only True Philosophy.—Prior to 
Justin, pagan philosophy had been ascendant. Even the 
Antonines reigned as philosophers. But now Justin confronts 
them with a new philosophy—the only philosophy, he claims, 
that will endure the conflict and test of the ages, the only one 
destined to live and triumph. Justin loved the language of 
philosophy but rejected most of its conclusions. In his new 
role he continued after his conversion to wear his philosopher’s 
pallium, or gown,0 as a token that he had found the only true 
philosophy. He also thought that it would give him more
8 Bishop A. Cleveland Coxe, in his '‘Introductory Note to the First Apology of Justin” 
(ANF, vol. 1, p. 160, note 2), interestingly observes: “It [the gown] survives in the pulpits 
of Christendom—Greek, Latin, Anglican, Lutheran, etc.—to this day, in slightly different 
form.”
810
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
ready access to men of all classes—including the intelligentsia.
lie sought conferences with men of education in order to 
communicate the truth of Christianity. In it all he sought to 
be true to Christ. He boldly identified himself with the despised 
Christian sect when imperial disfavor meant death. He not 
only sought to reconcile faith and reason but was the first 
to bring classical scholarship and the Platonic philosophy face 
to face with Christian theology. Nevertheless, he unwittingly 
did grave injury to the Christian faith by starting into motion 
certain trends that others carried to their logical and tragic 
lengths, as will later be seen.
Justin gives us an incomparable insight into the issues of 
his time. His earlier Dialogue With Trypho, most distinguished 
Jew of the day (probably written about a.d. 148), is the first 
elaborated exposition of the reasons for regarding Christ as 
the promised Messiah of the Old Testament, and the first 
systematic attempt to refute the false charges of the Jews in 
regard to Christianity. Trypho was probably a Pharisee, and 
therefore a believer in Inherent Immortality. Hence, emphasis 
on the immortality aspect of Justin’s discussion. (For Justin’s 
chronological and categorical placement, see Tabular Chart F, 
page 758.)
3. 
Prophetic 
O
utline, 
Second Advent, and 
Resurrec­
tion.—Justin was a stalwart believer in the Old Testament 
prophecies as the inspired outline of things to come, his writings 
constituting a reflection of the prophetic interpretation of his 
time. Justin held that God alone can reveal the future, citing 
as proof particulars in the life of the Messiah—such as His 
being born of a virgin in Bethlehem, His triumphal entry 
into Jerusalem, et cetera, as well as the predicted destruction 
of Jerusalem.
To Justin the Second, or premillennial, Advent is the 
grand climax of all prophecy, with its attendant literal resur­
rection of the righteous dead and its introduction of the millen­
nium. These were all tied in with the close of the outline
JUSTIN MARTYR AUGMENTS CONDITIONALISM 
811
prophecies, as in Daniel 7/ The Advent, Justin held, will take 
place after the appearance of Antichrist. To him two literal 
resurrections bound the millennium—that of the righteous 
dead at its beginning and the “general” resurrection at its 
close. Such was his eschatological outline, involving the dis­
position and destiny of man.
III. Justin’s Primary Definitions and Usage of Basic Terms
In order to grasp Justin’s views on the nature and destiny 
of man, and his position on the nature and duration of the 
future punishment of the wicked, certain basic definitions of 
terms as used by him must be noted. These will help to clarify 
common misconceptions as to his teaching. This is essential, 
for Justin has been claimed and quoted on both sides of the 
immortality issue. He has, by many, been considered as incon­
sistent and contradictory. However, it might be remarked here 
that it is not uncommon for men to change their views in the 
course of time when they find that what they once wrote 
contravenes their later convictions. This doubtless has a bear­
ing in the case of Justin. And because of his importance and 
timing, his position will be set forth rather fully.
1. 
“Immortal Existence” and “Ceasing to Exist.”—Take 
the term existence, or to exist (eimi). When it is applied to 
living creatures it means only that they have life or animation. 
In several places Justin states his belief that no wicked person 
will continue to have an eternal existence. In one preserved 
Fragment from his lost writings, Justin refers to the original 
transgression of Adam as having exposed him to that very peril.
“When God formed man at the beginning, He suspended the things 
of nature on his will, and made an experiment by means of one com­
mandment. For He ordained that, if he [man] kept this, he should 
partake of immortal existence; but if he transgressed it, the contrary 
[to “immortal existence”] should be his lot. Man having thus been made,
7 Justin Martyr, First Apology, chaps. 31, 47, 49, 33-35, 51-53; Justin, Dialogue With 
Trypho, chaps. 31, 52, 110; Justin, Fragments of Lost Work of Justin on the Resurrection, chaps. 
2, 4, 9, 10, in ANF, vol. 1, pp. 159-270; 294-299. For Justin’s interpretation of prophecy see 
L. E. Froom, Prophetic Faith, vol. 1, pp. 231-234.
812
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
and immediately looking towards transgression, naturally became subject 
to corruption." 8
“Immortal existence” was thus contingent on obedience; 
and contrariwise, disobedience would and did forfeit eternal 
existence. The conditional “if’s” in this excerpt determine 
the individual outcome. In several places Justin speaks of the 
ultimate nonexistence of the souls of the wicked. Thus wicked 
men along with fallen angels are doomed to final destruction. 
For example: “God delays causing the confusion and destruc­
tion of the whole world, by which the wicked angels and 
demons and men shall cease to exist [meketi osi].” 9
The time will come, then, though delayed, when the 
wicked will no longer exist.
2. 
“Destruction” Is Cessation 
of 
Existence.—As to 
Justin’s use of “destroy” (apollumi), there can be no doubt 
that by this term he meant to bring to an end, to cause to 
cease to exist, because not eternal. The idea of Endless Torment 
did not enter the picture, nor eternal suffering of pain. That 
was a later concept. And Justin expressly distinguishes “tor­
ment” from “destruction.” Thus in his Hortatory Address to 
the Greeks—possibly by Justin—in speaking of Plato’s opinion 
of the gods of the heathen—in which Plato held that they are 
not truly eternal, but at some time came into existence and at 
another time would cease to exist—Justin then observes: 
“These expressions declare to those who can rightly under­
stand them the death and destruction of the gods that have 
been brought into being.”10
There can be no doubt as to Justin’s meaning of “destruc­
tion.” The concept of endless misery is not involved in it, but 
instead a cessation of existence, or termination of being. 
Advocates of the Eternal Torment school of thought hold that 
“destruction” means to be endlessly “tormented in pain.” But
8 Justin, Other Fragments From Lost Writings of fustin, No. 11, in ANF, vol. 1, 
p. 301. (Italics supplied.)
9 Justin, Second Apology, chap. 7, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 190. (Italics supplied.)
10 Justin Martyr, Hortatory Address to the Greeh, chap. 22, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 282. 
(Italics supplied.)
Justin expressly distinguishes between “torment” and “destruc­
tion,” as illustrated in Christ’s punishment of the devils. Thus 
Justin says: “This is, was, and shall be the strength of Him 
alone, whose name every [evil] power dreads, being very much 
tormented because they shall be destroyed by Him.” 11
The “torment” was a present actuality, then being experi­
enced; whereas the “destruction” was yet future, in dread 
prospect. Justin’s meaning is consequently the usual intent of 
Greek writers generally, employing the natural sense. Here is 
one of many similar passages in Justin’s various writings:
“By whom [through Christ] God destroys both the serpent and those 
angels and men who are like him; but works deliverance from death to 
those who repent of their wickedness and believe upon Him.” 12
“Destruction” and “death” are thus equated as identical.
3. 
“Immortality” Means “Not Subject to Death.”— 
Justin’s use of the words “immortal” and “immortality” (atha- 
nasia), indicates deathlessness, that is, not subject to death or 
loss of existence. Justin frequently asserts that Immortality will 
be the peculiar, exclusive possession of the redeemed, and that 
the wicked will not obtain it. He likewise repeatedly lays down 
the principle that Immortality is a gift of God, not bestowed 
on any as yet, but to be received at the resurrection. Thus: 
“He shall raise all men from the dead, and appoint some to 
be incorruptible, immortal, and free from sorrow in the ever­
lasting and imperishable kingdom.” 13
So much for definitions. Now to usages.
IV. Justin’s Definitive Positions on Nature and 
Destiny of Man
1. 
Contended 
for 
Literal Resurrection 
of 
Dead.— 
Justin took an unyielding position on the literal resurrection 
of the dead, already under attack, holding that those who deny
11 Justin, Dialogue With Trypho, chap. Ill, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 254. (Italics supplied.)
12 Ibid., chap. 100, p. 249. (Italics supplied.) See also chap. 39, p. 214; Justin, Second 
Apology, chap. 7, in ANF, vol. l,p. 190.
13 Justin, Dialogue With Trypho, chap. 117, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 257. (Italics supplied.) 
See also chaps. 5, p. 197; 46, p. 218; 69, p. 233; First Apology, chap. 43, p. 177.
JUSTIN MARTYR AUGMENTS CONDITIONALISM 
813
814
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
it are “wrong.” Thus, “They who maintain the wrong opinion 
say that there is no resurrection of the flesh.” 14
2. Souls Not Taken to Heaven at Death.—Justin felt 
strongly about the resurrection, and denied the actual Christi­
anity of those who taught that the soul goes to Heaven at death:
“If you have fallen in with some who are called Christians, but who 
do not admit this [truth], [note 4: i.e., "resurrection”], and venture to 
blaspheme the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of 
Jacob; who say there is no resurrection of the dead and that their souls, 
when they die, are taken to heaven; do not imagine that they are 
Christians.” 15
3. “Man” Composed of Both “Body and Soul.”—Justin 
also refutes as heresy the theory just then being introduced, 
that the soul alone is the real man, and can act without the 
body:
“What is man but the reasonable animal composed of body and soul? 
Is the soul by itself man? No; but the soul of man. Would the body be 
called man? No, but it is called the body of man. If, then, neither of 
these is by itself man, but that which is made up of die two together is 
called man, and God has called man to life and resurrection, He has 
called not a part, but the whole, which is the soul and the body.” 16
Because of the vital character of the issue he presses the 
point, adding, “How then did he raise the dead? Their souls 
or their bodies? Manifestly both.” 17 And he illustrates it in this 
way:
“For as in the case of a yoke of oxen, if one or other is loosed from 
the yoke, neither of them can plough alone; so neither can soul or body 
alone effect anything, if they be unyoked from their communion.” 18
4. Denies Separate Immortality of the Soul.—Justin 
denied that the soul can live on independent of, or separate 
from, the body. And it ceases to live when God so wills:
“Now the soul partakes of life, since God wills it to live. Thus, then, 
it will not even partake [of life] when God does not will it to live. For 
to live is not its attribute, as it is God’s; but as a man does not live
11 Justin, On the Resurrection, chap. 2, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 294.
15 Justin, Dialogue IVith Irypho, chap. 80. in ANF, vol. 1, p. 239. (Brackets in original.)
18Justin, On the Resurrection, chap. 8, in ANF, vol. 1, pp. 297 , 298.
17 Ibid., chap. 9, p. 298.
18 Ibid., chap. 8, p. 297.
JUSTIN MARTYR AUGMENTS CONDITIONALISM 
815
always, and the soul is not for ever conjoined with the body, since, when­
ever this harmony must be broken up, the soul leaves the body, and the 
man exists no longer; even so, whenever the soul must cease to exist, the 
spirit of life is removed from it, and there is no more soul, but it goes 
back to the place from whence it is taken.” 19
5. 
Teaches Utter Extinction of the Wicked.—Justin 
repeatedly taught the utter extinction of the wicked. As already 
noted, he did not believe in the eternal misery of the lost:
“God delays causing the confusion and destruction of the whole world, 
by which the wicked angels and demons and men shall cease to exist.” 20 
“Thus some which have appeared worthy of God never die; but 
others are punished so long as God wills them to exist and to be pun­
ished.” 21
Justin frequently uses the Biblical terms “everlasting 
punishment” and “eternal fire,” as will be noted. Yet he 
positively declares that the sinner will ultimately cease to exist. 
Therefore the term cannot, 
to him, mean 
“everlasting 
punishing.”
18 Justin, Dialogue With Trypho, chap. 6, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 198. (Brackets in original.)
20 Justin, Second Apology, chap. 7, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 190. (Italics supplied.)
21 Justin, Dialogue With Trypho, chap. 5, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 197. (Italics supplied.)
CHAPTER 
FORTY-EIGHT
Justin on Final Annihilation of 
the Wicked
I. Apologies Amplify Intent of Everlasting Punishment
It is well to state at this point that since the ground 
covered by these key Ante-Nicene Fathers has been subject 
to many claims and counterclaims and much dispute, a rather 
full survey of such a pivotal writer as Justin is required. Parts 
of the portrayal are therefore more for reference and record 
than for cursory reading. The investigator needs the full cover­
age for examination—hence treatment in some depth.
Justin’s two Apologies are of unusual import because of 
the distinguished character of their recipients and their appeal 
to the Roman public. As noted, the First Apology had as its 
intended reader the Roman emperor. The Second Apology was 
sent to the Roman Senate. These Apologies are of special 
concern in our quest because of their sustained emphasis on 
the nature and destiny of the soul and the fate of the wicked. 
Justin is here striking not only against the positions of Plato­
nism but against the errors and absurdities of Gnosticism, then 
coming to prominence, with its degradation of Christ and its 
immortality of the soul. This emphasis continues as a persisting 
theme, like the proverbial scarlet thread that runs throughout 
the cordage of the British Navy. The agitation of the time, 
both from within and from without, now forced the issues 
upon the church.
Although a few seeming contradictions appear, in which 
Justin is apparently in conflict with himself, nevertheless the
816
JUSTIN ON FINAL ANNIHILATION OF WICKED 
817
same principles of Conditionalism that permeated his previous 
Dialogue With Trypho are iterated and reiterated, and clearly 
constitute his preponderant position. It is, moreover, partic­
ularly significant that Justin’s repeated declarations on the 
Conditionalist nature of the soul were neither opposed, 
reproved, nor repudiated by his contemporaries. He was living 
and writing in the formative period of the church, when its 
views had not yet become crystallized into creedal form. His 
were, in fact, but a continuation of the earlier views. And he 
was the leading Christian spokesman of his day.
The acceptance of Christianity had changed Justin’s view 
on the last things. Instead of considering death the beckoning 
gateway of the future life, as he had believed when a pagan, 
he now championed the truth of the resurrection, and thus 
denied the Platonic thesis of the inherent immortality of the 
soul that was now seeking a place in the church. The immor­
tality of the righteous alone had become Justin’s settled faith. 
In numerous passages he asserts that immortality is the peculiar 
and exclusive possession of the redeemed—the gift of God, 
not bestowed as yet, but to be received at the resurrection. 
And he likewise stressed the Christian doctrine of coming 
retribution at the hand of a just and righteous God.
However, by natural bent of mind and by training Justin 
was a philosopher. He was steeped in its phrasings, and familiar 
with the Platonic postulate of the natural and inalienable im­
mortality of the soul. At times he employed some of the thought 
patterns familiar to his distinguished readers, in an attempt 
to attract attention to the Christian faith and to win friends 
and adherents thereto. He assured his royal reader that the 
empire had nothing to fear from the Christians, as Christ’s 
kingdom is not of this world. In fact, he said, the Christians 
were his best subjects.
At times Justin drafted upon the language of the schools, 
which would be readily understood, as he sought to cushion 
unwarranted antagonisms between gospel truth and Greek 
philosophy. Some feel that he was not always uniformly con­
818
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
sistent or wise. Few men are. But when he discarded philo­
sophical mysticism Justin thought that at the same time he had 
rejected its errors. He assuredly championed the cause of 
Christianity and made a masterful pioneer defense of its doc­
trines. But already the rising cloud of departure was beginning 
to darken the Christian sky, though as yet but small and ill- 
defined.
1. Christ’s Judgment Precedes Punishment of Wicked. 
—After various preliminaries, and declaring that Christians, 
though threatened with death, would scorn “to live by telling 
a lie,” Justin comes to the crucial question of the fate of the 
wicked. Seeing a common starting point, he calls attention 
to the fact that Platonism also looks for a judgment, with 
punishment for the wicked. Christians, he says, do the same, 
but with this distinctive difference—it is at the “hand of 
Christ.” Note it:
“And Plato, in like manner, used to say that Rhadamanthus and 
Minos would punish the wicked who came before them; and we say 
that the same thing will be done, but at the hand of Christ, and upon 
the wicked in the same bodies united again to their spirits which are 
now to undergo everlasting [aionios] punishment.” 1
Justin here speaks of “everlasting punishmeni,” but not 
of unending conscious suffering, or punishing. It is only by 
assuming that aionios means endless, instead of “for the age,” 
that the thought of eternal punishing can find sustaining sup­
port. And inasmuch as this point appears at the very opening 
of his Apology, it will be wise to compass this aspect of Justin’s 
position at the very outset. We therefore digress long enough 
to trace this emphasis on the punishment of the wicked con­
tinuing on throughout the two Apologies.
2. 
“Eternal 
Punishment” 
Not 
Eternal 
Conscious 
Suffering.—Justin’s key references to the destiny of the un­
godly are these:
1 Justin, First Apology, chap. 8, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 165. (Italics supplied.)
“To undergo everlasting punishment” (First Apology, chap. 8, p. 165).
“To the everlasting punishment of fire” (ibid., chap. 12, p. 166).
“Suffer punishment in eternal fire” (ibid., chap. 17, p. 168).
“Eternal punishment is laid up” (ibid., chap. 18, p. 169).
“There will be burning up of all” (ibid., chap. 20, p. 170).
“Are punished in everlasting fire” (ibid., chap. 21, p. 170).
“Brings eternal punishment by fire” (ibid., chap. 45, p. 178).
“Punished in eternal fire” (Second Apology, chap. 1, p. 188).
"In eternal fire, shall suffer their just punishment and penalty” (ibid., 
chap. 8, p. 191).
“The wicked are punished in eternal fire” (ibid., chap. 9, p. 191).
These ten citations are impressive. But it is in this 
immediate connection that Justin explicitly declares that, when 
the fires have done their work, the wicked then “shall cease to 
exist.”2 That is too explicit for misunderstanding. And in 
equally strong and definite language Justin stresses the in­
separable fact that they will be punished only “so long as 
God wills them to exist and to be punished.” 3 The inescapable 
conclusion is that it then ceases. Theirs is therefore a termi­
nable existence. At the end of the period determined by the 
will and justice of God, the punishment of wicked souls will 
cease by the very cessation of their existence.
Such is the obvious meaning, for Justin repeatedly denies 
the inherent, independent, and indefeasible immortality of the 
soul. God only, he maintains, has absolute, independent, origi­
nal, and underived immortality. Justin obviously did not intend 
to teach an unending eternity of conscious misery in torment. 
Scholarly Dean F. W. Farrar, of Westminster, similarly observed 
that Justin’s words—
“imply an opinion on the part of St. Justin that at the end of a certain 
time, defined by the will of God, the punishment of souls shall cease 
either by the cessation of their existence or the removal of their 
punishment.” 1
3. 
Righteous Deemed Worthy 
of 
Incorruption.—In 
chapter ten of Justin’s First Apology the question of “incor-
JUSTIN ON FINAL ANNIHILATION OF WICKED 
819
2 Justin, Second Apology, chap. 7, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 190. (Italics supplied.)
3 Justin, Dialogue With Trypho, chap. 5, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 197.
* F. W. Farrar, Mercy and Judgment, p. 236.
820
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
ruption,” or “incorruptibility,” is brought out, and God’s 
purpose in the creation of man and “all things”:
“He [God] in the beginning did of His goodness, for man’s sake, 
create all things out of unformed matter; and if men by their works 
show themselves worthy of this His design, they are deemed worthy, and 
so we have received—of reigning in company with Him, being delivered 
from corruption and suffering. For as in the beginning He created us 
when we were not, so do we consider that, in like manner, those who 
choose what is pleasing to Him are, on account of their choice, deemed 
worthy of incorruption and of fellowship with Him.”6
And as Denniston comments, “It is not possible to doubt 
that he [Justin] uses the word ‘corruptible’ throughout as 
equivalent to ‘perishable,’ or ‘liable to come to an end.’ ” 8 
And the reverse would be true.
4. Each Goes to “Punishment or Salvation.”—Chapter 
twelve deals with the impossibility of the wicked escaping the 
“notice of God,” and the rewards or punishments that are 
to follow. Then he declares:
“Each man goes to everlasting punishment or salvation according to 
the value of his actions.7 For if all men knew this, no one would choose 
wickedness even for a little, knowing that he goes to the everlasting 
punishment8 of fire; but would by all means restrain himself, and adorn 
himself with virtue, that he might obtain the good gifts of God, and 
escape the punishments.” 9
5. Prays for “Existing Again in Incorruption.”—Chapter 
thirteen touches on the Christian’s worship of the “Maker of 
this universe,” the “unchangeable and eternal God, the Creator 
of all.” Thanking God through prayer and praise for our 
existence and blessings, we “present before Him petitions for 
our existing again in incorruption through faith in Him.” 
That is significant. And he adds, “Our teacher of these things 
is Jesus Christ, who also was born for this purpose.” 10 Always 
he is countering the errors of Gnosticism and of Platonism.
5 Justin, First Apology, chap. 10, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 165. (Italics supplied.)
8 Denniston, The Perishing Soul, p. 311, note 7.
7 Hudson says, “merit of His deeds” (Debt and Grace, p. 313).
8 Pusey translates it, “eternal condemnation” 
(What Is of Faith as to Everlasting 
Punishment? p. 179).
0 Justin, First Apology, chap. 12, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 166.
10 Ibid., chap. 13, p. 166. (Italics supplied.)
6. Punishment Is Proportionate to Sin.—In chapter 
seventeen, on the Christian’s relation to civil obedience, includ­
ing “taxes,” Justin declares:
“We believe (or rather, indeed, are persuaded) that every man will 
suffer punishment in eternal fire according to the merit of his deed, 
and will render account according to the power he has received from 
God, as Christ intimated when He said, ‘To whom God has given more, 
of him shall more be required.’ ” u
Then, continuing his theme in chapter eighteen, Justin 
remarks on how all men die “the death common to all” (the 
first death), which—
“if it issued in insensibility, would be a godsend (note 1, p. 169: “a piece 
of unlooked-for-luck”) to all the wicked. But since sensation remains to 
all who have ever lived, and eternal punishment is laid up (i.e., for the 
wicked), see that ye neglect not to be convinced, and to hold as your belief, 
that these things are true.” 12
The wicked will live again after the resurrection and be 
duly punished by God. But to hold that the wicked are auto­
matically annihilated at death would be to remove the deterrent 
of all future punishment. Justin then refers to the pagan 
practices of necromancy — divination, familiars, or familiar 
spirits—and touches on the opinions of Empedocles, Pythag­
oras, Plato, and Socrates, and the consideration given to such 
by the emperor. Justin then says that, as for Christians who 
believe in God, “we expect to receive again our own bodies, 
though they be dead and cast into the earth, for we main­
tain that with God nothing is impossible.” 13
Justin stresses the resurrection in chapter nineteen (“The 
Resurrection Possible”), declaring that the righteous shall “in 
God’s appointed time rise again and put on incorruption.” 
And he adds that “hell is a place where those are to be punished 
who have lived wickedly.” 11
7. Question of “Sensation After Death.”—Justin is
careful to differentiate between the teachings of the pagan
JUSTIN ON FINAL ANNIHILATION OF WICKED 
821
11 Ibid., chap. 17, p. 168.
12 Ibid., chap. 18, pp. 168, 169.
12 Ibid.
14 Ibid., chap. 19, p. 169.
822
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
writers on the coming conflagration of all things. The Stoics 
even teach that God Himself will be “resolved into fire,’’ and 
the world “formed anew by this revolution.” The Christians, 
on the contrary, “understand that God, the Creator of all 
things, is superior to the things that are to be changed.” 15 
Christian teachings are “fuller and more divine,” offering 
proof for what they affirm. Then follows one of Justin’s difficult 
statements:
“While we say that there will be a burning up of all, we shall seem 
to utter the doctrine of the Stoics: and while we affirm that the souls of the 
wicked, being endowed with sensation even after death, are punished, and 
that those of the good being delivered from punishment spend a blessed 
existence, we shall seem to say the same things as the poets and philoso­
phers.” 16
But from other passages it is obvious that the “sensation” 
after the “first” or common-to-all death comes at the resurrec­
tion of the wicked at the close of the thousand years. And the 
pain of punishment will continue only as long as God deems 
just, the wicked then passing into nonexistence.
The learned Prebendary Constable has an intriguing 
comment on this expression. First he asks, “Does Justin contra­
dict himself? Some say he does.” Or was he ambiguous? But 
Constable follows these with another pertinent question: “Or, 
has Justin some philosophical theory which may appear to us, 
and really be, a very absurd one, but which relieves him of 
the charge of ambiguity and contradiction?” Constable immedi­
ately states, “The latter is our belief.” 17 This scholarly writer 
then recounts the strange philosophical theory current in 
Platonism, namely, of a secret, or divine, fire, in contrast with 
common fire. The former is used in “Divine judgments”—a 
fire that “does not consume what it scorches, but while it burns 
it repairs.” And he adds that this concept Justin “probably 
borrowed from Plato.” 18
in Ibid., chap. 20, p. 169.
16 Ibid., p. 170. (Italics supplied.)
17 Constable, Duration and Nature of Future Punishment, p. 174.
18 Ibid., p. 176. Constable cites Plato, Phaedo, 79, 80. This is discussed further under 
Tertullian, which see.
Constable adds that Justin evidently “supposes the fire of 
hell to burn on through eternity, and to be ever consuming 
and reproducing these ‘immortal members.’ ” And, according to 
the theory, “they must possess that sensitiveness to the action 
of fire which all consumable matter though devoid of animal 
life is possessed of, and without which it could not be consumed 
at all.” And he notes that the word “aisthesis, which he puts 
for the sensation of the members, is the very word” used by 
Plato in this way. Constable explains that this “ ‘kind of sensa­
tion’ ” is “not the sensitiveness of pain which the living animal 
feels when exposed to the heat of fire.” He presses this point 
that it is “unaccompanied with pain. Pain departed when the 
soul ceased to exist in hell.”10 At the risk of redundancy, 
Constable summarizes the strange philosophical opinion of the 
time in these words:
“The members [limbs] of the damned, devoid of animal life and 
therefore incapable of pain, would for ever continue to grow and renew 
themselves. This he [Justin] thought, and truly, a kind of life, such as 
vegetables have, and so he calls them immortal. And thus we have Justin 
consistent with himself. Thus we are free to give their natural force to his 
descriptions of the utter destruction of existence in hell, i.e. of the existence 
of animal life.” 30
Constable is probably right in his evaluation.
II. Intent of Aidnion Fire for Sinners
1. 
Godly Immortalized; Sinners Punished in “Aionion” 
Fire.—In chapter twenty-one appears another passage some­
times misunderstood:
“And we have learned [“been taught”] that those only are deified 
[apathanatizesthai—“made immortal”], who have lived near to God in 
holiness and virtue; and we believe that those who live wickedly and do 
not repent are punished in everlasting [aidnion] fire.” 21
The aidnion fire is the fire of the “world to come,” as long 
as God determines it to continue. Justin here states that those
“ Ibid., p. 177.
20 Ibid., pp. 177, 178.
21 Justin, First Apology, chap. 21, p. 170.
JUSTIN ON FINAL ANNIHILATION OF WICKED 
823
824
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
only who live near to God are "made immortal ” not that the 
holy are deified. No trace of such a doctrine is found among 
the early Christians.22 And the “punished in everlasting fire” 
statement involves ultimate and entire cessation of being. As 
we have seen, Justin did not believe that everlasting fire 
involved endless suffering. Holders of the Endless-Torment 
thesis have no right to put a construction upon Justin’s state­
ments that involves him in direct contradiction, when his state­
ments can be made to agree.
2. 
Extent Not Known to Man; Determined by God.— 
Still another perplexing statement is in chapter twenty-eight, 
where Justin states:
“For among us the prince of the wicked spirits is called the serpent, and 
Satan, and the devil, as you can learn by looking into our [Christian] 
writings. And that he [the devil] would be sent into the fire with his host, 
and the men who follow him, and would be punished for an endless 
[aperanton, “unbounded age”] duration,23 Christ foretold. For the reason 
why God has delayed to do this, is His regard for the human race.” 21
This punishment is beyond any boundary that can be set 
by man. It is for an indefinite period so far as man is concerned, 
and determined by God alone. Denniston translates it “pun­
ished for the unlimited age” 
(ton aperanton aidna), and 
comments:
“This last expression is far from denoting a real infinity or eternity; 
being regularly applied to objects of which the limits are simply not 
apparent—as ‘the boundless ocean, plain,’ etc. It thus defines the ‘age’ of 
punishment as one to which we cannot set the term. But as the ocean and 
plain, however boundless, have their limit, so may the ‘boundless age’ be 
assumed as having its end also.” 25
In chapter thirty-nine Justin says, If Roman soldiers prefer
22 Dr. Petavel’s comment (op. cit., p. 236, note 1) is pertinent: “Apathanatizesthai.
According to its etymology, the primary meaning of this word is to immortalize. Its use in
the sense of apotheosis shows that among the Greeks deification and immortalization were 
synonymous terms, immortality being the prerogative of the gods. The evident inference is
that man, not being a god, without this process has not immortality.” See also Beecher, 
op. cit., p. 212.
22 Beecher (op. cit., p. 214) calls attention to the fact that Justin here uses the same 
word (aperanton) that Pindar does when he says (N. viii. 64), “Some men seek gold, and 
others (bedion aperanton) a vast or unbounded extent of land”; and (in P. ix. 61) where 
he speaks of “unbounded or immeasurable strength (alkas apeirantou).”
21 Justin, First Apology, chap. 28, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 172.
28 Denniston, op. cit., p. 307.
allegiance to country, kindred, and to their own corruptible 
lives, even though they can be offered “nothing incorruptible,” 
should not Christians, who “earnestly long for incorruption 
[aphtharsias erdntas],” “endure all things, in order to obtain 
what we desire from Him who is able to grant it?”38
3. Immortality Is Promised; Not Yet Possessed.—And 
in chapter forty-two, after stating that Christ came according 
to inspired prediction and was crucified, died, arose, ascended, 
and now reigns, Justin adds, “There is joy afforded to those 
who expect the immortality promised by Him.” 27
4. “Aionion” Punishment Is by Fire.—In chapter forty-five 
Justin comments on how pagan persecution, even to death, 
“indeed does no harm to us, but to you and all who unjustly 
hate us, and do not repent, brings eternal [aionion] punish­
ment by [or “in”] fire.” 28
If by aionion Justin meant absolutely eternal, then he 
was not in accord with the general contemporary usage of the 
term, and would be in direct conflict with his own repeated 
assertions as to the ultimate blotting out of the wicked. Such a 
demand is inconsistent and unnecessary.
5. 
Final 
Disposition 
at 
Second Advent.—Finally, in 
chapter fifty-two, in dealing with the certainty of prophecy, 
Justin refers to the “two advents” of Christ, one past and the 
other yet to come, when—
“He shall come from heaven with glory, accompanied by His angelic host, 
when also He shall raise the bodies of all men who have lived, and shall 
clothe [“invest”] those of the worthy with immortality, and shall send those 
of the wicked, endued with eternal sensibility,29 into everlasting fire with 
the wicked devils.” 30
Actually, it is “the fire of ages.”
“And in what kind of sensation and punishment the wicked are to be, 
hear from what was said in like manner with reference to this; it is as
20 Justin, First Apology, chap. 39, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 176. (Italics supplied.)
27 Ibid., chap. 42, p. 177. (Italics supplied.)
28 Ibid., chap. 45, p. 178. (Italics supplied.)
29 “Eternal sensibility” has already been noted in sec. 7, on pp. 821, 822.
30 Ibid., chap. 52, p. 180. (Italics supplied.)
JUSTIN ON FINAL ANNIHILATION OF WICKED 
825
826
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
follows: ‘Their worm shall not rest, and their fire shall not be quenched.’ ” “
As already noted, it is only by assuming, without justifi­
cation, that in this passage aiônios means endlessly “eternal” 
instead of “for ages” that the concept of eternal punishing 
can be maintained. The holy alone are immortalized, Justin 
constantly affirmed. That was Justin’s position.
III. Scholars Recognize Justin’s Position on Destruction 
of Wicked
That we neither misstate nor misunderstand Justin’s posi­
tion on the final total destruction of the wicked is sustained by 
the observation of many scholars of various faiths, as is apparent 
from a few of their terse statements:
Kitto: Justin “held that punishments, at least sensible 
ones, would sometime cease.” 32
Rothe: “Justin Martyr . . . thought that God would anni­
hilate the lost.” 33
Hagenbach: Justin affirmed the soul to be mortal, perish­
ing with the body, with immortality as a reward to be 
acquired.34
Ballou: Justin represented that “the wicked will be, 
eventually, annihilated.” 35
Beecher: Justin held and taught “the final annihilation 
of the wicked,” as “most eminent scholars concede.” 33
Gieseler: Justin held that the souls of the ungodly “will 
be at some time wholly annihilated.” 37
Alger: Justin “did not believe in endless torment, but 
in the final annihilation of the wicked.” 38
31 ibid.
32 Kitto, Cyclopedia of Biblical Literature, art., “Soul.”
33 Richard Rothe, Dogmatik, vol. 3, p. 158.
31 K. R. Hagenbach, Compendium of the History of Doctrines, vol. 1, pp. 162-164, art. 
“Immortality.”
115 Hosea Ballou, 2d, Ancient History of Universalism, p. 58.
38 Beecher, op. cit., pp. 211, 212. C. F. Hudson (Debt and Grace, p. 315) 
lists 
Grotius, Huet, Rössler, Du Pin, Doederlein, Münscher, Munter, Daniel, Hase, Starck, Kern, 
Otto, Ritter, J. Pye Smith, Bloomfield, and Gieseler as confirming the same.
37 John C. L. Gieseler, A Textbook of Church History, sec. 45.
38 Alger, The Destiny of the Soul, p. 195.
Constable: Justin held to the “utter destruction of exist­
ence in hell.” 38
IV. Dialogue—Righteous to Be Immortalized;
Wicked Destroyed
Because of the key position occupied by Justin as first 
of the ante-Nicene witnesses, his entire testimony needs to 
be surveyed that comprehensive deductions of his positions 
may be made. First in point of production comes his Dialogue 
With Trypho. This grew out of a challenge by this noted 
Pharisee while Justin was in Ephesus at the Xystus, or place 
of disputations.40 Their discussion is cast in the form of a 
Socratic dialogue, and is a quasi-biographical sketch of Justin 
himself, presented through the lips of the aged Christian of 
venerable manners,41 whose views were actually Justin’s own.
Here Justin repeatedly denies the inherent immortality 
of the soul, contending that the “worthy” will be given eternal 
life, whereas the “wicked” will be punished as long as God 
determines is just, then will pass into nonexistence. To prepare 
the way for the doctrine of the annihilation of the wicked, 
Justin first refuted the Platonic postulate of perpetual self­
existence and the natural and indefeasible immortality, or 
endless permanence, of the soul. His arguments are the more 
remarkable because he had once been an ardent Platonist.
1. 
C
ategorically 
Denies 
Innate 
Im
m
ortality 
and 
Transm
igration.—Answering (in chapter four) the question 
“Is the soul also divine and immortal?” and a part of Deity? 
Justin categorically denies that it is a part of Deity. And he 
absolutely rejects the Platonic concept of the “pre-existence 
and eternity” of souls, and its contention that they “trans­
migrate into other bodies,” and are “imprisoned in the bodies
JUSTIN ON FINAL ANNIHILATION OF WICKED 
827
38 Constable, op. cit., p. 178.
40 Justin, Dialogue With Trypho, chap. 1, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 194, note 1.
41 Ibid., chap. 3, p. 195.
828
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
of certain wild animals” as a form of punishment/2 Then comes 
Justin’s declaration, “Nor ought it [the soul] to be called im­
mortal; for if it is immortal, it is plainly unbegotten” 
(uncreated), in contrast with the Platonic contention that ‘‘it 
[the soul] is both unbegotten and immortal.” 13 And this is but­
tressed by the declaration “If the world is begotten [“created”], 
souls are necessarily begotten, and perhaps at one time they 
were not in existence.” 44 That was his approach.
2. 
Some 
“Never 
Die”; 
Others 
Suffer 
Determinate 
Punishment.—To the direct question “They are not, then, 
immortal?” comes Justin’s emphatic “No.”45 Then he adds, 
“But I do not say, indeed, that all souls die; for that were truly 
a piece of good fortune to the evil.” The disposition of all 
souls awaits the “time of judgment.” Then follows the declara­
tion of the future: “Thus some which have appeared worthy 
of God never die; but others are punished so long as God 
wills them to exist and to be punished.” 49
Thus Justin asserts, by antithesis, that the wicked finally 
cease to exist, after punishment as long as God shall determine. 
While the Greek expression for “all souls” may be ambiguous, 
strong bias has been revealed by some translators by substitut­
ing “any souls,” or even “no souls,” 47 and by unjustifiably inject­
ing the thought of “a place of misery and torment” during the 
interim.
3. Created Beings May Be “Blotted Out and Cease 
to Exist.”—Contending that created beings may be “blotted 
out and cease to exist,” Justin maintains that “God alone is
42 Ibid., chap. 4, pp. 1%, 197.
43 Ibid., chap. 5, p. 197.
44 Ibid.
15 Ibid. Dr. E. B. Pusey (op. cit., p. 182) frankly admits that “the aged man, to 
whom S. Justin owed the beginning of his conversion, arguing against Platonism, denied the 
immortality of the soul independent of its Author.”
4tt Justin, Dialogue With Trypho, chap. 5, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 197. (Italics supplied.)
47 Congregationalist Edward Beecher (op. cit., p. 332) asserts that “violent and unprin­
cipled interpretation” has been “resorted to” in order to deny Justin’s position on annihila­
tion. Beecher cites Maranus as trying “to get a denial of annihilation” out of the sentence 
reading, “I do not say that all souls die.” But Beecher charges that “he by a wrong position 
of the negative, and a wrong translation of it, brings out the assertion, ‘I say that no souls die.’ 
Otto well says that such a position of the negative cannot be defended, and that Maranus 
must have known it. Besides, it produces an immediate contradiction; for Justin soon goes 
on to say that some minds are punished and die.”
unbegotten and incorruptible.” Therefore created souls “both 
die and are punished.”
“ ‘ “For those things which exist after (note 1: “beside”) God, or shall 
at any time exist, these have the nature of decay, and are such as may be 
blotted out and cease to exist; for God alone is unbegotten and incorrupt­
ible, and therefore He is God, but all other things after Him are created 
and corruptible. For this reason souls both die and are punished.” ’ ”18
4. Separated From Body, Soul Ceases to Exist.—That 
the soul “is or has life” is incontestable, but, Is that life 
inherent, or is it received as a “partaker”? This is the question 
asked in chapter six. Justin’s answer is unequivocal, and cannot 
be misunderstood. He denies that the soul could live separated, 
or apart, from the body. Life comes by the will and provision 
of God; otherwise the soul “must cease to exist.”
“ ‘ “Now the soul partakes of life, since God wills it to live. Thus, then, 
it will not even partake [of life] when God does not will it to live. For to 
live is not its attribute, as it is God’s; but as a man does not live always, 
and the soul is not for ever conjoined with the body, since, whenever this 
harmony must be broken up, the soul leaves the body, and the man exists 
no longer; even so, whenever the soul must cease to exist, the spirit of life 
is removed from it, and there is no more soul, but it goes back to the place 
from whence it was taken.” ’ ” 48
There is a vast difference between the two ideas of “would 
not live if God did not choose,” and “will not live when God 
does not choose.”
5. Christ Coming Again to Destroy the Wicked.—Justin 
reminds Trypho, in the intervening chapters, that righteousness 
comes not by the law, nor by Jewish rites (chapters twelve to 
fourteen); that there is no salvation “except through Christ” 
(chapter twenty-six); and that “true righteousness” is obtained 
only in Christ (chapter thirty)—whose power is now great, 
but will be much greater at the Second Advent (chapter thirty- 
one). He then “distinguishes” between “the two advents”—the 
first in humility for salvation, and the second in glory for
48 Justin, Dialogue With Trypho, chap. 5, in ANF, vol. 1. p. 197.
ieIbid., chap. 6, p. 198. (Brackets in original.) Olsnausen (Opuscula, p. 180) says 
that such is “equivalent to non-existence.” And Moehler (Patrología, p. 242) 
comments, 
“sink again into its own nothing.”
JUSTIN ON FINAL ANNIHILATION OF WICKED 
829
830
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
judgment and rewards 
(chapters thirty-two, 
thirty-three). 
Justin then warns about false Christians who abandon the “pure 
doctrine of Jesus Christ,” in contrast with those who are “faith­
ful and steadfast in the hope announced by Him” (chapter 
thirty-five). But the Lord, who was crucified, arose, and 
ascended to Heaven, marks those who persecute the saints, 
“until He come again, and destroy them all, and render to each 
his deserts” (chapter thirty-nine).
V. Disposition of Righteous and Wicked
1. “Some” Punished With Fire; “Others” Receive Im­
mortality.—In chapter thirty-nine Justin synchronizes the 
time of the destruction of the demons and wicked men with 
the second advent of Christ—when He will “come again, and 
destroy them all.” 50 That leads him back, in chapter forty-five, 
to the incarnation of Christ, in order to compass the destruction 
of Satan and his angels and to destroy death through the 
Second Advent, when some shall be immortalized and some 
punished in the “condemnation of fire,” and “be no more.” 
Thus:
“In order that, by this dispensation, the serpent that sinned from 
the beginning, and the angels like him, may be destroyed [kataluthósi], 
and that death may be contemned,61 and for ever quit, at the second coming 
of the Christ Himself, those who believe in Him and live acceptably,— 
and be no more: when some are sent to be punished unceasingly into judg­
ment and condemnation of fire; but others shall exist in freedom from 
suffering, from corruption, and from grief, and in immortality.” 52
2. Saints Raised Incorruptible and Immortal.—Immor­
tality is set forth as reserved for the resurrected righteous. And 
Justin stresses his belief that true Christians, then undergoing 
persecution even unto death, will be immortalized at the first 
resurrection. He declares: “God will raise up by His Christ,
50 Justin, Dialogue With Trypho, chap. 39, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 214.
61 Pusey says, ‘set at nought” (op. cit., p. 181).
K Ibid., chap. 45j p. 217. Beecher (op. cit., p. 214) states that when “Justin says 
that the wicked are punished (apoustos) incessantly or without cessation, he means that this 
is true during the time of their punishment, however long it may be.”
and will make us incorruptible, and undisturbed, and immortal 
[aphthartous kai apatheis kai athanatous].” 53
The same thought is continued in chapter sixty-nine, 
where Christ, who even raised the dead at His first advent, 
will come for His own at His second advent, and “He shall 
raise him [the maimed] up at His second advent perfectly 
sound, after He has made him immortal, and incorruptible, 
and free from grief.” M
3. Soul Not “Taken to Heaven” at Death.—In chapter 
eighty, Justin discusses faithfulness in following the Scriptures. 
He assures Trypho that he will not “say one thing and think 
another.” Then referring to differences of view among professed 
Christians, Justin states candidly that “some who are called 
Christians” are “godless, impious heretics,” and “teach doc­
trines that are in every way blasphemous, atheistical, and 
foolish.” Declaring that he himself chooses to “follow not men 
or men’s doctrines, but God and the doctrines [delivered] by 
Him,” he states:
“If you have fallen in with some who are called Christians, but who do 
not admit this [truth], and venture to blaspheme the God of Abraham, 
and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob; who say there is no resur­
rection of the dead, and that their souls, when they die, are taken to 
heaven; do not imagine that they are Christians.” 55
And near the close of the same chapter he says that he 
and others who share his views are “right-minded Christians 
on all points,” and “are assured that there will be a resurrection 
of the dead” and a coming millennium.
4. Wicked Punished as God Deems Proper.—In chapter 
eighty-eight, after speaking of “the human race, which from 
Adam had fallen under the power of death and the guile of 
the serpent, and each one of which had committed personal 
transgression,” Justin touches on the result of man’s free will 
in relation to the question of life and death:
JUSTIN ON FINAL ANNIHILATION OF WICKED 
831
53 Justin, Dialogue With Trypho, chap. 46, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 218. (Italics supplied.)
61 Ibid., chap. 69, p. 233. (Italics supplied.)
55 Ibid., chap. 80, p. 239. (Brackets in original.)
832
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
“For God, wishing both angels and men, who were endowed with free­
will, and at their own disposal, to do whatever He had strengthened each 
to do, made them so, that if they chose the things acceptable to Himself, 
He would keep them free from death and from punishment; but that if 
they did evil, He would punish each as He sees fit.” “
5. “Destruction” Is Equated With “Death.” In chapter 
one hundred, in speaking of Christ as both the Son of God and 
Son of man, through assuming flesh and being born of Mary, 
Justin harks back to Eve, who, “having conceived the word 
of the serpent, brought forth disobedience and death.” And 
now the virgin Mary brought forth the Son of God—
“by whom God destroys both the serpent and those angels and men who 
are like him; but works deliverance from death to those who repent of 
their wickedness and believe upon Him.” 67
It will be observed that again “destroy” is equated with 
“death.”
6. “Torment” Not Identical With “Destruction.”— 
Several chapters are then devoted to the Old Testament proph­
ecies concerning Christ and the predictions of His resurrection 
(chapter 106), the conversion of the Gentiles predicted by Micah 
(chapter 109), and the rest of Micah’s prophecy not fulfilled 
at the first advent, which shall be completed at His second 
coming, when “He shall come from heaven with glory,” when, 
“together with the most righteous, and only spotless and sinless 
Christ, we are taken away out of the earth.” 68 Then in chapter 
111, on the two advents, Justin remarks: “For this is, was, 
and shall be the strength of Him alone, whose name every 
power dreads, being very much tormented because they shall 
be destroyed by Him.” se
That is, they are “much tormented” now, because they 
will later be “destroyed” at the Second Advent.
7. The Resurrected Face Contrasting Destinies.—In
56 Ibid., chap. 88, p. 243. Hudson says, “should think proper” (op. cit., p. 317).
57 Justin, Dialogue With Trypho, chap. 100, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 249.
58 Ibid., chap. 110, pp. 253, 254.
58 Ibid., chap. Ill, p. 254.
JUSTIN ON FINAL ANNIHILATION OF WICKED 
833
chapter 117 the climax is reached, and the separation is 
portrayed:
“He [Christ] shall raise all men from the dead, and appoint some to 
be incorruptible, immortal, and free from sorrow in the everlasting and 
imperishable kingdom; but shall send others away to the everlasting pun­
ishment of fire.” 80
In the light of this he exhorts men “to repent before the 
great day of judgment come.” 81
Reverting to the fall, condemnation, and death of man, 
Justin says his “discourse” was intended—
“to prove to you that the Holy Ghost reproaches men because they were 
made like God, free from suffering and death, provided that they kept His 
commandments, and were deemed deserving of the name of His sons, and 
yet they, becoming like Adam and Eve, work out death for themselves.” 82
And he warns that each shall be “by himself judged and 
condemned like Adam and Eve.”
Coming finally, in chapter 130, to “The Conversion of 
the Gentiles,” Justin states:
“We know from Isaiah that the members [kola, “limbs”] of those who 
have transgressed shall be consumed by the worm and unquenchable fire, re­
maining immortal [athanata, “deathless”]; so that they become a spectacle 
to all flesh.” 63
As to the expression “remaining immortal [“deathless”],” 
scholarly Dr. Beecher makes this significant observation:
“No stress can be laid on the word deathless (athanata), for it simply 
denotes the fact that, during the time of exposure to the fire, the bodies 
cannot die, but not that they cannot be annihilated by God, at such time 
as he shall see fit.” 84
Such is the testimony of Justin’s Dialogue.
60 Ibid., chap. 117, p. 257.
Ibid., chap. 118, p. 258.
62 Ibid., chap. 124, p. 262.
83 Ibid., chap. 130, pp. 264, 265.
04 Beecher, op. cit., p. 215.
27
CHAPTER 
FORTY-NINE
Tatian, Theophilus, and Melito— 
Continue Conditionalist Witness
I. Tatian—The Soul Is “Not Immortal” but “Mortal”
Tatian 
(c. a.d. 110-172), likewise a Christian apologist, 
was born in Assyria. He mastered the classical Graeco-Roman 
culture of the day. In his writings he quoted from ninety-three 
classic authors, making use of the knowledge gained from his 
extensive travels and wide reading. As a strolling philosopher 
(Aristotelian) he came to Rome, the center of the intelligentsia 
of the time. At first he was an eager student of heathen 
literature and devoted himself to the study of philosophy. But 
he found no satisfaction in the bewildering maze of Greek 
speculation. So he became a pupil of Justin Martyr, and was 
won to Christianity, soon becoming a teacher and an apologist 
for the Christian faith. And Justin, as we have seen, was a 
Conditionalist.
The facts of Tatian’s personal life are scant, but after 
the death of Justin (c. a.d. 165) he returned to Syria. And for 
some two hundred years his writings were highly regarded in 
the Syrian Church. As an apologist he exhibited a marked 
“abhorrence of pagan abominations,” recognizing no truth in 
heathen philosophy. He was a prolific writer, his Diatessaron 
being the earliest harmony of the Gospels to be produced. It 
was used in the Syrian Church until the fifth century.
It was, however, Tatian’s Oratio ad Graecos (Address to 
the Greeks)—an unsparing exposure of the enormities of pagan­
ism, probably written after Tatian’s association with Justin
834
CONTINUED CONDITIONALIST WITNESS 
8B5
Martyr, and largely sharing his teacher’s views—that brought 
him fame. In this treatise Tatian urgently invites his contempo­
raries to examine and accept the light of Christianity in contrast 
with the darkness of heathenism.1 He stresses belief in one 
God, the Creator and First Cause, with the Logos as the 
Creator of the world. Man was made that he might have a 
part with God and attain to immortality.
God lives in man now through the operation of the Holy 
Spirit, for the fall of man necessitated renewal by the Divine 
Spirit. Longings for God remain in the soul, and man may 
turn back to God through the exercise of the God-given free­
dom of the will. But by the same will he can also turn away 
from God. Tatian was strongly against the materialistic 
pantheism of the Stoics.
Regrettably, in his old age he adopted peculiar views and 
fell into certain sad extravagances. The luster created by his 
Apology was tarnished as he became entangled in the toils 
of Gnosticism. At the same time Montanism was elsewhere 
“rising like a fog in the marshes,” as someone has aptly 
phrased it. But Tatian invented some of the terminology that 
Tertullian developed. He adopted a stern asceticism and a de­
preciation of marriage, which became established in the Latin 
Church. He founded the ascetic sect known as the Tatianists, 
or Encratites (The Self-Controlled), practicing many austerities 
and holding to a rigid morality.
II. Tatian’s Confession of Faith on Soul, Here, and Hereafter
But before his digression, after dealing with the claims and 
the errors of the Greek philosophers and Greek polytheism, 
Tatian tells how Christians worship the one true God, without 
beginning and without end; how they hold to the doctrine 
of the creation of the world, and of man; how they believe 
in the fall of man, and in the Christian view of the resurrection;
1 See Jaroslav Pclikan, The Shape of Death (1962), chapter on Tatian.
836
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
and how the sin of man is not due to fate, but to man’s 
free will. Tatian then launches into the question of the claimed 
immortality of the soul (chapter thirteen), and the deception, 
depravity, and severe punishment of the demons.
1. Nonexistent in 
Death, 
Existent Again 
Through 
Resurrection.—Taking himself as an example, Tatian held 
that man came into being from a state of “not existing,” prior 
to birth—a “state of nothingnessHe came into being, or 
existence, through birth. In death, “existing no longer,” he is 
“seen no longer.” But through the resurrection (the subject 
of chapter six), from this period of nonexistence, Tatian de­
clares, “I shall exist again.”
And, as before birth, he “was not,” so in death—whether 
martyred through fire, with ashes “dispersed through rivers 
and seas, or torn in pieces by wild beasts”—he is “laid up,” 
as it were, in the “storehouses” of his Lord, who will “restore” 
him to life through resurrection. Here is Tatian’s full 
statement:
“For just as, not existing before I was born, I knew not who I was, 
and only existed in the potentiality (hupostasis) of fleshly matter, but 
being born, after a former state of nothingness, I have obtained through 
my birth a certainty of my existence; in the same way, having been born, 
and through death existing no longer, and seen no longer, I shall exist 
again, just as before I was not, but was afterwards born.” 2
Then he adds that, though after death others may not 
know where they are “stored up,” yet “God the Sovereign, when 
He pleases [at the resurrection], will restore the substance [the 
body] that is visible to Him alone to its pristine condition.” 3 
The language is unmistakable—in death there is no more 
knowledge than there was before a man was born. In other 
words, he teaches the unconscious state of man in death—a 
period of nonexistence, to be broken by the resurrection. Then 
he exists again.
2. Sin and Death Come Through Free Choice.—In chap-
2 Tatian, Address to the Greeks, chap. 6, in ANF, vol. 2, p. 67.
2 Ibid.
CONTINUED CONDITIONALIST WITNESS 
837
ter seven, “The Fall of Man,” Tatian says that God created 
man “an image of immortality,” without sin or corruption, that 
he “might have the immortality principle also.” The Logos 
was also the “Framer of angels,” who were free to act as they 
chose. Man, with the same freedom, is to be “brought to perfec­
tion” through his “freedom of choice.” Thus the bad will 
be justly punished, while the just will receive their reward. 
Thus, “such is the constitution of things in reference to angels 
and men.” It is therefore not fate, but the “choice of free 
agents,” that determines the future. Thus it was that through 
sin man became mortal/ This latter point concerning fate 
is amplified in chapter eleven, “The Sin of Men Due Not to 
Fate, but to Free-Will.” Here, he says, because of the Fall 
there is “one death for all.” Then comes Tatian’s appeal:
“Die to the world, repudiating the madness that is in it. Live to God, 
and by apprehending Him lay aside your old nature. We were not created 
to die, but we die by our own fault. Our free-will has destroyed us; we 
who were free have become slaves; we have been sold through sin. Nothing 
evil has been created by God; we ourselves have manifested wickedness; 
but we, who have manifested it, are able again to reject it.” B
3. 
Soul 
“Not 
Itself 
Immortal,” 
but 
“Mortal.”— 
Tatian’s unequivocal declaration that the soul is not innately, 
inherently immortal appears in chapter thirteen. Yet it is 
possible “not to die” forevermore. Twice the determinative 
“if” is introduced. “If” it sins it dies, and is “dissolved with 
the body,” yet it “rises again at last at the end of the world.” 
But “if” it acquires a saving knowledge of God, it “dies not” 
—in the eternal second death—though “for a time it be dis­
solved.” The soul is not of itself light, but “darkness.” The 
light comes from God. Here again is Tatian’s full statement:
"The soul is not in itself immortal, O Greeks, but mortal. Yet it is 
possible for it not to die. If, indeed, it knows not the truth, it dies, and is 
dissolved with the body, but rises again at last at the end of the world 
with the body, receiving death by punishment in immortality. But, again, 
if it acquires the knowledge of God, it dies not, although for a time it be 
dissolved. In itself it is darkness, and there is nothing luminous in it. And
838
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
this is the meaning of the saying, ‘The darkness comprehendeth not the 
light.’ For the soul does not preserve the spirit, but is preserved by it, and 
die light comprehends the darkness.” *
Everything depends on the relation of the soul to the 
Divine Spirit. However, “The Spirit of God is not with all,” 
but takes up His abode only “with those who live justly.” 7
It is to be noted that the phrases “punishment in immor­
tality,” and later “painful with immortality,” deviate from 
the phraseology of the New Testament. There only the simple 
term “immortality” and its equivalents “incorruptibility” and 
“eternal life” are used to describe the eternal state of the 
blessed. So we see Tatian is beginning to employ, and approach, 
the language of Plato, with which he was familiar.
4. Punishment of Demons Versus Punishment of Men. 
—In chapter fourteen (“The Demons Shall Be Punished More 
Severely Than Men”) Tatian declares that the demons “do 
not die like men,” but will suffer greater punishment. They 
will “not partake of everlasting life” and “blessed immortality.” 
They will have greater punishment, owing to their “boundless 
existence.” 
He 
uses 
the 
new 
expression 
“painful 
with 
immortality.” 8
And in chapter sixteen Tatian observes:
“But from us the things which are in the world are not hidden, and 
the divine is easily apprehended by us if the power that makes souls 
immortal visits us.” 6
5. Pagan Confusion Versus Christian Consistency and 
Truth.—Discussing, in chapter twenty-five, the quarrels of the 
philosophers—those that follow the doctrines of Plato, Epi­
curus, Aristotle, Pythagoras, and Pherecydes—Tatian states that 
Aristotle “impugns the immortality of the soul.” But the doc­
trines of these philosophers “clash with one another” in fatal 
disharmony. One says, “The world is indestructible,” but
9 Ibid., chap. 13, p. 70. (Italics supplied.)
7 Ibid., p. 71.
8 Ibid., chap. 14, p. 71.
8 Ibid., chap. 16, p. 72.
Tatian warns, “It is to be destroyed.” One says there will be 
“many conflagrations,” while Tatian maintains that it will come 
“once for all.” The philosophers say that “the soul alone is 
endowed with immortality,” while Tatian holds that, through 
the resurrection, the “flesh also” will be “endowed with it.” 
Here is his full statement:
“One of you asserts that God is body, but I assert that He is without 
body; that die world is indestructible, but I say that it is to be destroyed; 
that a conflagration will take place at various times, but I say that it will 
come to pass once for all; that Minos and Rhadamanthus are judges, but 
I say that God Himself is Judge; that the soul alone is endowed with 
immortality, but I say that tire flesh also is endowed with it.” 10
That was Tatian’s concise testimony as to the nature of 
man, written when associated with Justin and sharing his views. 
The pattern of his eschatology is thus evident—at the cata­
strophic end of the world come the resurrection of the righteous 
and the bestowal of immortality.
6. 
Place T
rust in Scripture; Follow
 “Father of Immor­
tality.”—He closes, in chapter twenty-nine, with an account of 
his conversion. After trying out the foibles of pagan philosophy, 
he sought how he “might be able to discover the truth.” Then 
he found the Old Testament Scriptures and was—
“led to put faith in these by the unpretending cast of the language, the
inartificial character of the writers, the foreknowledge displayed of future 
events, the excellent quality of the precepts, and the declaration of the 
government of the universe as centred in one Being.” u
Thus he was “taught of God,” and rescued from error. 
So, he says, he put away his former errors concerning the here­
after, believing that wickedness will finally be destroyed. This 
was the “hidden treasure” that Tatian found.13 And this true 
philosophy, revealed by Moses, is older than that of Homer 
and the Greeks (chapter thirty-one). So he concludes by touch­
ing again upon God as the Father of immortality.
“For having renounced the popular and earthly, and obeying the com-
10 Ibid., chap. 25, p. 76.
11 Ibid., chap. 29, p. 77.
12 Ibid., chap. 30, p. 77.
CONTINUED CONDITIONALIST WITNESS 
839
Tatian—Soul Not Immortal but Mor- 
Theophilus—Man Created a Candidate
tal; Nonexistent in Death; Again Ex- 
for 
Immortality; 
to Seek 
for 
Im-
istent Through Resurrection. 
mortality.
mands of God, and following the law of the Father of immortality, we 
reject everything which rests upon human opinion.” 13
That is the witness of Tatian’s testimony.
III. Theophilus of Antioch—Man Created a Candidate 
for Immortality
It will be remembered that it was at Antioch, in the church 
raised up by the apostles, that the early followers of Christ 
were first called Christians.14 And Theophilus (died c. a.d. 180) 
is listed as becoming the sixth bishop of Antioch, about a.d. 
168, in succession to Euodius. According to the records, by the 
close of the third century Antioch was one of the largest 
Christian churches in the Roman Empire. The statements of 
such a leader therefore carry considerable weight in our quest.
13 Ibid., chap. 32, p. 78.
M Acts 11:22-26.
840
CONTINUED CONDITIONALIST WITNESS 
841
Theophilus was educated as a pagan, but tells us he was 
converted to Christianity by the reading of the Scriptures. 
His numerous writings, extant at the time of Eusebius and 
Jerome, included a commentary on the Gospels and a treatise 
against heresies, both of which have been lost. Theophilus’ 
main work, his apology for Christianity, is in the form of a 
lengthy letter addressed to a pagan friend named Autolycus, 
an “idolater and scomer of Christians.” 16 Theophilus states 
that he writes as an avowed Christian. This treatise is a detailed 
examination of the evidences of Christianity derived from 
Scripture and history, and a careful exposition of Christian 
doctrines. It was designed to convince Autolycus of the absurd­
ities of paganism and the truth of Christianity. It was a learned 
work, showing the familiarity of the author with the Greek 
classics. More important, according to Bishop Coxe, it revealed 
“a profound acquaintance with the inspired writings.”
Theophilus was a disciple of Polycarp of Smyrna, who 
was also a Conditionalist. He was likewise a contemporary of 
Athenagoras, under whom significant departures were appear­
ing. (For Theophilus’ chronological and categorical placement, 
see Tabular Chart F, on page 758.) The evidence is overwhelm­
ing that Theophilus did not believe in the innate or inherent 
immortality of man, holding instead that we are immortalized 
only by and in Christ. He likewise enunciated another funda­
mental principle of Conditionalism—that God created Adam 
neither mortal (that is, certain to die) nor yet immortal (that 
is, certain not to die), but created him capable of either destiny, 
and master of his own fate. And he further taught that the 
penalty for sin is terminable—that the true penalty of sin is 
endless because it is final destruction, from which there is no 
return.
Theophilus, it should be stated, wrote his apology before 
the Neoplatonic philosophy, already beginning to find its way 
into the church, had been widely accepted. It is to be noted that
16 Theophilus to Autolycus, book 1, chap. 1, in ANF, vol. 2, p. 89.
no one censured Theophilus for his avowed position on the 
nature and destiny of man, for what he taught from so high 
a post was still the received and orthodox doctrine of many—if 
not, indeed, still the majority view at that time. But the 
rising tide of a radically different concept had already set in, 
destined erelong to overwhelm the earlier position of the 
Apostolic Fathers. The turning point in this area of the faith 
of the church was immediately ahead.
IV. Immortality Conferred on Righteous; Destruction 
Is Fate of Wicked
Assuring Autolycus that the eyes of the soul must be purged 
in order to see God and understand light, Theophilus presents 
the incomparable nature and attributes of God—the “father 
of the righteous” and “judge and punisher of the impious.”1" 
God, who established the earth, sustains the universe, and gives 
light to those who are in darkness, is “without beginning,” 
and is “unchangeable” and “immortal.” He is the “Fashioner 
and Maker” of all things, “because He is the creator and maker 
of the universe.” 17 Chapter six is headed “God Is Known by 
His Works,” in the heavens and on the earth. That is the 
preamble.
1. 
Mortality “Put 
O
ff”; 
Immortality 
“Put 
On.”—
 
Coming directly to the immortality issue, chapter seven is 
titled, “We Shall See God When We Put On Immortality.” 
After portraying God’s creative power, whose “breath you 
breathe,” Theophilus appeals to Autolycus to “entrust yourself 
to the Physician,” who “heals and makes alive.” He then por­
trays the coming change of those who live “holily, and right­
eously,” from “mortality” to “immortality,” to take place when 
we shall see the Immortal One face to face. Here is Theophilus’ 
clear declaration:
842 
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
CONTINUED CONDITIONALIST WITNESS
843
“When thou shalt have put off the mortal, and put on incorruption, 
then shalt thou see God worthily. For God will raise thy flesh immortal 
with thy soul; and then, having become immortal, thou shalt see the 
Immortal, if you now believe on him.” 18
This is, of course, at the resurrection and Second Advent.
2. 
“Seek” Immortality; Escape “Eternal Punishments.” 
—Discussing the resurrection, Theophilus states pointedly, to 
Autolycus, “But you do not believe that the dead are raised.” 
And he adds, “When the resurrection shall take place, then 
you will believe, whether you will or no.” And he reminds 
Autolycus, “He created you out of nothing, and brought you 
into existence.” 19 Because “God is able to effect the general 
resurrection of all men,” 20 He is equally able to foretell “things 
future in the order in which they shall be accomplished.”
Theophilus then solemnly declares to his pagan friend, 
if you “continue unbelieving,” you will be convinced, though 
too late, when “tormented with eternal punishments,” which 
are likewise foretold by the prophets. Then he appeals to 
Autolycus to escape “the punishments that are to light upon 
the profane and unbelieving.” 21 He entreats:
“But do you also, if you please, give reverential attention to the 
prophetic Scriptures, and they will make your way plainer for escaping the 
eternal punishments, and obtaining the eternal prizes of God.” 22
His reference is, of course, to immortality in Christ.
Theophilus then plainly declares that “to those who by 
patient continuance in well-doing seek immortality, He will 
give life everlasting, joy, peace, rest.” “But to the unbelieving 
and despisers,” he adds, “there shall be . . . tribulation and 
anguish, and at the last everlasting fire shall possess [seize] 
such men.” 23 But he does not say endless punishing. Rather, 
the fire would make an end of the wicked, when once their 
retribution for sin was complete. Theophilus, it is to be borne 
in mind, places “everlasting punishment” along with the doc-
M Ibid., chap. 7, p. 91.
19 Ibid., chap. 8, p. 91.
20 Ibid., chap. 13, p. 93.
21 Ibid., chap. 14, p. 93.
22 Ibid.
22 Ibid.
844
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
trine of nonimmortality of the soul, as did Justin. The true 
penalty for sin is final death, from which there is no return. 
Scholarly Frederick A. Freer makes a sound distinction between 
the “endless loss of life,” and the totally different “endless life 
of loss.” 2i And this was not a play on words but the statement 
of a profound truth.
3. Presents Foundational Bases for Faith.—In book two, 
chapter four, Theophilus cites Plato as teaching that both 
God and matter are “uncreated” and “unalterable.” Therefore, 
if matter be uncreated and unalterable, it is “equal to God,” 
for “that which is created is mutable and alterable.” But 
Theophilus contends that “out of things that are not He 
creates and has created things that are.” 25
In chapter nine (“The Prophets Inspired by the Holy 
Ghost”) Theophilus discusses the role of the prophet, declaring 
that the prophets were “God-taught,” and as “instruments of 
God” they not only declared the truth regarding “the creation 
of the world and all other things” but predicted things to come. 
And because they declared what happened before their day, 
and “what things are now being fulfilled in our own day: 
wherefore we are persuaded also concerning the future things 
that 
they will 
fall 
out, 
as 
also 
the 
first 
have 
been 
accomplished.” 20
4. N
ature and Peril of U
nfallen M
an in Eden.—The 
same inspired prophets declare that “God made all things out 
of nothing; for nothing is coeval with God.” 27 Creation week, 
and the work of each day, including the creation of man, 
are then presented in chapters eleven to seventeen, based on 
Genesis 1 and 2. In chapter eighteen “The Creation of Man” 
is set forth, and then man’s placement in Paradise (chapter 
nineteen), in which state “man became a living soul.” Because 
of this expression, Theophilus says, “By most persons the
24 Frederick A. Freer, To Live or Not to Live, p. 87.
25 Theophilus to Autolycus, book 2, chap. 4, in ANF, vol. 2, p. 95.
28 Ibid., chap. 9, p. 97.
27 Ibid., chap. 10, p. 98.
CONTINUED CONDITIONALIST WITNESS 
845
soul is called immortal.”28 But this he discusses soon. The 
conditions of the saved in Paradise are presented in chapter 
twenty.
Next follows the Genesis account “Of the Fall of Man” 
(chapter twenty-one)—the Garden and its trees, and the tree 
of life, from which man was to eat. Provision was thus made 
for the preservation of life. Only of the tree of the knowledge 
of good and evil was Adam commanded ‘‘not to taste.” Here 
in the Garden man was to perfect character, and to advance 
and come into “possession of immortality,” for, Theophilus 
adds, “man had been made a middle nature, neither wholly 
mortal, nor altogether immortal, but capable of either.” 29
5. Expelled From Eden Lest He Remain in Sin Forever. 
—Paradise was therefore “intermediate between earth and 
heaven.” Only the observance of God’s command was required, 
“lest, disobeying, he should destroy himself, as indeed he did 
destroy himself, by sin.”30 Then follows chapter twenty-five 
with its declaration that “for the first man, disobedience pro­
cured his expulsion from Paradise,” and, “from his disobedience 
did man draw, as from a fountain, labour, pain, grief, and 
at last fall a prey to death.”31 He was not to live forever 
in sin.
6. Returns to Paradise After Resurrection and Immor­
talization.—In chapter twenty-six Theophilus plainly says,
concerning man’s expulsion from Paradise, “God showed a
great kindness to man in this, that He did not suffer him to
remain in sin for ever,” but by “banishment, cast him out
of Paradise,” afterward to be “restored.” But Paradise is twice
portrayed, the first wherein man was initially placed, and the
second, to which he will be restored “after the resurrection
and judgment.” 32 Thus, like a potter’s vessel, man through
a flaw became broken, and had to be made over. And he
28 Ibid., chap. 19, p. 102.
-■» Ibid., chap. 24, p. 104.
80 Ibid.
31 Ibid., chap. 25, p. 104.
32 Ibid., chap. 26, pp. 104, 105.
846
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
immediately adds that in the same way man “may rise in the 
resurrection whole; 
I mean spotless, and righteous, and 
immortal.” 33
So in God’s call to Adam in Eden, “He gave him an 
opportunity of repentance and confession.” 84 Thus God pro­
vided the way to immortality.
7. 
Immortality a Reward, Not an Original Possession. 
—The short chapter twenty-seven, on “The Nature of Man,” 
is so vital to our quest that we quote it in entirety—simply 
breaking it into two sections. First, Theophilus deals with 
man’s nature at Creation, in which he repeats and emphasizes 
the thought of the sentence quoted from chapter twenty-four 
—“For man had been made . . . neither wholly mortal, nor 
altogether immortal, but capable of either,” thus with alterna­
tive destinies open before him.
In this view he is followed by Irenaeus, Arnobius, Lac- 
tantius, and Nemesis, in the second, fourth, and sixth centuries. 
It is a recurring thought that God did not arbitrarily create 
man mortal or immortal, but capable of either, and thus a 
candidate for either, according to his choice and action. The­
ophilus here expands this thought:
“But some one will say to us, Was man made by nature mortal? Cer­
tainly not. Was he, then, immortal? Neidier do we affirm this. But one will 
say, Was he, then, nothing? Not even this hits the mark. He was by nature 
neither mortal nor immortal. For if He had made him immortal from the 
beginning, He would have made him God [like]. Again, if He had made 
him mortal, God would seem to be the cause of his death. Neither, then, 
immortal nor yet mortal did He make him, but, as we have said above, 
capable of both; so that if he should incline to the things of immortality, 
keeping the commandment of God, he should receive as reward from Him 
immortality, and should become God [like];85 but if, on tire other hand, 
he should turn to the things of death, disobeying God, he should himself 
be the cause of death to himself.” 38
So according to Theophilus man was not created immortal, 
but immortable, or immortizable, as some phrase it. And im­
mortality is a reward, not a natural right.
33 Ibid., p. 105.
3* Ibid.
36 Genetai theos, literally, “become a eod.’ 
» Ibid., chap. 27, p. 105.
8. Man Chooses Either Everlasting Life, or Death. 
—The second half of this little chapter deals with man’s free­
dom of the will, and his responsibility for his own fate— 
because of obedience and resultant life everlasting and incor­
ruption, through the resurrection, or of disobedience and death. 
Because of disobedience man forfeited immortality. But in 
mercy God gave opportunity to acquire “life everlasting” 
through obedience to the gospel and the law of God. The- 
ophilus continues:
“For God made man free, and with power over himself. That, then, 
which man brought upon himself through carelessness and disobedience, 
this God now vouchsafes to him as a gift through His own philanthropy 
and pity, when men obey Him. For as man, disobeying, drew death upon 
himself; so, obeying the will of God, he who desires is able to procure 
for himself life everlasting. For God has given us a law and holy com­
mandments; and every one who keeps these can be saved, and, obtaining 
the resurrection, can inherit incorruption [“immortality”].” 37
God therefore conferred upon man the supreme privilege 
of liberty, but liberty cannot exist without the necessity of 
choice—choice of life or death. An enforced immortality would 
nullify that divinely implanted freedom.
9. Righteous to Escape Eternal Punishments.—Chapter 
twenty-eight touches on Eve’s tempter, Satan the serpent, the 
author of sin. He became “ ‘demon’ and ‘dragon,’ on account 
of his . . . revolting from God,” for at first Satan “was an 
angel.” 38 Theophilus then tells of the aftermath of man’s ex­
pulsion from Eden, revealed through “the holy prophets.” 38 He 
declares that God “did not abandon mankind, but gave a law, 
and sent holy prophets” to draw men back to God. And he adds 
that “he who acts righteously shall escape the eternal punish­
ments, and be thought worthy of the eternal life from God.”
10. Wicked Consumed in Final Conflagration.—He
alludes, in chapter thirty-seven, to the principle that “evil-doers
must necessarily be punished in proportion to their deeds,”
CONTINUED CONDITIONALIST WITNESS 
847
37 Ibid. (Italics supplied.)
38 Ibid., chap. 28, p. 105.
» Ibid., chap. 33, p. 107.
10 Ibid., chap. 34, p. 108. (Italics supplied.)
848
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
and then mentions the coming “conflagration of the world,” 
in accordance with the “testimony of the prophets.” 41 In chapter 
thirty-eight he adds: “Concerning the burning up of the world, 
Malachi the prophet foretold: ‘The day of the Lord cometh 
as a burning oven, and shall consume all the wicked.’ ”49
11. 
God’s Care for the Dead.—Theophilus states that 
the prophets, poets, and philosophers “have clearly taught both 
concerning righteousness, and judgment, and punishment, and 
also concerning providence, that God cares for us, not only 
for the living” but “also for those that are dead.” He cites 
Solomon’s allusion to God’s “care taken of thy bones,” and 
Hosea’s declaration, “The ways of the Lord are right.” 43
That is the testimony of Theophilus. Book three adds little. 
Chapter seven alludes to Plato’s repeated assertions on “the 
unity of God and of the soul of man, asserting that the soul 
is immortal,” and to the great pagan philosopher’s inconsistency 
in holding to the transmigration of souls, in which “some souls 
pass into other men, and that others take their departure into 
irrational animals” (a “wolf, or a dog, or an ass”), calling 
such a teaching “dreadful and monstrous.”44 But Bishop 
Theophilus is clear, consistent, and scriptural.
V. Melito of Sardis—Death a Long Sleep; Immortality 
Regained Through Christ
Melito (d. c. a.d. 190), little known and less quoted 
bishop of Sardis, was an early apologist.45 According to 
Eusebius,48 he was a prolific writer, authoring some sixteen or 
eighteen treatises. But the majority of these have long since 
vanished except for scanty fragments. Dealing with the doctrinal
« Ibid., chap. 37, p. 109.
42 Ibid., chap. 38, p. 110.
43 Ibid.
44 Ibid., book 3, chap. 7, p. 113.
46 A. Cleveland Coxe. Preface to “Melito the Philosopher,” in ANF, vol. 8, pp. 750,
751; Robert R. Williams, A Guide to the Teachings of the Early Church Fathers (I960),
pp. 36, 42-44; ODCC, art., “Melito,” p. 884; J. B. Lightfoot, The Apostolic Fathers, vol. 1,
part 2, p. 510.
48 Eusebius, Church History, book 4, chap. 26, in NPNF, 2d series, vol. 1, pp. 203-205.
CONTINUED CONDITIONALIST WITNESS 
849
questions of the day, Melito is best known for his Apology, 
written to Emperor Marcus Aurelius about a.d. 176.4T Melito 
visited the East, and seems to have met Clement.48
1. Eternal Christ Was Creator of Man.—Melito was
deeply imbued with a sense of the deity of Christ, repeatedly
calling Him both God, and man in the highest sense, the
Creator of the universe and of man, and insisting that in Him
all things subsist. Here are pertinent samples:
“By His power doth everything subsist. This Being is in no sense 
made, nor did He ever come into being; but He existed from all eternity, 
and will continue to exist for ever and ever.” 49
“Christ, who is veritably God the Word existing before all time.” 60 
“This is He who made the heaven and the earth, and in the beginning, 
together with the Father, fashioned man.”n
“The deeds done by Christ after His baptism . . . gave indication and 
assurance to the world of the Deity hidden in His flesh. For, being at once 
both God and perfect man likewise, He gave us sure indications of His 
two natures”—“His Deity” and “His humanity.” 62
“He was the true God existing before all ages.”63
Melito’s soundness on the Godhead is thus attested.
2. Coming Flood of Fire to Destroy Earth.—Testifying 
to the emperor as to the mystery of “why this world was made, 
and why it passes away, and why the body exists, and why 
it falls to decay, and why it continues,” Melito says, “thou 
canst not know until thou hast raised thy head from this sleep 
in which thou art sunk, and hast opened thine eyes.” 54
Melito warns of the coming “flood of fire” that will come 
upon “all the world.” Then he adds:
"So also it will be at the last time: there shall be a flood of fire, and 
the earth shall be burnt up, together with its mountains; and mankind shall 
be burnt up ... ; but the just shall be preserved from wrath.” “
3. Christ Died That We Might Be Raised.—In his dis­
course “On the Soul and Body” Melito eloquently says that 
Christ was “born man” that “He might save man, and gather
47 Philip Carrington, The Early Christian Church, vol. 2, p. 226.
48 Coxe, op. cit., p. 750.
49 “Remains of the Second and Third Centuries,” in ANF, vol. 8, p. 751.
60 Ibid., p. 759. 
S3 ¡bid,
si Ibid., p. 758. 
si ¡bid, p. 754.
52 Ibid., p. 760. 
ss ¡bid., pp. 755, 756. (Italics supplied.)
850
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
together those members of His which death had scattered.” M 
To this end “the Immortal dieth, and answereth not a word; 
the Celestial is laid in the grave.” “When our Lord arose 
from the place of the dead, and trampled death under foot, 
and bound the strong one, and set man free, then did the 
whole creation see clearly that for man’s sake the Judge was 
condemned.” He “died in order that He might give life, was 
laid in the grave that He might raise from the dead.”57 “He 
that hung up the earth in space was Himself hanged up; He 
that fixed the heavens was fixed with nails; He that bore up 
the earth was borne up on a tree.” 88 But He is risen “from 
the place of the dead, and ascended to the height of heaven, 
and sitteth on the right hand of the Father.” “
4. 
Sleep 
of 
Death 
a 
Long 
Silence.—In the papyrus 
containing Melito’s “Homily on the Passion,” or more correctly 
“On the Passover” (Peri Pascha), discovered largely in its 
entirety in 1940 (Papyrus Bodmer XIII, 1960), in chapter 
twenty-five Melito says: “The angel of death tells the first 
born in Egypt that to Him belongs the long silence . . . the 
silence of death.”60
And in chapter thirty-nine he adds that, though Adam 
and Eve lived a long time after their expulsion from Eden, 
the heritage they left their children was “not immortality but 
corruption.” 61
Because of its pertinence let us note it in greater detail. 
This rarely cited papyrus codex, translated by Dr. Campbell 
Bonner, of the University of Michigan, is of special interest 
because it is not the customary contemporary defense of Chris­
tianity against paganism, Judaism, or heresy. Instead, it is a 
fairly complete early sermon by a respected leader for the 
“edification of the Church.”
“ Ibid., p. 756. 
89 Ibid., p. 757.
w Ibid. 
59 Ibid., p. 758.
80 See C. Bonner, Studies and Documents (cd. by K. and Silva Lake), XIX, 1940. 
Cf. ODCC, p. 884.
91 See E. J. Wallesz, ‘‘Melito’s Homily on the Passion,” in J.T.S. xliv (1943), pp. 41-52.
CONTINUED CONDITIONALIST WITNESS 
851
5. Death and Dissolution From Disobedience.—Melito 
here deals with the dual nature of the Passion— (1) the ancient 
institution of the chosen people; (2) illuminated and inter­
preted in the sacrifice of Christ and the divine plan for the 
salvation of mankind. The type of old is presented as a prepara­
tion for the new and eternal reality. Melito again stresses the 
person of Christ and the new dispensation. Born as a son, 
sacrificed as a lamb, suffering and dying as a man, He has 
risen as God, being by nature “both God and man.’- 62 And we 
are recipients both of His grace and life. Originally, man, 
created in a state of innocence, had only to obey in order to 
“enjoy it always.” 83
The forbidden fruit and the transgression, the temptation 
and the Fall and the dire consequences, are then dwelt upon, 
along with “the inevitable penalty—death and dissolution.” 04 
To redeem man the mystic Passover is consummated in the 
sacrifice of Christ. Melito deals with the pre-existence of Christ, 
His earthly life and death, and why and how He was put 
to death, as Creator and Deliverer.80
6. Corruption and Destruction From Disobedience.— 
In chapter twenty-five of the text, dilating on the death of 
the “firstborn,” as mentioned, Melito twice speaks of “the 
long silence of death . . . the silence of death.” 88 And he com­
ments (in chapter thirty-one) on how “the death of the sheep 
[that was slain] became the life of the people,” typifying the 
Lord (chapter thirty-two). Turning in chapters forty-eight and 
forty-nine, to Creation, the primal pair in the Garden were 
declared “capable of good or evil,” and coming to the prohibi­
tion as regards the “tree of the knowledge of good and evil,” 
Melito takes up the warning against death for disobedience, 
and tells how Adam “returned to earth,” and bequeathed 
death to mankind as an “inheritance.” Here is his expressive 
statement. Adam left them—
62 “The Homily on the Passion by Melito Bishop of Sardis,” in Studies and Documents, 
XII, by Kirsopp and Silva Lake (1940), edited by Campbell Bonner, pp. 3-5, 16.
03 Ibid., p. 17. 
«6 Ibid., pp. 18, 168.
M Ibid., pp. 17, 18. 
«> Ibid., p. 170 (chap. 25).
852
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
"not incorruptibility but corruption, not honor but dishonor, not freedom 
but slavery, not sovereignty but oppression, not life but death, not salvation 
but destruction. And strange and terrible was the destruction of men upon 
the earth.” 97
7. 
Ransoms and Restores From Grave.—As a result “Sin” 
became the “co-worker of death.” And, Melito adds (in chapters 
fifty-four and fifty-five), “Upon every soul Sin sets its mark in 
all alike devoted she to Death.” Note his graphic description:
“So all flesh fell into the power of Sin, and every body into the power 
of Death, and every soul was driven forth from its house of flesh. That 
which was taken from the earth was resolved into earth, and that which 
was given of God was shut up in Hades [gravedom] . . . for man was sepa­
rated into his parts by Death.” 98
He was “captive under the shadows of death.”
Then in chapter sixty-seven comes the “mystery” of 
redemption through Christ, as He “ransomed us from ruin” 
and “freed us from slavery to the devil.” 68 Thus man is “raised 
from the grave below to the heights of the heavens.”70 Thus 
our Creator and Redeemer, who “fixed the stars in heaven,” 
restores us.71 Thus He makes “the dead to live again” and 
raises up “him who was buried.” 72 He is the Christ who “put 
down death.” Thus “He brought man home, safely to the 
heights of heaven.” 73
Such is a contemporary Conditionalist presentation of the 
times—brief but expressive.
87 Ibid., p. 173 (chap. 49). (Italics supplied.)
88 Ibid., p. 174 (chap. 55).
09 Ibid., p. 175 (chap. 67).
70 Ibid., p. 176 (chap. 70).
7> Ibid., p. 177.
™ Ibid., p. 180 (chap. 101).
73 Ibid., chap. 102.
I
CHAPTER 
FIFTY
Gnostic-Manichaean Perversions 
Compel Restatement of Truth
One of the earliest and gravest of doctrinal perversions 
to imperil the Early Church and its pristine faith was the 
menace of Gnosticism. This development was most prominent 
in Egypt and Syria. But in Rome, Asia Minor, Mesopotamia, 
Armenia, and eastern Persia fruitful soil was likewise found 
for its propagation. And it not only flourished widely but 
proved to be exceedingly persistent. In fact, it was overcome 
only after some three centuries of stubborn controversy. It 
confronted the world with a whole battery of new terms that 
connoted alien concepts. It was a neopagan revival with tre­
mendous virility and persistence. Its significance therefore needs 
to be sensed.
In time the church defeated Gnosticism, but the marks 
of the adversary were left indelibly upon her. Plagued by 
this, and other departures that followed—especially Neoplato­
nism—the church never went back to her primitive form of 
teaching. To clarify her position before the world she felt 
compelled to crystallize and to creedalize her faith. But as a 
result, among other departures, alien teachings regarding the 
nature and destiny of the soul came to be adopted by the 
majority, and were retained in large sections of the church 
from the third century onward. This constitutes a compelling 
reason for this little survey of Gnosticism.
The Gnostic movement professed to have the answer to 
the baffling problem of the origin and destiny of the universe, 
especially the inception and disposition of evil. As to its dis-
853
854
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
tinctive teachings, three major concepts were elemental in this 
strange development. These were: (1) a Supreme Being, the 
Absolute Eternal God, unconnected with matter and incapable 
of being affected by it; (2) matter, also eternal, produced by 
emanations instead of creation, matter being the source of all 
evil and opposed to God; and (3) a series of intermediate 
beings between the two. From these elementáis sprang a host 
of errors and evils profoundly affecting the subject of our quest.
I. Scope of Gnosticism’s Sinister Heresies
Only as one realizes the nature of the subtle sophistries 
and basic errors of these movements that arose to imperil the 
Early Church is it possible to understand what the early apolo­
gists were actually fighting against, and why, and the significance 
of their arguments, the logic of their reasonings, and the expres­
sions sometimes employed. This alone explains why they wrote 
so much on the origin, nature, and destiny of man, as well 
as on the deity, the redeeming power, and the life-giving 
prerogatives of Christ, and His position as judge.
They felt impelled to expose fundamental fallacies, as well 
as to declare primary truths. It is therefore necessary, at this 
point, to pause long enough to survey the ramifications of 
Gnosticism—the first great heretical movement of major dimen­
sions, whose postulates were a direct attack on the primary 
positions of the subapostolic church, as reflected by the Apos­
tolic Fathers. If not checked Gnosticism would ultimately 
overthrow, or at least gravely confuse, the primitive beliefs 
of the church on the Godhead, Christ, Creation, the fall and 
redemption of man, his ultimate resurrection and immortali­
zation, as well as the final disposition of sin and sinners. To 
the ramifications of this early crisis we therefore now address 
ourselves, as we turn the spotlight on the multiple subversions 
of Gnosticism.
1. 
Blighting 
Characteristics 
of 
Gnosticism.—Gnos­
ticism (from the Greek gnosis, “knowledge”) stood for salvation
PERVERSIONS COMPEL RESTATEMENT OF TRUTH 
855
by “knowledge.” The Gnostics claimed to know the mysteries 
of the universe, this knowledge being esoteric (private or secret) 
rather than exoteric (public and open), and transmitted by 
tradition—of which they claimed to be the special custodians. 
In its pagan form Gnosticism antedated the Christian Era, 
borrowing its formula from various ethnic religions and having 
a distinctly pantheistic tinge. Later, borrowing certain addi­
tional terminology from Christianity, it took on a “Christian” 
form, and by the second century 
a.d. had become highly 
aggressive. Professing to solve the great questions of the uni­
verse, it had a certain subtle appeal.
Gnosticism led the way in the amalgamation of pagan 
concepts with Christian thought and terminology. Its fondness 
for mysteries, or secret rites, was derived principally from 
Hellenistic and Egyptian mysteries. And its elaborate and 
pompous liturgical service stimulated a taste for similar ornate­
ness in the regular churches. It made definite inroads among 
Christians—espoused by some but bitterly fought by others, 
especially by Irenaeus of Gaul. Because of these exposures, 
by the fifth century Gnosticism had spent its force.1
2. 
Strange 
Medley 
of 
Borrowed 
Elements.—The 
Gnostic movement was a syncretism, a composite of various 
borrowed elements. It drew its concepts from pagan philoso­
phies and Oriental mythologies, as well as Jewish cabalistic 
sources, and, as mentioned, finally drafted upon certain Chris­
tian terms and teachings. It combined the esoteric philosophy 
of Egypt with the deadly Dualism common to Zoroastrianism, 
old Babylonianism, Platonism, and even the Jewish cabala. 
And it drafted upon the Brahmic concept of successive emana­
tions from the Absolute Being—these emanations being the 
workings of the Eternal One, supposedly overflowing from the 
Central Being, without decreasing the reality or the fullness 
of that source.
1 Leading authorities on Gnosticism include Seviney, Barrie, Lea, Rust, Kraeling, 
Ritter, Moller, 
Gieseler, 
Neander, 
Hase, 
Schaff, Hilgenfeld, 
King, 
Harnack, 
Mansel, 
Bunsen, Lightfoot, Pressense, Angus, Case, Moehiman. More recent is R. M. Grant, Gnosticism 
and Early Christianity.
856
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Gnosticism also adopted the Buddhist antagonism of spirit 
and matter and the unreality of derived existence. It similarly 
incorporated the Buddhist concept of a god in process of de­
velopment, and spiritual souls longing to be freed from the 
bonds of matter and raised above the things of sense—and 
ultimately being reunited with the divine Source of Life.
It laid hold on the Platonic idea of a god withdrawn 
entirely within itself, intelligible only to the initiated, with an 
eternal antagonism between god the spirit and the lower world 
of matter. It similarly took over the idea of a fall of spiritual 
beings through this material element. It presented a theory 
of the universe based on speculation instead of revelation— 
how it was originally projected, and how it will finally be 
restored to harmony. Harnack defined Gnosticism as the 
“Hellenization of Christianity.”
Its philosophical basis centered on the origin of evil, 
blending Pythagorean and Platonic concepts with those of 
Philo of Alexandria2 concerning the Supreme Being. Its chief 
practical concern was the knowledge of God and the origin 
and destiny of mankind. Central in emphasis was this gnosis, 
by which the spiritual element in man might receive redemp­
tion. It was a scheme of salvation. The Gnostics claimed a 
knowledge higher than that of common men, founded on intu­
ition rather than historical evidence or logical reasoning.
Draft was likewise made upon the Pythagorean notion 
of numbers, and the Parsi conception of the divine essence 
as light, and a Dualism in which God is continually subjected 
to the aggressions of matter, and in which the principle of 
goodness and light is in unending conflict with the principle 
of evil and darkness. But the brightness of the light decreases 
continually, and loses itself in the surrounding darkness. So 
the power of the Absolute expresses itself in an increasingly 
diluted form.
2 Philo, influenced by Neoplatonism, Neo-Pythagoreanism, and old Egyptian theosophy, 
also exalted the Supreme Being above contact with the visible world. To him the Old Testament 
Logos was a derived being. Philo employed the allegorical method of exegesis, holding that the 
literal meaning was worthless.
PERVERSIONS COMPEL RESTATEMENT OF TRUTH 
857
These derivations were all so evident as to indicate their 
sources. They constituted a strange medley, confusing to the 
world and perilous to the church. Moehlman calls it a “syncre- 
tistic whirlpool.” 3 Now to certain definitions.
3. 
“Demiurge,” “Emanations,” and “Aeons.”—Gnosti­
cism made sharp distinctions between the remote and unknow­
able Supreme Being, or Great God (the Source of all), and 
the “Demiurge,” 4 believed to be one of the “Aeons” 3 resulting 
from “emanations.” * The Demiurge, as the Creator-God, was 
held to be the immediate source of the visible world and 
the originator of matter. Finite existence was accounted for 
as a progressive falling away from the original perfection. The 
Demiurge therefore occupied an intermediate place between 
the Supreme God and the material world. But while the Gnos­
tics held that he created and ruled the world, they claimed that 
he was actually in rebellion against the Supreme God. The 
Demiurge was not originally evil, only limited and imperfect. 
But evil sprang from the defects of his work and plans. 
Nevertheless, he transformed the chaos of matter into the 
organized universe, which they averred is under his control.
According to these concepts the Demiurge created man, 
but could only impart to him his own weak principle—the 
sensuous soul. Only the highest and really Great God could 
impart the divine rational soul. But the Demiurge, while claim-
3 Conrad H. Moehlman, “Gnosticism,” in Vergilius Ferm, An Encyclopedia of Religion,
p. 300.
* Demiurge—the English form of the Greek word for “craftsman,” used by Plato for 
the World-Framer in his account of the formation of the visible world. Hence, it was Platonic 
in origin. It was later employed by Greek Christian writers simply of God as Creator. The 
Gnostics used the term disparagingly for the inferior Creator-God of the Old Testament.
6 Aeon—meaning “self-existing,” one of a group of self-existing spiritual powers 
progressively emanated from, and subsisting coeternally with, the Eternal Being. These Aeons 
form the Pleroma (plenitude or fullness), or invisible spiritual world, and the Divine Being 
from which they emanated, in contradistinction to the Kenoma (chaotic void), or visible 
material world. They thus constitute the intermediaries, and give form to other substance. 
The latest and highest Aeons were believed to be Christ and the Holy Spirit.
The number of Aeons differed in different systems—sometimes twelve, as in the 
planetary relations; or thirty, as in the years of Christ; or 365. as in the days of the year; 
or just indefinite. These Aeons embodied truth, intelligence, faith, hope, love, wisdom, et cetera.
8 Emanation_ (Latin, emano, “to flow out”), meaning issuing from its source. Used by 
the Gnostics to indicate the process of creation, conceived of as a series of “effluxes” flowing 
forth from the Absolute God and forming a “multiplicity” of created beings, all things 
coming from the First Reality or Source. It was a process of descent from the perfect to 
the less perfect, the First Cause remaining unchanged. And according to Valentinus the 
emanations were in pairs, male and female, and involving generation.
858
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
ing to be the highest god could not bring his creatures to the 
true knowledge of God, and was really only the god of the 
Jews, and to some extent that of Christianity. Thus Jesus, 
coming as the promised Messiah, could only prepare the way 
for redemption. Such were some of its sinister aspects broadcast 
to the pagan world as the Gnostic concept of “Christianity,” 
and spread among Christians to confuse.
4. 
Mankind Cast Into T
hree Basic Categories.—Specifi­
cally as concerns man, Gnosticism held that there is a spark 
of the Divine in the constitution of some. And through gnosis 
this spiritual element may be released from its material environ­
ment, and assured of a return to its home in the Divine Being. 
Thus the origin, nature, and destiny of man were tied inex­
tricably with the vagaries of Gnosticism. That, we would 
emphasize, is why we must examine it. It was basic with 
Gnosticism that the Demiurge was himself subject to imperfec­
tions, and the world he created was a fallen world.
Man, they held, partakes of three elements in varying 
proportions—the Supreme God, the Demiurge, and matter. 
In consequence, all men are divided into three categories— 
the spiritual, psychical, and fleshly—higher or lower according 
to the predominance of the elements of deity within them, 
and in proportion to their freedom from matter, which is 
ever and only evil. Note the distinctions: 
(1) The highest
(or spiritual) class comprises those who share largely in the 
nature of the truest Aeons, and are the only ones capable of 
attaining perfection; (2) the intermediate (or psychical) group 
who have the nature of the Demiurge, and to some extent 
have power to rise above the debasement of matter; and (3) 
the lowest (or fleshly) category, constituting those who are 
wholly under the control of matter, and will share its tragic 
fate. Such cannot be saved, for their nature is only evil, devoid 
of any spark of the Divine within them.
They held that historically the fleshly was predominant 
in past paganism, the psychical flourished in the Jewish dis-
PERVERSIONS COMPEL RESTATEMENT OF TRUTH 
859
pensation, and the spiritual was now to be found in the 
Christian dispensation—though 
with 
some 
intermingling. 
While some Gnostics allowed of no transition from one class 
to another, others held that such was possible, because of 
divine communication of special powers. Some of these sought 
to be saved by faith, faith being considered vastly inferior to 
knoiuledge. The Gnostics considered themselves as constituting 
the first, or spiritual, group, regarding their special knowledge 
as their assurance of immortality, for only the souls of spiritual 
men are immortal. They were very group conscious, and their 
salvation would result from their esoteric knowledge and 
ascetic life.
5. 
Redemption 
Conceived 
of 
as 
Liberation 
From 
Matter.—The Gnostic idea of redemption was the notion 
of the liberation of the spirit from its connection with matter, 
but it was restricted to the upper two classes. Some, however, 
held the more liberal view that there were certain favored 
ones in each group—sparks of light having fallen into the 
breasts of those sighing for redemption. The work of redemp­
tion was consequently the liberation of the spiritual nature 
in man from the evil material existence by which it is enslaved, 
thus affording escape into the Pleroma (divine fullness). That 
was one of its most blatant perversions.
6. Gnostic Dualism Versus Apostolic Monism.—The 
distinctly dualistic concept characterizing Gnosticism was based 
on pagan ideas accounting for the universe as caused by two 
eternal and equal but distinct and perpetually conflicting 
principles—good and evil, spirit and matter, ideal and material, 
light and darkness. Dualism held that these are the outcome 
or product of separate and equally ultimate “first causes.” 
Such a Dualism flourished among the Persians under the names 
of Ormuzd and Ahriman. And while Dualism was introduced 
into the church through Gnosticism, it was perpetuated by 
Manichaeism, as will later be observed. Its ultimate is seen in 
the contention that makes Satan the chief of an imperishable
860
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
kingdom of immortal sinners like himself, in an ever-burning 
Hell. So it is definitely involved in our quest.
On the contrary, primitive Christianity was Monistic/ 
asserting that “all that exists” was derived from a single, 
ultimate Source—the absolute, infinite God of the Old Testa­
ment and the New, of whom Paul says, “who only hath 
immortality” (1 Tim. 6:16). Monism involved the thought 
that the day is coming when evil will be utterly banished from 
the universe, and God will be “all and in all.”
But this leads logically to the concept of the ultimate 
annihilation of the devil and his followers, both demonic and 
human, along with the principle and practice of evil. Since God 
is the sole source of life, all who separate themselves from 
Him in rebellion are doomed to ultimate death. Thus the 
annihilation of sin and sinners is the necessary outcome and 
inevitable consequence of such a concept of sin, whether viewed 
from the metaphysical, juridical, or moral standpoints.
7. Dualism Involves Endless Duration of Wicked.— 
The point must not be missed that Gnosticism’s dogma of the 
soul’s immortality was based on Dualism. And, granting its 
premises, the ultimate philosophical consequence of the system 
seems inescapable. Gnosticism starts with the axiom of the 
indestructibility of the immortal soul, and the final result 
of the exercise of human freedom, in persistent revolt, involves 
the eternal suffering of a certain number of such creatures. 
It involves the eternal duration of the evil principle, in a state 
of rebellion against God. Infinity of evil stands in eternal 
opposition to the infinity of good. That was another of the 
inevitables of the system that struck at the primitive faith.
8. Blasphemously Denied Deity of Christ.—More than 
that, the deity of Christ was impugned. The Gnostics held 
that, though Christ was not the highest God, He came as an
7 The term Monism was coined to express “all that is” in terms of a single source and 
reality, in denial of the Dualism of the physical and psychical, or body and mind, by 
postulating a reality transcending those of which both are made.
PERVERSIONS COMPEL RESTATEMENT OF TRUTH 
861
emissary of the Supreme God, bringing gnosis. But the Gnostics 
taught that Christ, as a Divine Being, did not assume an actual 
human body, but either temporarily inhabited a human “Jesus” 
or merely assumed a phantasmal human appearance. That, of 
course, was Docetism, noted later. They thus denied the actual 
deity of Christ, degrading Him to the category of other Aeons 
of the higher category. This was still another of the vicious 
aspects of the system that Irenaeus and others felt forced to 
battle.
9. Rejected Old Testament and Maligned “Jehovah.” 
—Still further, Gnosticism rejected the Old Testament and the 
Mosaic account of the creation of the world. Adam was regarded 
as purely mythical. The Gnostics held the pernicious belief 
that the Jehovah of the Old Testament was the enemy of the 
true God. Nevertheless, he was the alleged creator of the world 
and of Hell, holding his captives by error and indulgence. 
They taught that Christ, though defective, came to rescue 
those shut up in Hell, and to unmask the wiles and evil 
character of Jehovah. And Marcion 
taught that Christ 
descended into the underworld to release those souls who re­
fused to obey the demons worshiped by the Jews.
Such are some of the leading aspects of the devastating 
perversions taught by the Gnostic sects. But they become even 
more sinister when examined in greater detail. It thus becomes 
increasingly obvious why Christian leaders believed that this 
colossal system of anti-Christian error must be met in head-on 
conflict. It was an inescapable part of the struggle we are 
surveying.
10. Like Termites Eroding Basic Structure.—We should 
bear in mind as we progress that Gnosticism was just one— 
but a weighty one—in a series of disintegrating developments 
that sought to infiltrate the early Christian Church and sub­
vert its fundamental teachings. These various related heresies 
might well be likened to termites boring into the basic structure 
of the temple of Christianity. These all sought to emasculate
862
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
the apostolic concepts of God and man, particularly as regards 
man’s nature and destiny. The groundwork was thus laid 
for further inroads through Platonism and kindred regressive 
developments in the days to come. That is the tie-in, and why 
we must scan it. It was one early segment in a vicious circle 
of circumstances that boded ill for the future integrity of 
the church.
II. Underlying Unity Despite Wide Diversity
Gnosticism’s most conspicuous teachers were Valentinus, 
Saturninus, Basilides, and Marcion. Carpocrates might also be 
listed. Confusing diversity marked the teachings of these fac­
tional leaders, yet there was an underlying unity. All fac­
tions were united, first, in stressing pagan Dualism, and second, 
in considering themselves spiritual and therefore immortal by 
nature. The immortality sought by mankind was believed 
theirs by virtue of the very constitution of their being—an 
inherent aristocracy, not a gift of divine goodness or one ob­
tained by impartation of divine character.
What the Apostolic and early Ante-Nicene Fathers had 
insisted was a conferred gift, or grace, all Gnostics regarded 
as innately theirs. This point is important: They would auto­
matically be saved, they held, because they were spiritual— 
irrespective of conduct. The sinister effect of such a concept 
of immortality was inevitable. The immortal might even rightly 
do things sinful for others and not come under condemnation.
Such was the confusing and grossly misleading picture 
presented to the pagan world by these warring Gnostic factions, 
all claiming the name of “Christian.” Thus all Christians were 
divided into three categories. Some souls were spiritual and 
sure of salvation because of their special knowledge. Others 
were recognized as psychical, having soul without spirit, whose 
salvation, if possible, was yet to be effected. Still others were 
considered material, and therefore hopelessly lost. Such was
PERVERSIONS COMPEL RESTATEMENT OF TRUTH 
863
its fatalism. But this eerie medley becomes more confusing 
as we note the conflicting views of the factions.
1. Valentinus Injects “Intermediate” Waiting Place. 
—Valentinus, for example, lists man’s accepted threefold 
nature as predominantly material, animal, or spiritual. The first 
partakes of the body of flesh, which all believed is only evil and 
doomed to destruction. The second is the imperfect, mundane 
animal soul. The third, or spiritual soul, is incorporeal like 
that of the Aeons, and destined to enter the Pleroma (abode 
of the Aeons) in the supermundane sphere, where the primary 
Ogdoad (Ruler) resides.
When the spiritual soul is divested of all animal sin, it 
is said to be irresistibly drawn back up to the Pleroma. But 
Valentinus, in touching on the survival of the soul after death, 
injects an “intermediate” waiting place for the soul until 
admitted to Heaven—a sort of embryonic Purgatory. The 
material portion passes to destruction, while the animal soul 
stays with the Demiurge in this intermediate place forever.8
Furthermore, Valentinus held yet another pagan feature, 
drawn from Hinduism—immortality of things, as well as of 
persons. The Hindu philosophy held the immortality of all 
life, beasts being men in transitu. This too was part of Gnos­
ticism. So metempsychosis, or transmigration of souls, was like­
wise involved in its complexities.
2. Fantastic 
Degrading 
Notions 
of 
Saturninus.— 
Saturninus of Rome, likewise strongly dualistic, held the fantas­
tic notion that the Supreme but Unknowable God created a 
series of angels and other supernatural beings, which in turn 
created man. But, as originally formed, man was supposedly a 
“powerless entity” that wriggled on the ground like a worm, 
until a divine spark set him on his feet. Saturninus believed the 
God of the Jews to be one of the Creator-Angels. And he 
held that the Supreme Father sent Christ to destroy this Jewish
8 See Irenaeus, Against Heresies, book 1, chaps. 7, 8, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 325.
864
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
God and to redeem such as were endowed with the divine spark.9
3. 
Basilides’ 
“Transit of 
Soul” 
From 
Mithraism.— 
Basilides, of Syria, stressed that the Supreme God is separated 
from the world by 365 heavens—ranks of supermundane beings 
filling the space between the Supreme Being and the world 
of matter. This world, he held, is under the superintendency of 
the God of the Jews, who is of the lower rank, and always 
seeking to subject man to Himself. In order to free men, God 
sent His Nous (Mind), a spiritual being of high rank, into the 
world, who dwelt in Jesus, though He suffered in appearance 
only. But man must follow Him to secure freedom from matter, 
and so rise to the Supreme God. Basilides’ philosophy was 
also pantheistic, one of his designations of God being the 
“Non-existent” One.10
The Basilidean doctrine—blending Persian, Hindu, and 
Neoplatonic ideas—in its view of the descent and ascent of 
the soul through the heavens, appears to have borrowed this 
from Mithraism, which embodied such a belief.11 Basilides’ 
strange view was specifically this: The soul of man originated 
in the Ogdoad (eighth heaven, region of the fixed stars). From 
there it descended to the Hebdomad (seventh, or planetary 
heaven), where it acquired its “psychical nature,” and thence 
to earth, where it took on a carnal or corporeal nature.
On earth the soul of the spiritual man suffers until it 
obtains release from the body, which disintegrates into dust, 
while the departed soul ascends to the Hebdomad, where its 
psychical nature is cast off. Thus purified, it ascends to the 
Ogdoad, to dwell with the Great Archon (Ruler) in radiant 
light. Moreover, on earth the soul, having sinned in a previous 
life (transmigration), endures punishment in this life—being 
purged by appropriate punishment. This was, of course, an 
embryonic form of the later Purgatory.12
0 Hippolytus, The Refutation of All Heresies, book 7, chap. 16, in ANF, vol. 5, p. 109.
10 Ibid., chap. 14, in ANF, vol. 5, p. 109.
11 Cf. Origen, Against Celsus, book 6, chap. 22, in ANF, vol. 4, p. 583.
12 Hippolytus, op. cit., book 7, chap. 15; book 10, chap. 10, in ANF, vol. 5, pp. 108, 144; 
also Clement of Alexandria, Miscellanies, book 4, chap. 12, in ANF, vol. 2, pp. 425, 426.
PERVERSIONS COMPEL RESTATEMENT OF TRUTH 
865
4. 
Marcion 
Rejects 
Heart 
of 
Christian 
Faith.— 
Marcion, of Rome, disposed of all historical foundations and 
established a purely imaginary system of Christianity, his 
special notion being that the gospel is wholly a gospel of 
love, to the exclusion of law. This led him to the rejection 
of the Old Testament. But that came from the pagan Gnosti­
cism of ancient Egypt, which was starkly antinomian. The 
Demiurge, or Creator-God, revealed as the Old Testament 
Jehovah from Genesis 1 onward, Marcion held to be wholly 
a god of law, having nothing to do with the gospel of Christ.
Marcion held that it was the purpose of the Supreme God 
to overthrow the Demiurge. And, as the true contrast of law 
and spirit was understood by Paul alone, in New Testament 
times, only his ten epistles were accepted as canonical Scripture. 
Marriage and procreation were attributed to Satan, and 
Marcion also denied the human birth of the Saviour,13 regard­
ing His body as a mere appearance, and His life and death as 
simply apparent—Docetism.
5. Carpocrates Taught a Licentious Ethic.—Carpoc- 
rates of Alexandria likewise taught the transmigration of im­
mortal souls, passing from body to body, until at last liberated, 
then soaring to God, the Maker of the world, who is above 
the angels. Carpocrates was also antinomian, preached a licen­
tious ethic, and taught that Jesus was born by natural 
generation.14
6. Gnostic Heresies Force Church to Define Faith.— 
Because of this babel of conflicting voices, confusion was con­
founded as to what “Christians” really believed, for the Gnostic 
factions all masqueraded under that name. In the very nature 
of the case, true Christian teachers were compelled to defend 
the genuine Christian faith against the multiform attacks of 
this vicious assailant. Thus it was that the Gnostic controversy
13 Hippolytus, op. lit., book 7, chaps. 17-19, in A.NF, vol. 5, pp. 110, 112.
14 Irenaeus, Against Heresies, book 1, chap. 25, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 350; see also Hip­
polytus, op. cit., chap. 20, in ANF, vol. 5, pp. 113, 114.
28
866
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
forced the Christian Church to define her doctrinal beliefs 
and basic positions, and hastened the development of her early 
formulas of faith, or creeds, as well as defining the accepted 
canon of Old and New Testament Scriptures. When these 
were duly defined and recognized, the Gnostics were then 
shut out from Christian fellowship.
III. Recapitulation of Principal Errors of Gnosticism
Here is a summary of the multiple errors of Gnosticism in 
its variant forms:
1. Dualism—The coexisting opposition of two eternally contrary prin­
ciples, with matter regarded as evil, and therefore not having been created 
directly by the Supreme Being. There was consequent repugnance toward 
anything material.
2. Emanations—Posited on a succession of Aeons through emanations 
from the Supreme Being, the more remote the more degraded. In place of 
a direct creation, emanation ultimately produced the world.
3. Demiurge—The most degraded of the emanation figures was the 
World-Framer, identified with the God of the Jews, and the Old Testament 
inspired by him.
4. Hostility to Judaism—Jehovah regarded as malign, and actively 
hostile to the true god. Regarded as diabolical by some, while others con­
sidered him merely ignorant and imperfect.
5. Docetism—The Messiah’s body only an appearance, or only tempo­
rarily used. Thus His Saviourship was denied.
6. Rejection of Old Testament and All but Pauline New Testament 
Epistles—Peter and James considered servants of the Demiurge.
7. Striving After System—Seeking to bring all eclectic truth into har­
mony, but with emphasis on pomp and ceremony.
8. Arbitrary Aristocracy—Men scaled in proportion to knowledge of 
supposed "mysteries”: (1) the masses sarkical, animal or fleshly; (2) some 
—psychical or capable of reasoning about earthly matters; and (3) the elite, 
or Gnostics—the spiritual, apprehending divine mysteries.
9. Fatalistic—Man’s present condition not from his own choosing, but 
results from the method of his creation. And from this he can do nothing 
to free himself.
10. Matter Inherently Evil—Great contempt of the flesh as inherently 
evil. Some practiced extreme asceticism; others believed that the indulgence 
of the flesh was immaterial, giving free rein to indulgence; and still others 
even insisted that the flesh ought to be destroyed by the practice of vice.
11. Included Idea of Redemption—A divine interposition in world
PERVERSIONS COMPEL RESTATEMENT OF TRUTH 
867
affairs was, however, conceived, to deliver from the dominion of evil. In this 
it differed from other theosophical systems.
12. Degraded Christ—Through the separation of the Creator of the 
world from the Supreme God, and putting Christ in the same category as 
other beings of a lower nature, Gnosticism degraded the dignity and deity 
of Christ.
13. Transmigration—That souls migrate from body to body until com­
plete purification has been achieved; thus at fundamental variance with 
the Christian doctrine of the resurrection of the body.
Such was the complex peril that confronted the church 
and impelled Irenaeus to detail its errors and confront its 
claims—with much emphasis on the true nature and destiny 
of man. But before we turn to Irenaeus we must briefly note 
the menace of Manichaeism.
IV. Menace of Manichaeism Imperils Post-Nicene Church
Another grave peril that arose to menace the Christian 
Church, likewise based on a fundamentally distorted concept 
of body and soul, here and hereafter, was the Manichaean 
Dualistic movement, reaching its height in the fourth and 
fifth centuries. This further statement is therefore necessary 
for additional background understanding. The Manichaean 
movement followed after Gnosticism had passed its peak. It 
was actually a development of Gnosticism, with the Christian 
element reduced to a minimum and dualistic Zoroastrianism, 
old Babylonian nature worship, and other Oriental elements 
raised to the maximum—and all elevated to a gnosis.
1. 
Origin, Characteristics, and Amazing Spread.—The 
early phenomenal spread of true Christianity awakened the 
opposition of all pagan religions from the Indus to the 
Euphrates. But when Gnostic Christianity was introduced into 
Persia, Zoroastrianism was on the decline. Manes, or Mani 
(c. a.d. 216-276), was born in Persia. Perceiving points of agree­
ment between Mithraism, Parsiism, Buddhism, and Gnostic 
Christianity, he conceived the idea of blending Oriental pagan 
Dualism, the chief teachings of Parsiism, or Magism as reformed
868
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
by Zoroaster, with these new Gnostic-Christian elements. 
Christianity must first be freed from alleged Jewish corruptions, 
for he believed the Jews were worshiping darkness instead 
of light. Then this syncretism would be clothed in Biblical 
phraseology, thus to produce the perfect universal religion.15 
It was a grandiose scheme.
Manes began the public teaching of his views in the Persian 
court about a.d. 240, but Zoroastrianism soon forced him into 
exile. Reaching Western China, he went from there down 
into India, where he became better acquainted with Buddhism 
and decided to incorporate its best points in his expanding 
syncretism. The “Christian” element was by now reduced 
to a hollow shell, stripped of all reality and divested of all 
true intent, simply retaining certain Christian terms. It was 
a crude, unholy alliance, but Manes propagated it far and 
wide. And Manes, it should be stated, was finally put to death 
by being flayed alive.
Manichaeism was persecuted by the Roman emperors, first 
as a Persian sect and then as a Gnostic cult. Laws were issued 
against it, as by Diocletian in a.d. 296. But still it flourished. 
It was vehemently opposed by some in the church, such as 
Ambrose and Athanasius and Gregory I. Yet it definitely in­
fluenced certain leaders in the church.10 Manichaeism first 
gained a foothold in Persia and Mesopotamia, penetrated the 
Roman Empire about a.d. 280, and established itself in Egypt by 
the close of the third century.
In the fourth century it began to spread rapidly, and 
achieved popularity in Italy. However, the bulk of its ad­
herents were in Northern Africa. It survived in Chinese 
Turkestan for centuries, and by a.d. 1000 was still in Southern
15 On Manichaeism see Ephraim of Syria, Titus of Bostra, Irenaeus, Augustine, Albiruni
i
or Biruni), and collections of Manichaean manuscripts. Also such standard historians as Schaff, 
lase. Gieseler, Neander, Waddington, Baur, Harnack, and Newman, together with Cudworth 
and Bunsen, and especially F. C. Burkitt, A. V. W. Jackson, and Hans j. Polotsky.
10 Augustine was a Manichee for nine years before he recognized its errors. Following 
that he spared no pains in trying to counteract Manichaeism. Nevertheless, some of the 
Manichaean modes of thought affected him, and he retained the evil principle of Dualism. 
His dogmatics reveal the marks left upon him. (See Hudson, Debt and Grace, pp. 144, 330; 
Newman, A Manual of Church History, vol. 1, pp. 197 , 365.)
PERVERSIONS COMPEL RESTATEMENT OF TRUTH 
869
France and Spain, and even in Germany, affecting some of 
the monks and clergy. In fact, traces of it continued in various 
lands until the thirteenth century. Some even maintain that 
it continued to make proselytes up until the Reformation. 
And various medieval sects were 
believed to be Neo- 
Manichaeans at heart. For a time it appeared to be a real rival 
of Christianity.
2. 
Essence of the Manichaean Movement.—Manichae­
ism had a hierarchical organization. At the head stood Manes, 
regarded as an apostle of Christ and considering himself the 
Paraclete, completing the work left unfinished by Christ, with 
successors like Peter and the popes. The seat of the Manichaean 
popes was for centuries at Babylon, then at Samarkand. Manes 
surrounded himself with twelve apostles and seventy bishops. 
There were five gradations in the cult: (1) Teachers—Manes 
and his successors, (2) bishops, or overseers, (3) elders or pres­
byters, (4) electi, or perfect, a priestly sacerdotal class, practicing 
Buddhist asceticism, and (5) auditores, or hearers—secular lay­
men with more freedom. It had a rigorous system of fasts with 
Sunday as the chief day, consecrated to the sun, the visible 
representation of light worship.
The prime object of it all was to free the “light” from 
the intermingled “darkness.” Christ was sent to accomplish 
this. But according to the Manichaeans, His apostles misrepre­
sented His doctrine, so Manes was sent to succeed where Christ 
had failed, and to restore what was lost. The soul partakes of the 
kingdom of light; the body of the kingdom of darkness. And 
Manichaeism’s great moral aim was to teach men how to 
deliver the good soul from the corrupt body, and to overcome 
the power of evil matter, for evil was considered a real essence.
Manichaeism called for physical refinement rather than 
moral regeneration. And redemption was to be found in and 
through light, as worshiped in the East as a symbol of deity. 
But the World-Soul was still chained to matter. And instead 
of freeing the soul from darkness, light had turned into
870
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
darkness. Such were some of the grave issues raised by 
Manichaeism.
3. Christian Aspect Emasculated and Nullified.—The 
“Christian” aspect of Manichaeism was reduced to a farce. It 
held that Christ did not really die, that He did not have a real 
body, and no dual (divine-human) nature—only a fantastic 
semblance of corporeality in which His essence as the Son of 
Everlasting Light was presented to the eyes of men. That, of 
course, was simply Docetism." Accordingly, they held that Christ 
had no human birth, and that His suffering and death were 
really fictitious. Thus the life of Christ was, to the Manichaeans, 
only a series of illusory appearances. All historical reality was 
removed, leaving only a few Christian terms and metaphores. 
And some identified Christ with Mithras. Thus the system 
was stripped of a saving Christ. That was its most sinister 
aspect.
4. Fantastic Concepts of Body, Soul, 
Redemption, 
Resurrection.—The intrinsic evil of matter and the human 
body was taken as axiomatic. Man, they taught, consists of two 
opposing principles, with a soul like the kingdom of light, and 
a body like the kingdom of darkness. Struggling souls on earth 
are to be delivered from their sinful bodies, and after being 
purified by the sun are to ascend to the region of light. But 
those souls that neglect the struggle against their corrupt 
nature are, after death, to pass, through transmigration, into the 
bodies of animals or other beings until they have expiated 
their guilt.
And this belief in the intrinsic evil of matter led them, 
perforce, to the denial of the resurrection. Matter was somehow 
always evil, the flesh being ever and necessarily at war with 
the spirit. Salvation therefore lay in the exterminating of bodily
17 Docetism—denying the humanjty and sufferings of Christ as apparent rather than 
real—denied the unique union of the divine and the human in Christ’s person, and rejected 
the reality of the incarnation. Many held that Jesus was a mere man, and that the Aeon 
Christ descended upon the man Jesus at His baptism, but left Him immediately before His 
crucifixion—so that Christ was not actually subject to pain and death. Docetism is in contrast 
with Ebionism.
PERVERSIONS COMPEL RESTATEMENT OF TRUTH 
871
desires. Thus a rigid and gloomy abstinence was fostered.
5. Based on an Absolute Dualism.—Manichaeism is based 
on an absolute, pagan Dualism 18—two eternal principles from 
which all things proceed; two everlasting kingdoms bordering 
on each other—the kingdom of light under the dominion of 
God, and the kingdom of darkness under the control of 
Daemon, eternally opposed to each other. In the visible world 
they are commingled and in conflict. But the question of the 
eternity of evil xuas really the main issue—its essence and its 
outcome.
But within its framework of the absolute Dualism, ex­
plained in mystic terms, was a sort of pantheism, each element 
of the Dualism evolving into multiformity. From the “kingdom 
of light” emanated the “mother of life,” which in turn gener­
ated the “primitive man,” who was overcome by the kingdom 
of darkness. Thus created, man consists of two opposite 
principles, with a soul that must be freed from the body of 
darkness, the higher nature being tempted by the lower.
6. Church Rites, Polity, and Ceremonies.—In Manichae- 
ism’s religious rites, baptism and communion were celebrated 
with great pomp and ceremony, as by Catholics a little later. 
The elect were a sacerdotal group, the connecting link between 
the auditors and the “kingdom of light.” They practiced Bud­
dhist asceticism, possessed no property, were celibate, abstained 
from wine, took no animal life, and subjected human life 
to stringent regulations.
Another sinister aspect was that they rejected the Old 
Testament as the work of the god of darkness, and they accepted 
the New Testament only conditionally, where not in conflict 
with their teachings. Nevertheless, absurd and un-Christian 
as it was, it claimed to be the “only true Christianity.” 
It exalted asceticism, introduced pompous ceremonialism,
_18 Polytheistic Persia personalized its Dualism under Ormuzd and Ahriman, without 
beginning or ending. Their gross and bald Dualism asserted two personal, self-subsisting gods, 
warring eternally against each other. Evil was an eternal necessity, and involved eternal sin 
and misery, and is unconquerable or irreducible. That was the basis and the animus of Mani­
chaeism.
872
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
held that its ministers are the intermediaries between God 
and man, possessing extraordinary powers with God, and intro­
duced a sort of Purgatory. Prayers were addressed to the God 
of Light, the kingdom of light, the angels, and to Manes—the 
self-styled Paraclete or Comforter, who was to declare the way 
of salvation.
This was another of the vicious systems confronting the 
church, against which loyal churchmen were impelled to fight 
in post-Nicene times. That is why the Conditionalists dwelt 
so constantly upon the true origin, nature, and destiny of man, 
and the true provisions of salvation and immortality in Christ, 
together with the revealed fate of the wicked.
That is why we have been compelled to turn aside long 
enough for a candid examination—in order to understand the 
sinister character of these movements and the spread of their 
activities that induced such widespread discussion of the nature 
and destiny of man. Nevertheless, these were some of the 
multiple factors in the growing acceptance of the Innate-Immor- 
tality thesis, and the dualistic notion of the eternity of evil, 
which is tied in with the concept of the Eternal Torment of 
the wicked.
CHAPTER 
FIFTY-ONE
Irenaeus of Gaul—Conditionalist 
Champion on Western Outpost
First of Three Schools of Theological Trilemma Strengthened— 
Irenaeus Helps Establish Clear Positions of Conditionalism
I. Unique Position as Contender for Orthodoxy
We now turn to Irenaeus, of Gaul, most conspicuous 
and learned Conditionalist of the third century, who bore a 
remarkable testimony in this transition hour. The close of the 
second century reveals a marked change in the character and 
position of the expanding Christian Church. It had appealed 
to the judgment of various philosophers, but had not yet won 
the deference of the statesmen. Nevertheless, the church was 
in definite process of establishment throughout the empire.
Meanwhile, within the church acrimonious controversy 
had developed over the issue of Chiliasm, or the reign of the 
glorified saints on earth during the thousand years following 
the Second Advent. This was occasioned by extremists who 
had brought the whole premillennialist position into discredit. 
And now heresies were sweeping over the church like destruc­
tive swarms of locusts, to devour the “harvest” of the gospel. 
Gnosticism was the most devastating of all, and so became 
the object of Irenaeus’ massive attack.
1. 
Pupil of Conditionalist Polycarp, of Smyrna.— 
With this as a setting we now turn to the Western outpost 
of the church in Celtic Gaul, which in a.d. 177 was visited by 
terrible persecution under Aurelius, with many martyrdoms 
at Lyons. Although nothing is known positively as to the origin
873
Irenaeus of Gaul — Condi­
tional Champion of Western 
Outpost; Mortal Man Must 
Be Immortalized.
of the church in Gaul, its pioneers are believed to have come 
from Asia Minor. But about a.d. 178 Irenaeus 
(c. 130-202), 
who had been born in Asia Minor, was made bishop of 
Gaul. He had received a Hellenistic education, but definitely 
belonged to the West, and became one of the most learned 
and renowned of the early Ante-Nicene Fathers.
He had been a pupil of Polycarp of Smyrna, who, it will 
be remembered, was an avowed Conditionalist. This association 
doubtless influenced Irenaeus’ own views on this controverted 
question. And now from Lyons, on the banks of the Rhone, 
he conducted a vast missionary and literary activity. By this 
time Gnosticism was rampant, and Irenaeus sought both to 
check its sweep and to reaffirm and establish the fundamentals 
of the Christian faith. In this he became the most renowned 
champion of orthodoxy in his generation. He was also the 
connecting link between East and West. Because of his unique 
testimony as a spokesman for Conditionalism we shall analyze 
his witness quite fully.
874
CONDITIONALIST CHAMPION 
ON WESTERN OUTPOST 875
2. Lifelong Foe of Contemporary Heresies.—Irenaeus 
was a lifelong foe of these contemporary heresies, especially 
Gnosticism, then spreading like a pestilence over portions of 
the church in various lands. He studied them as a skilled 
physician studies diseases, says Coxe, classifying, describing, and 
countering them. He was an independent thinker, and fearless 
in the expression of his convictions. Thus he set an example 
of resistance to Rome when she was to be blamed, that persisted 
through the centuries.1
As to Gnosticism, with its professed “knowledge” (gnosis) 
—but actually sinister assumptions and absurdities—Irenaeus 
felt his task to be clear. He must make it impossible for anyone 
to confound true Christianity with Gnosticism. Moreover, he 
must make it impossible for such a monstrous system to survive, 
or ever to rise again. In this high resolve he delivered body 
blows, demonstrating its essential identity with old pagan 
mythology and heathen systems of philosophy, and refuting 
its sophistries. So, despite militant paganism and heresy he set 
up the landmarks of the faith in Gaul, as he castigated the 
errors of his day.
3. General Survey of Irenaeus’ Definitive Treatise.— 
Bishop Irenaeus’ famous treatise Against Heresies is a detailed 
exposure and confutation of the multiform Gnostic heresies 
of the time, leading into a definitive exposition and defense 
of the Christian faith. Its full title, as given by Eusebius, is 
A Refutation and Subversion of Knoivledge falsely so called. 
Written during the episcopate of Plotinus, his predecessor at 
Lyons, it is divided into five books. The first two are a detailed 
description of the sinister teachings of the heretical sects, with 
an exposure and overthrow of their absurdities. The remaining 
three books set forth the true Christian doctrine as the rule 
of faith and practice, but still in basic contrast with, and opposi­
tion to, Gnosticism.
The Gnostics had raised two questions: How could the
1 Coxe, “Introductory Note to Irenaeus Against Heresies,” in ANF, vol. 1, pp. 309, 310.
876
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
finite be reconciled with the Infinite? and, How could the 
existence of evil be accounted for? Here was Irenaeus’ able 
answer. Regrettably, only the first book has been preserved 
in the Greek original. The rest are in Latin translation only— 
made when the church had all but universally adopted the 
Augustinian theory, and by a translator of that persuasion. 
Too much dependence cannot, therefore, be placed on the 
precise rendering of certain controverted passages. Nevertheless, 
the treatise bears remarkable testimony to the Conditionalist 
doctrine of the nature and destiny of man, and its inseparable 
corollary, the ultimate destruction of the wicked.
4. Stands as Bulwark Against Universal Innate Immor­
tality.—It should be remembered that Irenaeus was recog­
nized as one of the ablest and soundest of the Ante-Nicene 
Fathers. He stands in imposing contrast with, and opposition to, 
the two conflicting schools just arising. These in time came to 
be known as Augustinianism (with its universal Innate-Immor- 
tality thesis, combined with the Eternal-Torment-of-the-wicked 
postulate developed by Tertullian), and Origenism (likewise 
with its universal Innate Immortality, but having as its corollary 
the ultimate universal restoration of the wicked). Irenaeus stood 
as a bulwark against both of these conflicting immortal-soul 
concepts just making their appearance. His chronological timing 
and relationship to the other Church Fathers will be seen by 
the Tabular Chart F, on page 758.
Let us first take a panoramic view of his over-all positions. 
On the basis of Holy Writ, Irenaeus envisioned the coming of 
a clean universe—free from sin and suffering, brought about 
through the ultimate destruction of sin, sinners, and demons— 
and the final restoration of righteousness. In refuting the pagan 
postulate of the Innate Immortality of the soul, Irenaeus 
stressed that it is from Cod’s own grace, majesty, and power, 
and not from our own nature, that we receive the gift of immor­
tality, or living forever.
5. Wicked Destined to Cessation of Being.—Irenaeus 
seemed to exhaust the expressive vocabulary at his command
CONDITIONALIST CHAMPION ON WESTERN OUTPOST 877
in denying the immortality of the unsaved. The incorrigibly 
wicked are consigned to eternal punishment which, he explains, 
ends in complete cessation of being or existence; and this results 
in the end of all evil. The chastisement of the wicked will 
be eternal in its effects, because God’s benefits are eternal. His 
argument, in a sentence, was this: To be deprived of the benefits 
of existence is the greatest punishment, and to be deprived of 
them forever is to suffer “eternal punishmentThis should 
be borne in mind.
Irenaeus rejected the principle, common alike to Gnosti­
cism and to Platonism, that glorifies the soul and depreciates 
the body. He held to the oneness of man and insisted on the 
resurrection of the body and the redemption of the entire man. 
He argued against the transmigration of souls, a belief held in 
the East and in Greece and even creeping into the church in 
Alexandria. To Irenaeus “incorruptibility” does not mean a 
mere mystic purity of life but the imperishability of the resur­
rected body and the whole man.
Church historian Philip Schaff declared Irenaeus to be 
the leading representative of the Johannine School in the second 
half of the second century, the champion of orthodoxy against 
the Gnostic heresy, and mediator between the Eastern and the 
Western church, and, on the whole, the “most orthodox of 
the ante-Nicene fathers.” 2 In the light of Irenaeus’ pronounced 
Conditionalism, that is a highly significant evaluation.
6. 
Eschatological Outline 
Portrays Last Events.— 
Before we take up Irenaeus’ discussion of man’s nature and 
destiny, it is desirable to grasp his exposition of the great 
prophetic outlines of Scripture, as these have a direct bearing 
on his eschatological views. Irenaeus was an able expositor of 
the major prophecies of Daniel and the Apocalypse. The im­
pressive parallelism of Daniel 2 and 7 is brought out with 
remarkable clarity—the four world powers of Babylonia, Medo- 
Persia, Greece, and Rome, and their aftermath.
2 Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, vol. 2, p. 751.
878
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
He identifies his own times with that of the Roman 
“fourth,” “which now rules,” but which, he held, was soon to be 
partitioned, according to prophecy, into ten lesser kingdoms— 
the coming nations of Western Europe. And this breakup of 
Rome, portrayed by the broken feet-and-toes portion of the 
image of Daniel 2, sets forth the same fourth kingdom, par­
titioned into the same ten smaller kingdoms, but here followed 
by the Heaven-descending stone kingdom of Christ, destined 
to smite the nations in earth’s latter days.
Then, Irenaeus notes in Daniel 7 an added feature, per­
taining to coming developments in the Roman Empire. A 
“little horn” kingdom was to supplant three of Rome’s ten 
divisions, which he identified under the multiple names of 
Antichrist, Man of Sin, Mystery of Iniquity, Son of Perdition, 
Beast, and Little Horn, whose reign would terminate in de­
struction at the Second Advent.4 And Christ’s second coming 
is, he states, accompanied by the first resurrection, and followed 
by the reign of the resurrected saints during the millennium.5
But the general resurrection and judgment upon the 
wicked, Irenaeus declares, follows the descent of the New 
Jerusalem at the end of the millennial period. Such is his bold 
and clear depiction of the inspired or prophesied outline 
of the centuries, and the order of eschatological events—includ­
ing the final destiny and disposition of all mankind.
By having before us Irenaeus’ concept of the final dis­
position of all things—in other words, his eschatology—the 
way is open for understanding his view of the annihilation 
of the wicked in connection with the last judgment, and the 
conferring of immortality on the righteous only, and not on 
the wicked. Thus inspired prophecy and Biblical doctrine are, 
according to Irenaeus, seen to be in complete agreement. But 
there is one key principle that unlocks his entire exposition.
7. Christ Came 
to 
Undo R
uin W
rought 
by Adam.—
3 Irenaeus, op. cit., book 5, chaps. 25, 26, in ANF, vol. 1, pp. 553-555.
4 Ibid., chaps. 25-35, pp. 553-566.
5 Ibid., chap. 25, sec. 2, p. 566. For details of his exposition consult Froom, Prophetic 
Faith, vol. i, pp. 244-252.
CONDITIONALIST CHAMPION ON WESTERN OUTPOST 
879
Irenaeus’ position may be summed up in the word “recapitula­
tion,” meaning “summing up” or “starting afresh.” Jesus is 
the Second Adam. As Adam fell through disobedience and 
became mortal, so Jesus came as the Second Adam to be 
victorious through obedience, and to confer immortality. From 
this position Irenaeus attacks the Gnostics. They say that the 
flesh is the work of the Demiurge, and so is of no account, 
and that man, in his soul, is naturally immortal. Irenaeus 
says that the flesh is the handiwork of the true God and a 
vital part of man and so must be redeemed. For these reasons 
Christ came in true flesh to undo what Adam had done in 
the flesh. This is the key to Irenaeus’ entire treatise.
II. Irenaeus’ Basic Doctrinal Positions and Definitions
Before taking up the comprehensive witness provided 
through a consecutive book-by-book coverage of Against Her­
esies, let us preview Irenaeus’ basic positions and his funda­
mental definitions and usages of terms for guidance through 
his voluminous treatise. First to be noted are certain contrasts. 
Eighty years ago Anglican Prebendary Henry Constable so ably 
tabulated Irenaeus’ leading positions that his general outline 
will, in part, be followed here.
1. 
Mortal Man Must Be Immortalized at Resurrec­
tion.—Irenaeus’ views were diametrically opposed to those of 
the Tertullian-Augustinian School—with their Innate-Immor- 
tality and Etemal-Torment-of-the-wicked postulate—just then 
appearing in Rome and Africa. Tertullian and Augustine 
maintained that from the very beginning man was possessed 
of an inherent and inalienable immortality of the soul. 
Irenaeus, on the contrary, held that man’s entire nature was 
created for immortality, but was mortal,6 and not yet possessed 
of immortality.
6 Irenaeus, op. cit., book 4, chap. 39, in ANF, vol. 1, pp. 522, 523.
880
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
He maintained that unfallen man, in his first estate in 
Eden, had to obtain something that he did not at first possess, 
and failed to obtain. And in his fallen state, if he refused to 
accept Christ as his complete Saviour from sin, man cut himself 
off from the proferred gift of immortality. Thus Irenaeus’ 
position was absolutely irreconcilable with the Augustinian 
dogma that the wicked have an innately immortal existence. 
He, on the contrary, held that immortality will be bestowed 
at the resurrection, with the reunion of the believer’s body and 
soul.7
2. To Live Is to “Exist”; to Die, to “Cease to Exist.”— 
Irenaeus’ concept of “life” is that of the literal sense of 
existence, whereas Augustinianism forced upon the word the 
thought of “well-being,” 
“happiness,” 
“felicity.” 
But 
to 
Irenaeus there may be life where there is no light or joy, 
but only fear, darkness, and sorrow, for the flesh partakes of 
life. And Irenaeus defines life eternal as never growing old, 
never dying the second death, never ceasing to exist. It is 
Christ, the Prince of Life, who existed before all, who is the 
source of all life. To live, then, is to exist.8
3. Eternal Life Is “Bestowed” Eternal Existence.— 
Eternal life, he held, is that life that is bestowed by Christ 
upon His redeemed. And it involves “perpetual duration,” 
“continuance for ever and ever,” “length of days for ever and 
ever,” or unending existence, and is set forth as identical 
with “immortality” and “incorruptibility.” Believers are the 
“children of the resurrection,” through which they will obtain 
the life now pledged to them. Immortality is now in promise, 
but not as yet in actual possession. Thus the elect are “enrolled” 
for “life eternal.” That, said Irenaeus, is the Christian’s glorious 
prospect.
4. Immortality Restricted to the Righteous.—None
7 Ibid., book 5, chaps. 10-13, pp. 536-541.
8 General Note: As stated, the multiple references to Irenaeus’ many statements cited 
in this chapter, and scattered throughout his five books, are not duplicated here because of 
space, but appear in the chapter-by-chapter coverage in chapter 52.
but the redeemed will obtain this life that will never end, 
this “perpetual duration.” It is a gift from God through Christ, 
and is confined to the redeemed. The unbelieving and wicked 
“shall not inherit the world of life which is to come.” They 
thereby “defraud themselves of this life,” having forfeited 
it through their perverseness. And their “everlasting perdition” 
consists in “cutting them off from this [proffered] life.” In 
this specific way Irenaeus’ stand is in complete contrast with 
that of the later Augustinian School, which taught that unend­
ing existence is for all men, evil as well as good.
5. Disobedience Caused Loss of Man’s Immortality.— 
Coming specifically to “immortality” 
(athanasia), Irenaeus 
gives its primary meaning as exemption from death and annihi­
lation; in other words, unending existence. When applied to 
God it is the absolute, eternal existence of which He cannot 
be deprived. But Irenaeus repeatedly asserts that immortality 
was forfeited by man through his transgression, and cannot 
possibly be the inherent possession of the disobedient. Because 
of disobedience man was “cast off from immortality.” And he 
asks the unanswerable question “How can man be immortal 
who in his mortal nature did not obey his Maker?”
Moreover, the immortality thus lost by sin can be regained 
only by choice and struggle. Irenaeus cites Paul’s logical and 
consistent exhortation to struggle that we may be crowned 
with immortality, and refers to “that which is acquired by our 
struggle, but which does not encircle us of its own accord.”
6. Union With Christ Results in Immortality.—In 
various ways and by multiple forms of expression, Irenaeus in­
sists that immortality is a gift conveyed to the believer through 
the gospel, which provision he interestingly describes as 
“breathing out immortality” and “vivifying man afresh.” Un­
ion with Christ is the sole means by which it is gained. So he says, 
“By no other means could we have attained to incorruptibility 
and immortality unless we had been united to incorruptibility 
and immortality.” This involves a saving knowledge of the
CONDITION ALIST CHAMPION ON WESTERN OUTPOST 881
882
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Son of God, and friendship with God, which “imparts immor­
tality to those who embrace it.” This honor is both accorded 
and restricted to “those who have obeyed and believed on God.”
7. Future Destinies Determined by Contrasting Resur­
rections.—Irenaeus’ view on the resurrection, or rather, 
the resurrections—of the just and the unjust—confirms his 
point. Augustinianism held that the bodies of the wicked 
will be raised immortal, for eternal suffering. Irenaeus, on the 
contrary, restricts immortality to the redeemed, to be bestowed 
at the first resurrection, and only to the bodies of the “just” 
when God will “render” them “incorruptible and immortal.” 
Contrariwise, the bodies of the wicked will be mortal in their 
resurrection, and subject to disintegration and final destruction.
8. Incorruption 
Means 
“Incapable 
of 
Decay.”—By 
“incorruption” Irenaeus stated that he means exemption from 
decay or dissolution, or exemption from ceasing to exist. It 
must be remembered that Irenaeus was opposing Gnostic here­
tics who denied a bodily resurrection, and who held that the 
flesh of the “spiritual” is “not capable of corruption,” that 
they must continue on forever. But Irenaeus asserted its appli­
cability to matter. Thus the flesh not only decays but is capable 
of being quickened. When infused with life from God it enjoys 
eternity of transformed existence, and is then precluded from 
“becoming old.” But this belongs to the redeemed alone, and 
is attained only by union with Christ, and secured in and 
through Christ. It is denied to the wicked.
9. Incorruption Now “in Promise,” Not Yet in Posses­
sion.—Irenaeus held that this incorruption of the righteous 
is not possessed in this present life, where it is had only in 
promise, but at the resurrection, when the saints shall have it 
in possession. And the present indwelling of the Holy Spirit 
is the earnest, or pledge, of incorruption. Thus the resurrection 
is “the commencement of incorruption,” contrary to the figura­
tive explanations of what came to be called Augustinianism.
10. 
Resurrection 
Bodies 
Are 
Totally 
Distinct.— 
Irenaeus puts a marked distinction between the bodies of the 
just and the unjust at the resurrection. In contrast with Augus- 
tinianism’s eternal duration of the wicked as essential to its 
Eternal-Tonnent-of-the-wicked thesis, Irenaeus’ eternal dura­
tion is expressly confined to the “incorruptible” and “immor­
tal” redeemed. Thus the hope of the resurrection, which is 
“to eternity,” is for the righteous, while the wicked remain 
in mortal flesh, subject to the second death.
11. To “Perish” Means Ultimate Nonexistence.—To 
“perish” is another of Irenaeus’ strong and frequently used 
words. It is synonymous with ultimate nonexistence. This 
is in contrast with the Gnostic position, which denied that 
the wicked perish, but rather are “absorbed in the universal 
substance.” But to Irenaeus to “perish” is the ultimate fate 
of all unrighteous souls. It leads to cessation of existence. On 
the other hand, Tertullian, Hippolytus, and Augustine con­
tended that the wicked do not die in Hell, that cessation of 
being never comes, and never can come to them, that they 
are both in soul and in body incorruptible, eternal, immortal. 
Irenaeus held to diametrically opposite terms and concepts.
12. Punishment Is “Punitive,” Not “Purgative.”—To the 
later 
Origenists, 
Restorationism’s 
future 
punishment 
is 
“purgative.” And after a protracted period the soul sentenced 
to Hell will allegedly come forth purified, and join the ranks 
of the redeemed. But to Irenaeus, to whom the verdict of 
the judgment is eternal, the punishment is “punitive ” and is 
eternal in its effects. The hideous cruelty of Augustinianism’s 
Eternal Torment finds no sanction in Irenaeus. To him the 
duration of the punishment is eternal, but its nature is death, 
destruction, perdition, cessation of being, annihilation—not 
ceaseless punishing. Augustinianism teaches that the wicked 
will remain forever alive and unconsumed, but Irenaeus con­
tends that they “shall be burned up as were Nadab and Abihu,” 
by fire from the Lord. They will “perish,” be “punished with
CONDITIONALIST CHAMPION ON WESTERN OUTPOST 883
884
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
everlasting death,” will ‘‘pass away,” will ‘‘not endure forever.” 
And “everlasting perdition” he defines as “cutting off the 
wicked from life,” and being “deprived of continuance for ever 
and ever.” It signifies “non-existence,” and the “loss of all 
benefits.”
13. Eternal Punishment Is Eternal Loss of Life.— 
Future punishment is, to Irenaeus, “eternal” because the loss 
of blessing is eternal, not because of eternally inflicting new 
misery, but because of eternal loss of what the saints eternally 
enjoy. Separation from God involves the death penalty, the 
forfeiting of life, the loss of life. Eternal loss is eternal punish­
ment. “Eternal death” cuts them off from eternal life.
14. Life Dependent on Gratuity of God.—In answering 
the Gnostic contention that there could be no immortality 
or endless existence for any created souls that had a beginning, 
Irenaeus responds that they will endure as long as God wills 
the existence and continuance of the saved. It is the Father 
“who imparts continuance for ever and ever on those who 
are saved.” He says, “Life does not arise from us, nor from 
our own nature.” Such as accept the gift of this provision 
“shall receive length of days for ever and ever.” And contrari­
wise, he who rejects the offer of this gift “deprives himself of 
continuance for ever and ever.”
We close this preview of Irenaeus’ Conditionalist positions 
by quoting the impressive conclusion to the learned Prebendary 
Constable’s denial of the claims of those Immortal-Soulists 
who cite Irenaeus as sustaining the contention that the wicked 
will exist in misery forever and ever, and that their punishment 
will be “deprivation of happiness,” not ultimate annihilation:
“To say that ‘sweet’ means ‘bitter,’ or that ‘light’ means ‘darkness,’ is 
just as allowable a use of words as to say that the ‘enduring’ and ‘continu­
ing’ of one of God’s works, such as the sun in the sky or the human soul, 
means ‘the happiness’ of these works. We dismiss such interpretation as an 
insult to our common understanding. Irenaeus, notwithstanding his Bene­
dictine editor and his Presbyterian translator, tells us that the wicked will 
not continue to exist for ever, because God does not will them to exist. God
CONDITIONALIST CHAMPION ON WESTERN OUTPOST 885
did will his [man’s] ‘happiness’ and his ‘well-being,’ but he marred them. 
God does not will his continued existence, and therefore he will cease to 
exist. Such is the testimony of the learned, holy, and martyred Bishop of 
Lyons, in the second century of Christ.” 8
9 Constable, Duration and Nature of Future Punishment, p. 191.
CHAPTER 
FIFTY-TWO
Irenaeus Voices Preponderant 
Belief of Church
I. Foremost Second-Century Contender for Conditionalism
As has already been observed, Irenaeus was one of the 
noble minds of his generation, as well as one of the most 
learned and respected theological authorities of his time. 
Enslin says of him, “Irenaeus is properly regarded one of the 
most influential figures of the ante-Nicene Church.”1 Among 
contemporary bishops he was surpassed by none in influence 
and importance throughout his long episcopate. He was the 
foremost second-century contender for Conditionalism. Because 
of its explicitness and candor, his testimony is therefore of 
exceptional value in our quest. As to timing, his principal 
treatise was written, it is believed, between a.d. 182 and 188.2 
A systematic survey of his total testimony is therefore highly 
desirable, in addition to the panoramic view given in the 
previous chapter on his Conditionalist stand. Two perplexing 
passages will also be frankly examined. These will appear in 
Appendix B.
As noted, Irenaeus’ most conspicuous work for the church 
was his masterful refutation of the spreading Gnostic per­
versions, which included gross misconceptions and false teach­
ings regarding the nature and destiny of man. But he was 
similarly successful in refuting the Platonic postulate of the
1 Morgan S. Enslin, “Irenaeus,” in Ferm. An Encyclopedia of Religion, p. 379.
2 Coxe, “Introductory Note to Irenaeus Against Heresies,” in ANF, vol. 1, p. 312.
886
IRENAEUS VOICES PREPONDERANT BELIEF OF CHURCH 887
natural immortality of the soul, now just beginning to make 
entrance into the Christian Church.
In his exposure of the subversions of Gnosticism, Irenaeus 
was compelled to deal decisively with their wearisome specious 
contentions over “emanations,” “Aeons,” the “Pleroma,” the 
“Archon,” et cetera, which have already been defined on page 
862. But Irenaeus is not content with merely refuting error. 
He affirms truth, going into the heart of the issues involved, 
and dealing with the fundamentals at stake. And he does so 
as a conspicuous proponent of many of the principles of Con­
ditionalism. That is the key to his arguments. Only by the 
total testimony of this fearless and faithful key witness, and 
a summation of his multiple statements, can the full impact 
and significance of his position be seen.
1. Grapples With Basic Issues of Controversy.—In his 
positive approach Irenaeus not only exposes Gnosticism’s origin 
and degrading character but also insists on the true and rightful 
place of Christ in the Godhead, as Creator and Redeemer of 
man. In contradistinction to Gnosticism, Irenaeus stressed the 
goodness of God’s original material creation, the true nature of 
man as created, the disastrous character and entry of sin, and the 
catastrophic results of the Edenic fall.
He pressed on the reality of the earthly life of Jesus 
Christ—emphasizing His eternal pre-existence, His incarnation 
through a virgin birth (thus He became the one and only 
God-man in order to save men), His sinless life on earth, His 
actual sufferings and crucifixion, His vicarious atoning death, 
His literal resurrection and ascension, and heavenly ministry. 
Irenaeus insisted on salvation and immortalization solely in 
and through Christ, with immortality as a gift “conferred” 
on the righteous at the first resurrection.
2. Remarkable Scope of Analysis of Error.—Irenaeus 
likewise denied the Gnostic notion of the eternal existence of 
sin, involving sinful, polluted beings in the universe of God, 
continuing on defiantly throughout all eternity. Irenaeus in-
888
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
sisted that, on the contrary, Christ came to banish sin and 
to restore universal harmony and righteousness by bringing 
all sin and pollution to an utter and permanent end. This 
point he stressed effectively.
Only God, Irenaeus firmly held, is by His own nature 
inherently and absolutely immortal. But, by the will of God, 
men will continue to exist only as long as He shall please 
and determine. The object of the Incarnation was expressly 
stated to be the purging away of all sin and the ultimate 
annihilation of all evil. At the same time Irenaeus deftly 
undermined the notion of such an accomplishment by universal 
restoration of all sinners, as some were then beginning to 
argue. His unequivocal utterances are on open record. So to 
these we now turn.
II. Devastating Exposure of Gnostic Errors and 
Countering Truth
Book one of Against Heresies contains an analytical 
description of the tenets of the various Gnostic sects, exposing 
their crass absurdities and antiscriptural character, and at the 
same time reaffirming the truths with which they were in 
direct conflict. Book two constitutes a complete demolition 
of their vicious teachings, principally on the grounds of reason. 
Here the foe, masquerading as “Christian,” is effectively un­
masked. Then, books three and five present the true doctrines 
of revelation as the complete antithesis of the speculations 
of Gnosticism. Note the specifics:
Chapter one (of book one) deals with Valentinus and 
his “fancied” and “ever-existing” Aeons contention—that of 
alleged emanations, or “fructifications,” from the divine sub­
stance, subsisting coordinately with the Deity, but dwelling 
outside the Pleroma 
(divine fullness). The Valentinians 
claimed that these various Aeons, which are listed,3 “possess
3 Irenaeus, op. cit., book 1, chap. 1, secs. 1, 2, in ANF, vol. 1, pp. 316, 317.
IRENAEUS VOICES PREPONDERANT BELIEF OF CHURCH 889
perpetual existence” and are coeternal with the divine nature/ 
A description of Gnosticism’s grotesque origin of the visible 
world fills chapters four and five, and their concept of the 
Demiurge, himself created, but the “Framer” of all other 
things yet outside the Plëroma/
This caution may well be given. In this systematic and 
searching analysis of Irenaeus, one must beware of taking cer­
tain of his descriptions of the fallacies of Gnostic notions to 
be the expression of his own positions, as some have unjustifi­
ably done. In chapters six and seven the three categories of 
men—spiritual, material, and animal, that are “feigned by 
these heretics”—are rehearsed. That their alleged “animal 
men” and “animal souls” are noted, together with the sacri­
legious Gnostic references to the “animal Christ”—though not 
in the “material” category, as is differentiated in note 2/ 
Chapter seven concerns their “blasphemous opinions 
against the true incarnation of Christ by the Virgin Mary.” 7 
The material and animal souls are, they say, destined to 
“corruption”—if they do not make the right choice—and pass 
to “destruction.” And chapter eight notes their twisting per­
versions of Scripture, to “support their own impious opinions,” 8 
with refutations following.
III. Irenaeus’ Personal Creed Then Preponderant Belief 
of Church
1. 
Irenaeus’ “Creed,” and “Conferred” Immortality.— 
In chapter ten Irenaeus sets forth his personal statement of 
faith, couched in “sublime simplicity,” 9 which belief he declares 
to be “the Faith of the Church Throughout the Whole World.” 
Because of its representative character, as the generally accepted 
faith of Christians at that time (between a.d. 182 and 188), 
it is here given in entirety, as essential reading:
890
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
“[She believes] in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven, 
and earth, and the sea, and all things that are in them; and in one Christ 
Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our salvation; and in the 
Holy Spirit, who proclaimed through the prophets the dispensations of 
God, and the advents, and the birth from a virgin, and the passion, and 
the resurrection from the dead, and the ascension into heaven in the flesh 
of the beloved Christ Jesus, our Lord, and His [future] manifestation from 
heaven in the glory of the Father ‘to gather all things in one,’ and to raise 
up anew all flesh of the whole human race, in order that to Christ Jesus, 
our Lord, and God, and Saviour, and King, according to the will of the 
invisible Father, ‘every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things 
in earth, and things under the earth, and that every tongue should confess’ 
to Him, and that He should execute just judgment towards all; that He 
may send ‘spiritual wickedness,’ and the angels who transgressed and be­
came apostates, together with the ungodly, and unrighteous, and wicked, 
and profane among men, into everlasting fire; but may, in the exercise of 
His grace, confer immortality on the righteous, and holy, and those who 
have kept His commandments, and have persevered in His love, some from 
the beginning [of their Christian course], and others from [the date of] 
their repentance, and may surround them with everlasting glory.” 10
This refreshing and illuminating statement of the cardinal 
truths of Christianity was the direct antithesis and antidote 
to the Gnostic distortions. Here the Trinity is set forth, with 
Christ as truly God, becoming “incarnate for our salvation.” 
The Holy Spirit is presented as the inspirer of the prophets. 
Then follows the truth of the two advents, the virgin birth, 
the crucifixion, the resurrection, and the ascension, in flesh, of 
our Lord.
And finally Christ’s second advent from Heaven in glory 
is depicted, to “raise up anew all flesh of the whole human 
race,” through the resurrection, as the omnipotent Christ re­
turns to “execute just judgment” on all men. The Advent 
is climaxed with the sending of the “ungodly” “into everlast­
ing fire,” along with the fallen angels, while at the same 
time Christ confers “immortality on the righteous, and holy” 
who repented. Thenceforth they are surrounded with “ever­
lasting glory.” 11 This is the manner in which Irenaeus believed 
all evil and pollution would be removed from the universe,
10 Ibid., sec. 1, pp. 330, 331. (Brackets in original; italics supplied.)
u Ibid., p. 331.
IRENAEUS VOICES PREPONDERANT BELIEF OF CHURCH 891
and harmony and righteousness restored. It is in striking har­
mony with the apostolic teaching. It is definitely Conditionalist.
2. Irenaeus’ Statement Never Again True.—The sig­
nificance of this comprehensive creedal statement must not be 
missed. While this is Irenaeus’ personal confession of faith, 
it is, he avers, more than that. It is the preponderant belief 
of the church at large at that time—uttered, be it noted, just 
before the church had come to the fork in the stream, when 
the eddying currents of Immortal-Soulism, under Athenagoras 
and Tertullian (and soon thereafter Origen), began swirling 
away from the main channel of the original stream, in new and 
divergent courses.
Its time of utterance is therefore of great significance. 
Never again could it be said that this was the generally accepted 
view. Thenceforth there was a tangent view, with the Immortal- 
Soul concept steadily gaining in acceptance. It was consequently 
the last time that such a general declaration of Conditionalist 
belief could be made in the Early Church. Irenaeus firmly held 
that immortality is conferred, not inherent, and is proffered 
to all men, but bestowed on the righteous only. It is definitely 
not for the wicked, and not merely for an elite Gnostic clique.
3. Gnosticism Is But Camouflaged Paganism.—Irenaeus 
then turns to the plaguing heresies. Chapter after chapter 
follows, with telling strokes against the “deviations” of Satur- 
ninus and Basilides (chapter twenty-four), and Carpocrates 
(chapter twenty-five), with all their “deceitful arts and nefari­
ous practices,” and “absurdities” ad nauseum. Special note 
is taken of the Marcosians (chapter twenty) and their total 
misconception of redemption (chapter twenty-one). Similar 
perversions, found in Cerinthus, the Ebionites, and the Nicolai- 
tanes (chapter twenty-six) are noted, as well as those of Cerdo, 
Marcion, Tatian, the Encratites (chapters twenty-seven and 
twenty-eight), and others (chapters twenty-nine to thirty-one). 
Such was the sad state of affairs among these fringe groups 
when Irenaeus battled for truth and grappled with error.
892
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Continuing his searching charges in the first thirteen 
chapters of book two, he comes (in chapter fourteen) to the 
fundamental point that Gnosticism is derived from paganism, 
simply with changed terminology—such as that “the Creator 
formed the world out of previously existing material,” and 
that God “cannot impart immortality to what is mortal, or 
bestow incorruption on what is corruptible.” 12 Their systems, 
he asserts, are “burdened with so great contradictions.”13 
Irenaeus exposes the “folly of the arguments derived . . . 
from numbers, letters, and syllables.”14
4. Made Incorruptible and Immortal at Resurrection. 
—Irenaeus refutes the false Gnostic view on the nature and 
destiny of man, again declaring that immortality and incor­
ruptibility come at the resurrection. He insisted on the oneness 
of man and the redemption of the whole man:
“And then the doctrine concerning the resurrection of bodies which 
we believe, will emerge true and certain [from their system]; since, [as we 
hold,] God, when He resuscitates our mortal bodies which preserved right­
eousness, will render them incorruptible and immortal.” 15
The time of that immortalization is clear. It is at the 
Second Advent and resurrection.
5. Eternal Continuance Is “Bestowed” and “Imparted.” 
—In chapter thirty-three Irenaeus exposes the fiction and 
“Absurdity of the Doctrine of the Transmigration of Souls.” 
He says they “never existed in other bodies.” 16 Irenaeus tells 
of the resurrection of the entire man—how “all those who 
have been enrolled for life [eternal] shall rise again, having 
their own bodies, and having also their own souls, and their 
own spirits, in which they had pleased God.” 17 Irenaeus’ climax 
comes in chapter thirty-four, where he explicitly declares that 
“God alone, who is Lord of all, is without beginning and with­
12 Ibid., book 2, chap. 14, sec. 4, p. 377.
13 Ibid., chap. 17, sec. 1, p. 380.
14 Ibid., chap. 24, heading, p. 393.
15 Ibid., chap. 29, sec. 2, p. 403. (Brackets in original; italics supplied.)
13 Ibid., chap. 33, sec. 5, p. 410.
17 Ibid., p. 411. (Italics supplied.)
IRENAEUS VOICES PREPONDERANT BELIEF OF CHURCH 893
out end,” and therefore “unchangeable.” From Him all things 
proceed.
Moreover, “created things” will, he maintains, “endure 
as long as God wills that they should have an existence and 
continuance,” “ and gives “length of days for ever and ever.” He 
declares of such, “It is the Father of all who imparts [gives] 
continuance for ever and ever on those who are saved.”10 
As to the “bestowed” life he adds:
“For life does not arise from us, nor from our own nature; but it is 
bestowed according to the grace of God. And therefore he who shall pre­
serve the life bestowed upon him, and give thanks to Him who imparted 
it, shall receive also length of days for ever and ever. . . . But he who shall 
reject it, and prove himself ungrateful to his Maker, inasmuch as he has 
been created, and has not recognised Him who bestowed [the gift upon 
him], deprives himself of the [privilege of] continuance for ever and 
ever.” 20
6. 
“Perpetual Duration” Is Unending “Existence.”— 
His argument is amplified and enforced in section four, where 
Irenaeus asserts that “the soul herself is not life, but partakes 
in that life bestowed upon her by God.” And he adds:
“When God therefore bestows life and perpetual duration, it comes 
to pass that even souls which did not previously exist should henceforth 
endure [for ever], since God has both willed that they should exist, and 
should continue in existence.” 21
That is the declared basis of “the continued duration of the 
soul.”22
IV. Multiple Arguments for Conditional Immortality
1. 
Union With God Prerequisite to Immortality.— 
Book three turns even more fully to declaring “the truth.” 
Chapter four refers to the Second Advent, when Christ “shall 
come in glory, the Saviour of those who are saved, and the 
Judge of those who are judged,” and with “eternal fire” pre-
18 Ibid., chap. 34, sees. 2, 3, p. 411.
19 Ibid., sec. 3, p. 411.
20 Ibid., pp. 411, 412. (Brackets in original; italics supplied.)
21 Ibid., sec. 4, p. 412. (Brackets in original; italics supplied.)
22 Ibid.
894
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
pared for those who pervert truth, and “despise His father 
and His Advent.” 23 But to the redeemed He comes to restore 
“liberty to men” and to bestow on them “the inheritance 
of incorruption.” ” And in chapter eleven Irenaeus speaks of 
the four gospels as the “four pillars” of the church, “breathing 
out immortality on every side, and vivifying men afresh.”25 
And in chapter eighteen he states, “Unless man had been 
joined to God, he could never have become a partaker of 
incorruptibility.” 28
Irenaeus alludes to the “disobedience of the one man 
[Adam] who was originally moulded from virgin soil,” and 
thus “many were made sinners, and forfeited life.” 27 Then in 
chapter nineteen he refers to those who have not known 
“Emmanuel” and are thus “deprived of His gift, which is 
eternal life.” They are “debtors to death,” not having obtained 
“the antidote of life.” 28 Then he states:
“For by no other means could we have attained to incorruptibility and 
immortality, unless we had been united to incorruptibility and immortal­
ity. But how could we be joined to incorruptibility and immortality, unless, 
first, incorruptibility and immortality had become that which we also are, 
so that the corruptible might be swallowed up by incorruptibility, and the 
mortal by immortality, that we might receive the adoption of sons?” 29
Irenaeus recognizes the full deity of Christ as Life-giver, 
who “is Himself in His own right, beyond all men who ever 
lived, God, and Lord, and King Eternal.” 30 There is remark­
able clarity all the way through.
2. 
Must Sense Dependence Upon the Life-giver.—In 
alluding to Jonah, chapter twenty, who was not left to “perish” 
in the whale, Irenaeus declares that God allowed “man to be 
swallowed by the great whale, who was the author of trans­
gression.” This, says Irenaeus, was done “that man, receiving
23 Ibid., book 3, chap. 4, sec. 2, p. 417.
24 Ibid., chap. 5, sec. 3, p. 418.
25 Ibid., chap. 11, sec. 8, p. 428.
26 Ibid., chap. 18, sec. 7, p. 448.
27 Ibid.
28 Ibid., chap. 19, sec. 1, p. 448. (Italics supplied.)
IRENAEUS VOICES PREPONDERANT BELIEF OF CHURCH 895
an unhoped-for salvation from God, might rise from the dead, 
and glorify God.” Our salvation, he again insists, is “derived” 
from God. And why?—“that no flesh should glory in the 
Lord’s presence,” and suppose that “the incorruptibility which 
belongs to him is his own naturally,” and thus judge himself 
equal to God.31
The purpose of God was that man, “attaining to the 
resurrection from the dead,” and sensing the “source of his 
deliverance,” shall glorify God, and though “mortal and weak” 
shall obtain “from Him the gift of incorruptibility,” for “He 
[God] is immortal and powerful to such a degree as to confer 
immortality upon what is mortal, and eternity upon what is 
temporal.” 32 Thus mortal man, “who had been disobedient 
to God, and being cast off from immortality, then obtained 
mercy.” 33
3. 
Adam Separated From Tree Lest He Be “Immortal 
Sinner.”—In chapter twenty-three Irenaeus deals with the 
fall of man, who “had been created by God that he might 
live.” But, “losing life” after the Fall, God did not leave 
him “abandoned to death.” Provision was made for the “second 
man” (Christ) to “bind the strong man” (Satan), and having 
“spoiled his goods,” Christ thus provides a way of salvation. 
The first Adam was deceived under the “colour of immor­
tality.” 34 Or differently stated, in “the case of Adam,” he was 
“beguiled by another under the pretext of immortality.” 35
Thus God “drove him out of Paradise, and removed him 
far from the tree of life.” And, Why? “Because He pitied 
him, [and did not desire] that he should continue a sinner 
for ever, nor that the sin which surrounded him should be 
immortal, and evil interminable and irremediable.”38 Thus 
it was that Adam came to receive “new life.” And thus the 
“last enemy” is to be “destroyed.” So “salvation is death’s
31 Ibid., chap. 20, sec. 1, pp. 449, 450.
32 Ibid., sec. 2, p. 450.
33 Ibid.
34 Ibid., chap. 23, sec. 1, pp. 455, 456.
35 Ibid., sec. 5, p. 457. (Italics supplied.)
38 Ibid., sec. 6, p. 457.
896
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
destruction. When therefore the Lord vivifies man, that is, 
Adam,” death is destroyed.37
4. Believing and Obedient “Honoured With Immortal^ 
ity.”—In book four, chapter eight, addressing himself to 
Marcion’s fallacies, Irenaeus declares that “those who disallow 
his [Abraham’s] salvation, and frame the idea of another God 
besides Him who made the promise to Abraham, are outside 
the kingdom of God, and are disinherited from [the gift of] 
incorruption.” 38 For, he continues, Christ “Himself suffering 
death, that exiled man might go forth from condemnation, 
and might return without fear to his own inheritance.” 38
Life in Christ is the continuing strain. Thus in chapter 
eleven Irenaeus says that to the wicked “He assigned everlasting 
perdition by cutting them off from life.”40 But he assures 
the obedient that “He grants to those who follow and serve 
Him life and incorruption and eternal glory.” 41 And he adds, 
at the close of chapter fifteen, that “those who have obeyed 
and believed on Him should be honoured with immortality,” 42 
while in chapter eighteen he refers to those who have “the 
hope of the resurrection to eternity.” 43
5. Gift of Immortality Restricted to Believers.—In 
chapter twenty Irenaeus tells how “man might attain to immor­
tality, having been invested with the paternal light,” and 
states that God “confers [upon him] incorruption for eternal 
life.” And he adds that “the means of life is found in fellow­
ship with God.” Then he declares, “Men therefore shall see 
God, that they may live, being made immortal by that sight.” 44 
On the contrary, “The punishment of those who do not believe 
the Word of God, and despise His advent, and are turned 
away backwards, is increased; being not merely temporal, but 
rendered also eternal.” 45
37 Ibid., sec. 7, p. 457.
38 Ibid., book 4, chap. 8, sec. 1, p. 471. (Brackets in original.)
39 Ibid., sec. 2, p. 471.
40 Ibid., chap. 11, sec. 4, p. 475. 
42 Ibid., chap. 15, sec. 2, p. 480.
41 Ibid., chap. 14, sec. 1, p. 478. 
43 Ibid., chap. 18, sec. 5, p. 486.
44 Ibid., chap. 20, secs. 2, 5, 6, pp. 488, 489. (Italics supplied.)
45 Ibid., chap. 28, sec. 2, p. 501.
IRENAEUS VOICES PREPONDERANT BELIEF OF CHURCH 897
Then this thought is added on the immortality of the 
righteous: “For they all received a penny each man, having 
[stamped upon it] the royal image and superscription, the 
knowledge of the Son of God, which is immortality.” 48 On 
the contrary, those who do not come to God “cannot receive 
His immortality.” 47 Christ, the “perfect bread,” Irenaeus adds 
interestingly, provides for us the “Bread of immortality.”48 
Irenaeus presses on the point that man’s disobedience “is his 
death.” 49 And he asks the searching question, “How, again, 
can he [created, mortal man] be immortal, who in his mortal 
nature did not obey his Maker?” 00
6. Eternal Fire for Satan and His Followers.—Chapter 
forty opens by declaring that God “has prepared the eternal 
fire for the ringleader of the apostasy, the devil, and those 
who revolted with him.” But “impenitent” man will also share 
this “eternal fire and outer darkness.” 51 In the same chapter 
it is also twice called a “furnace of fire,” “prepared for the devil 
and his angels,” but including “those persons who deserve it.” 52 
Then Irenaeus appeals to men to “be converted, and come to 
repentance, and cease from evil,” that they might “have power 
to become the sons of God, and to receive the inheritance of 
immortality.” 53
7. Immortality Received Only Through Christ.—And 
now in the final book five, chapter one (on “Christ Alone Is 
Able to Teach Divine Things, and to Redeem Us”), Irenaeus 
further counters Gnosticism and praises Christ the Creator 
as “the only best and good Being,” who has “the gift of immor­
talityHe has redeemed “us by His own blood,” by “giving 
His soul for our souls, and His flesh for our flesh,” thus 
“attaching man to God by His own incarnation, and bestowing
48 Ibid., chap. 
36, sec. 7, p. 518. (Brackets in original.)
47 Ibid., chap. 
37, sec. 6, p. 520.
48 Ibid., chap. 
38, sec. 1, p. 521.
49 Ibid., chap. 
39, sec. 1, p. 522.
50 Ibid., sec. 2, pp. 522, 523.
81 Ibid., chap. 40, sec. 1, p. 523.
“ Ibid., sec. 2, p. 524.
63 Ibid., chap. 41, sec. 3, p. 525.
29
PAINTING BY JES SCHLAIKJER, N.A. 
© 1957 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
John, the Seer of Patinos, Viewed in Vision the New Earth 
With Its Immortalized Inhabitants Dwelling There For­
ever.
upon us at His coming immortality durably and truly.” Then 
Irenaeus declares impressively, ‘‘All the doctrines of the heretics 
fall to ruin.” 64
Striking again, in chapter two, at the Gnostic depreciation 
of the flesh, he chides the heretics who despise the provision 
of God and ‘‘disallow the salvation of the flesh, and treat with 
contempt its regeneration.” Then he asks, ‘‘How can they affirm 
that the flesh is incapable of receiving the gift of God, which 
is life eternal?” 56 His own view is crystal clear. Immortality 
as a conferred gift is a continuing strain running all through 
the treatise.
8. 
God Who Gives ‘‘Earthly” Life, Can Bestow Immor­
tality.—In chapter three (on “The Power and Glory of God” 
to “Render Our Body a Participator of the Resurrection, and 
of Immortality,” and to “Bestow Upon It the Enjoyment of 
Immortality”) Irenaeus once more affirms Christ’s ability as 
Creator to “reinstate again [through resurrection] those who had 
a former existence,” in this present life, and chides those who 
“maintain the incapacity of flesh to receive the life granted by 
God.” Man, Irenaeus insists, is an “infirm being, and mortal by 
nature,” while God by contrast is “immortal and powerful.” 
Irenaeus asserts that “if He does not vivify what is mortal, 
and does not bring back the corruptible to incorruption, He 
is not a God of power.” “ He climaxes his argument by saying:
“For that the flesh can really partake of life, is shown from the fact 
of its being alive; for it lives on, as long as it is God’s purpose that it should 
do so. It is manifest, too, that God has the power to confer life upon it, 
inasmuch as He grants life to us who are in existence. And, therefore, since 
the Lord has power to infuse life into what He has fashioned, and since the 
flesh is capable of being quickened, what remains to prevent its participat­
ing in incorruption, w'hich is a blissful and never-ending life granted by 
God?” 67
Thus he bore witness against the theory of a merely 
spiritual resurrection, already being agitated in Alexandria.
898 
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
IRENAEUS VOICES PREPONDERANT BELIEF OF CHURCH 899
V. Fate of Wicked Is Final Annihilation
1. 
Distinguishes 
Between 
Body and 
Soul.—We now 
come to one of two instances where it is claimed that Irenaeus 
teaches the later view of the immortality of the soul. Chapter 
seven deals with the resurrection of the flesh. After telling 
how Christ rose in “the substance of the flesh,” as attested 
by “the marks of the nails and the opening in His side,” 
Irenaeus affirms that He shall also “raise us up by His own 
power,” and adds that He will “also quicken your mortal 
bodies.” Then he declares immediately:
“What, then, are mortal bodies? Can they be souls? Nay, for souls are 
incorporeal when put in comparison with mortal bodies; for God ‘breathed 
into the face of man the breath of life, and man became a living soul.’ Now 
the breath of life is an incorporeal thing. And certainly they cannot main­
tain that the very breath of life is mortal. Therefore David says, ‘My soul 
also shall live to Him,’ just as if its substance were immortal.” 58
Irenaeus proceeds to contrast the “spirit” with the “mortal 
body,” which later in death “is decomposed.” “For to die is 
... to become henceforth breathless, inanimate, and devoid 
of motion, and to melt away into those [component parts] 
from which also it derived the commencement of [its] sub­
stance.” But this is not true of “soul, for it is the breath of 
life; nor to the spirit” for it is “the life of those who receive 
it.” Wherefore it is the “mortal” body which is “decomposed 
gradually into the earth from which it is taken,” 68 and which 
is quickened, or resurrected, in incorruption. Just as a “grain 
of wheat, is sown in the earth and decays,” so our bodies, 
“through the Spirit’s instrumentality,” rise and come forth to 
“perpetual life.”60 Then “our face shall see the face of the 
Lord (note 9: Grabe, Massuet, and Stieren prefer to read, “the 
face of the 
living God”), 
and shall 
rejoice 
with 
joy 
unspeakable.” 01
Irenaeus is so lucid that he cannot be misunderstood.
58 Ibid., chap. 7, sec. 1, pp. 532, 533. (Italics supplied.)
“ Ibid., p. 533.
60 Ibid., sec. 2, p. 533.
«Ibid.
900
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
2. 
Irenaeus’ Definition of Death.—Several chapters 
amplify but do not add to what Irenaeus has said. In chapter 
twenty-seven he deals with “The Future Judgment by Christ,” 
and “The Eternal Punishment of Unbelievers.” Adverting to 
the parable of the tares, in which the wicked are burned 
up with “unquenchable fire,” and to the parable of the sheep 
and the goats, in which the goats are sent “into everlasting 
[aionion] fire, which has been prepared by His Father for 
the devil and his angels,” 82 Irenaeus then gives this definition 
of “death”:
“Separation from God is death, and separation from light is darkness; 
and separation from God consists in the loss of all the benefits which He 
has in store. Those, therefore, who cast away by apostasy these foremen­
tioned things, being in fact destitute of all good, do experience every kind 
of punishment. God, however, does not punish them immediately of Him­
self, but that punishment falls upon them because they are destitute of all 
that is good. Now, good things are eternal and without end with God, 
and therefore the loss of these is also eternal and never-ending.” 83
3. Second Death—Hell, Lake of Fire, Eternal Fire.— 
This “eternal (aionion) fire,” frequently alluded to, is in 
chapter twenty-eight explained as the final “lake of fire.” 81 
And in chapter twenty-five Irenaeus equates “hell,” the “lake 
of fire,” and “eternal fire,” which he previously stated has 
been “prepared for every kind of apostasy.” Thus: “ ‘And 
death and hell were sent into the lake of fire, the second 
death.’ Now this is what is called Gehenna, which the Lord 
styled eternal fire.” 85
4. Final Annihilation 
of the 
Wicked.—Some have 
claimed that when Irenaeus here, and elsewhere, refers to 
aionion fire and aionion punishment, he means Eternal Tor­
ment, and not destruction. But such overlook the definitive 
declarations of Irenaeus’ systematic coverage, which show con­
clusively that by aionion punishment he did not mean eternal 
punishing, but rather punishment in the world to come that
62 Ibid., chap. 27, sec. 1, p. 556.
63 Ibid., sec. 2, p. 556.
84 Ibid., chap. 28, sec. 2, p. 557.
65 Ibid., chap. 25, sec. 2, p. 566.
IRENAEUS VOICES PREPONDERANT BELIEF OF CHURCH 901
ends in cessation of being. The first death cuts man off 
from a life of but few years’ duration—a life that is due to 
die. But the second death cuts the sinner off from eternal 
life, and is consequently an eternal death. This is attested by 
Dr. Philip Schaff, who states Irenaeus’ position impressively:
“It is therefore the more remarkable that the doctrine of future eternal 
punishment was not taught ... so far as we know, nor the doctrine of uni­
versal restoration; but on the other hand, the doctrine of the final annihila­
tion of the wicked was clearly taught by so eminent a man as Irenaeus.” 68
And Edward Beecher, after recording a similar conclusion, 
remarks on the “very great reluctance in the ranks of the ortho­
dox, in modern times, to concede that he was a defender of 
the doctrine of the annihilation of the wicked.” 67
Dean Frederic W. Farrar likewise adds that Irenaeus—
“uses the phrase ‘eternal punishment,’ or ‘eternal fire,’ as all use those 
phrases who accept the Bible; and in one passage he says that ‘the good 
things of God, being eternal and endless, the privation of them also is 
eternal and endless.’ Certainly this passage shows his opinion that the ‘pain 
of loss’ (as we all believe) may be eternal and endless.” 88
5. 
Fruition of All Hopes and Provisions.—Then, in the 
new heaven and new earth of Revelation 20, to follow, there 
will be no more death, or sorrow, or pain, for all those things 
will have passed away forever. He cites Isaiah 65 as referring 
to the same new heaven and new earth, in which there will 
henceforth be “no remembrance of the former, neither shall 
the heart think about them.” In this present earth “the right­
eous are disciplined beforehand for incorruption and prepared 
for salvation.” At that glad day the redeemed “truly rise from 
the dead, and not allegorically.” “Disciplined beforehand for 
incorruption” they actually rise in glorious incorruption and 
immortality at that time.09 Such was Irenaeus’ concept of life, 
death, and destiny—most explicit of the Early Church Fathers.
60 Schaff, op. cit., pp. 194, 195.
67 Beecher, The Scribtural Doctrine of Retribution, p. 198.
88 Farrar, Mercy ana Judgment, pp. 239, 240. (Italics supplied.)
89 Irenaeus, Against Heresies, book 5, chap. 35, sec. 2, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 566.
CHAPTER 
FIFTY-THREE
Novatian of Rome—Conditionalist 
Opponent of Cornelius
I. Novatian—Immortality of God and Mortality of Man
During the Decian persecution (c. a.d. 250) many pro­
fessed Christians denied the faith and deserted the church. 
Then when the storm had passed, many such sought readmission 
to the church. The laxer party, predominant at Rome, favored 
readmission without delay or discipline. This created a crisis.
By this time the church and her ordinances had come 
increasingly to be regarded as the medium of salvation. Her 
baptism and her communion were the keys by which Heaven 
was opened or closed. Moreover, the church had become 
crowded with those seeking to escape the “endless woe” for 
the wicked now being stressed by some—albeit they were 
more willing to avoid it by penance and ceremony than by 
obedience and love. Such could not endure tribulation, and 
the reviving of pagan persecution led to widespread denial 
of the faith. Should they be rejected as apostates? In any event, 
how could they be saved from the “unconsuming flames” of 
Hell?
Novatian—Protests 
Apostasy; 
Calls 
for 
Reform. 
—Novatian 
(a.d. 210-280), prominent presbyter of Rome, 
vigorously opposed this laxity on the part of the indulgent 
Cornelius, newly elected bishop of Rome, and insisted on a 
vigorous exclusion of the lapsi—the weak who had fallen from 
the faith under civil pressure. However, he withdrew his
902
Novatian of Rome—Stresses the Im- 
Arnobius of Africa—Boon of Immor-
mortality of God and the Mortality of 
tality 
Is 
God's 
Gift; 
Incorrigibly
Man; 
Must Attain 
Immortality. 
Wicked to Be Extinguished.
protest when he was overwhelmed. He disavowed the author­
ity of Cornelius and the validity of Catholic baptism. Eventually 
Novatian was consecrated bishop of the rival party, including 
numerous priests at Carthage. As such, he was really the first 
antipope.
The bulk of the churches in Italy, Africa, and the East 
adhered to Cornelius, but the Novatian party formed a strong 
organization in Northern Africa and Asia Minor, constituting 
themselves the “true church,” with congregations at Carthage, 
Alexandria, Constantinople, Nicomedia, Phrygia, Gaul, and 
Spain. This Novatian movement persisted for more than two 
hundred years, or into the sixth century.
The Novatians believed largely as others. The issue was 
over laxity of discipline, not doctrine. But they came increas­
ingly to believe that the nominal churches had become apostate, 
and insisted on rebaptism—and the tide of baptismal regenera­
tion was running strongly at this time. Novatian was really 
a third-century Puritan, the founder of the Cathari (“pure”). 
His birthplace is unknown, possibly Phrygia. He is said to have
903
904
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
been a Stoic prior to his conversion to Christianity, but the 
evidence adduced is questionable. He is supposed to have died 
a martyr, as church historian Socrates states.1
In any event Novatian became one of the conspicuous 
characters of the third century. Even his enemies recognized 
his integrity and admitted to his being doctrinally sound. He 
was an apostle of unrelenting discipline, and was “heretical” in 
that he disturbed the calm of the churches by calling for reform. 
That is why opprobrious epithets were hurled at him.
II. Arguments Based on Natures of Creator and Creature
Novatian’s well-known Treatise Concerning the Trinity, 
written about a.d. 257, comprises thirty-one chapters. The first 
portion deals with the “Rule of Truth or Faith”—really his 
creed, in which God is set forth as the “absolutely perfect 
Creator of all things.” Novatian ascribes to Him the attributes 
of eternity, unity, goodness, immutability, immortality, and 
spirituality. The second and major section concerns Jesus 
Christ, promised in the Old Testament and manifested in the 
New, and proving that He is truly God and truly man. The 
closing section treats on the Holy Spirit and His operations. 
Man is then discussed in his relation to the Deity.
1. 
Man’s Disobedience Brought “Mortality.”—Chapter 
one describes God as the “absolutely perfect Founder of all 
things,” showing the “intelligence of the Artificer.” And at the 
close of the manifold works of Creation, man was brought forth, 
“made in the image of God,” with “mind, and reason, and 
foresight,” and an “earthly” body. God willed and provided 
“that he alone should be free.” But, lest he through “un­
bounded freedom should fall into peril,” God “laid down a 
command” concerning the fruit of one tree. And man “was 
forewarned that evil would arise if perchance he should exer­
cise his free will, in the contempt of the law that was given.”
1 Socrates, The Ecclesiastical History, book 4, chap. 28, in NPNF, 2d series, vol. 2, p. 249.
CONDITIONALIST OPPONENT OF CORNELIUS 
905
So the law was “added,” that “an unbridled liberty might 
not break forth even to a contempt of the Giver.” Thus man 
was given complete power of choice, with resultant “worthy 
rewards and a deserved punishment” for his conduct. But 
because of his wrong choice “mortality” came upon him, for 
he had sought to be as God, under the influence of “perverse 
counsel.” 2
2. Expelled From Eden to Forestall “Immortality of 
Guilt.”—Next, man’s hope of future recovery and “salvation 
in Christ” are presented.3 Man was expelled from Eden to 
prevent any further access to the tree of life, so as to forestall 
“immortality of guilt,” or immortal sin. In Novatian’s words:
“Lest, living for ever without Christ’s previous pardon 
of his sins, he should always bear about with him for his 
punishment an immortality of guilt.” *
Novatian then discusses the “higher regions,” declared 
to be the abode of the angels, while “beneath the earth,” he 
adds^ “there is a place whither the souls of the just and the 
unjust are taken, conscious of the anticipated doom of future 
judgment.” 5
3. God, Without Beginning or End, 
Is Consequently 
“Immortal.”—Chapter two deals with God as “pervading all 
things, and moving all things, and quickening all things,” and 
“transcending the mind of man.” God is without “any begin­
ning,” so consequently He is without “an ending.” He is 
“always eternal,” and “unbounded.” Being “without begin­
ning,” He “has no time.” Thus Novatian concludes, “He is 
on that account immortal,” and does “not come to an end.” 8 
After an apostrophe of praise that is ornately eloquent,7 Nova-
2 Novatian, A Treatise Concerning the Trinity, chap. 1, in ANF, vol. 5, pp. 611, 612.
2 Ibid., p. 612.
4 Ibid. (Italics supplied.)
5 Ibid.
0 Ibid., chap. 2. p. 612.
7 It reads: “What can you say of Him, who is loftier than all sublimity, and higher than
all height, and deeper than all depth, and clearer than all light, and brighter than all brightness, 
more brilliant than all splendour, stronger than all strength, more powerful than all power, and 
more mighty than all might, and greater than all majesty, and more potent than all potency,
906
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
tian closes by repeating that God, “without any beginning or 
end of time, controls, by the highest and most perfect reason, 
the naturally linked causes of things, so as to result in benefit 
to all.” 8
4. God “Incorruptible” and Therefore “Immortal.”— 
Chapters three and four are devoted to proving from Scripture 
the Creatorship and other attributes of God. In this connection 
Novatian cites 1 Timothy 1:17—“Now unto the King eternal, 
immortal, invisible, the only wise God.” Again he stresses the 
fact that “because He is incorruptible, He is therefore im­
mortalHere, in Novatian’s involved description, he elabo­
rates on the “incorruptibility” and “immortality” of God:
“Because He is incorruptible, He is therefore immortal; and because 
He is immortal, He is certainly also incorruptible,—each being involved 
by turns in the other, with itself and in itself, by a mutual connection, and 
prolonged by a vicarious concatenation to the condition of eternity; im­
mortality arising from incorruption, as well as incorruption coming from 
immortality.” 10
Chapter five touches on God’s wrath against the sin of 
fallen and corrupted man. When He “threatens” it is that 
“by these threats men are recalled to rectitude.” So Novatian 
insists that those things which in men are “faulty and corrupt­
ing,” “cannot exert the force of corruptibility” upon God.11
5. Man Made With “Materials of Mortality.”—Turn­
ing now, in chapter ten, to Jesus Christ our Lord, the Creator 
of all things, Novatian holds that He is both “Son of God and 
truly man.” 18 And referring to the “law of resurrection” for 
man, Novatian shows that Christ arose with the “very body” 
with which He went into the tomb. Thus a “law of resurrection 
is established.” In this way the “mortality of guilt is put away” 
for us.13 But Christ, in contrast, has “life in Himself,” which
and richer than all riches, more wise than all wisdom, and more benignant than all kindness, 
better than all goodness, juster than all justice, more merciful than all clemency?” (ibid., p. 613).
8 Ibid.
9 Ibid., chap. 4, p. 615. (Italics supplied.)
10 Ibid.
11 Ibid., chap. 5, p. 615.
18 Ibid., chap. 10, p. 619.
13 Ibid., p. 620.
CONDITIONALIST OPPONENT OF CORNELIUS 
907
man cannot have “in him after the example of God the Father, 
because he [man] is not glorious in eternity, but made with 
the materials of mortality ” M
6. Word of Christ “Affords Immortality” for Man.— 
Another argument, in chapter fifteen, for the immortal deity 
of Christ and the mortality of finite man, is presented in the 
following significant statement:
“If Christ is only man, how does He say, ‘If any man shall keep my 
word, he shall not see death for ever?’ Not to see death for ever! what is 
this but immortality? But immortality is the associate of divinity, because 
both the divinity is immortal, and immortality is the fruit of divinity. For 
every man is mortal; and immortality cannot be from that which is mortal. 
Therefore from Christ, as a mortal man, immortality cannot arise. ‘But,’ 
says He, ‘whosoever keepeth my word, shall not see death for ever’; there­
fore the word of Christ affords immortality, and by immortality affords 
divinity. But although it is not possible to maintain that one who is himself 
mortal can make another immortal, yet this word of Christ not only sets 
forth, but affords immortality: certainly He is not man only who gives 
immortality, which if He were only man He could not give.” 16
Novatian’s definition of “immortality” is to be noted: 
it is, “not to see death for ever,” and this condition is conferred 
on mortal man by Christ. That, of course, is the essence of 
Conditionalism.
7. Man “Destined” for “Attainment” of Everlasting 
Life.—In meeting a “common heresy” of his time—that Christ 
“was only man”—Novatian asks, “If Christ was only man, how 
is it that He Himself says, ‘And every one that believeth in 
me shall not die for evermore?’ ” This he follows up with the 
statement:
“Whence, if on the one hand He is man only, as the heretics will have
it, how shall not anybody who believes in Him die eternally, since he who
trusts in man is held to be accursed? Or on the odier, if he is not accursed, 
but rather, as it is read, destined for the attainment of everlasting life, 
Christ is not man only, but God also, in whom he who believes both lays 
aside all risk of curse, and attains to the fruit of righteousness.” 10
11 Ibid., 
chap. 14, p. 623. (Italics supplied.)
» Ibid., 
chap. 15, p. 624.
16 Ibid., 
chap. 16, p. 625.
908
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
So in this connection, to “die eternally” is set forth as 
the fate of the unrepentant wicked.
8. 
Humanity Died, Not Deity, on the Cross.—Novatian’s 
closely reasoned yet elaborate argument for the eternal pre­
existence and complete deity of Christ extends over many 
chapters, and compasses the whole range of Scripture. But in 
chapter twenty-five Novatian introduces another argument— 
that while Christ died for us, the Deity in Christ did not die, 
because “God cannot be admitted to have died.” 17 Then he 
draws the conclusion:
“But when Scripture determines, as we have frequently shown, that 
He is not only God, but man also, it follows that what is immortal may be 
held to have remained uncorrupted.” 18
This contention Novatian restates in a slightly different 
phrasing: “It was not that in Christ that died which is God, 
but that in Him died which is man.” Next he refers to man, 
and the fact that a fellow man cannot kill the soul (Matt. 
10:28). Then Novatian adds that it would be impossible to 
slay the “Word of God.” So it was the “human nature in Christ 
that was put to death,” but “the Word in Him was not drawn 
down into mortality.” So the divine and immortal part of Christ, 
as God, was not “extinguished” while His body died. Then he 
concludes, “For the power of death is broken when the authority 
of immortality intervenes.” 10
Such was another of Novatian’s interesting arguments for 
the deity of Christ. Then he adds, in chapter twenty-nine, 
that the eternal Holy Spirit can “produce our bodies at the 
resurrection of immortality.” For by Him (the Holy Spirit) 
our bodies “advance to immortality.” 20 Thus the conferring of 
immortality is the combined work of each Person of the 
Godhead.
Some may question the propriety of including Novatian
17 Ibid., chap. 25, p. 636.
18 Ibid.
“ Ibid.
» Ibid., chap. 29, p. 641.
CONDITIONALIST OPPONENT OF CORNELIUS 
909
here, inasmuch as he is commonly regarded as a “heretic.” 
But his “heresy,” it is to be remembered, consisted of his 
determined opposition to Cornelius, bishop of Rome, over the 
readmission of unrepentant deserters (lapsi) into the church 
—not over Novatian’s doctrinal beliefs. Furthermore, the 
charges of heresy came from Cornelius, and Novatian’s enemies. 
Many, like Neander, have doubted their validity.
It is also to be remembered that Novatian was chosen 
by the entire clergy of Rome to write in their name the 
“Letter” addressed to Cyprian about a.d. 250.21 This Cyprian 
himself states.22 It was written during the vacancy in the Roman 
bishopric, after the death of Fabian and before the election 
of Cornelius.23 This shows the confidence of the clergy in him 
at that time. Novatian’s “heresy” was therefore not over doc­
trine, but over discipline in relation to the bishop of Rome. 
And Novatian was a Conditionalist.
III. Arabian Believers in Soul’s Death and Resurrection
As shown elsewhere by the latter half of the third century 
the doctrine of the Innate Immortality of the soul had now 
become widely received by many professing Christians. And, 
proportionately, the primitive doctrine of the basic mortality 
of man and the sleep of the dead was being increasingly 
abandoned. Nevertheless, there were those who persisted in 
holding to the earlier faith, though, according to Eusebius, they 
were now counted as heretical. One such group was down in 
Arabia, and illustrates the other side of the picture. This is 
the clear record of Eusebius 
(c. 
a.d. 260-340),2i bishop of 
Caesarea, and “father of church history.” He himself was an
21 See Epistle XXX, The Roman Clergy to Cyprian, in ANF, vol. 5, pp. 308-311.
22 See The Epistles of Cyprian LI, sec. 5, in ANF, vol. 5, p. 328.
23 Coxe, in nis Introductory Note (ANF, vol. 5, p. 807). says that in the interim 
between Fabian and Cornelius, Novatian served as “vicar-general, 
presiding over the Roman 
presbytery, as their “secretary for foreign affairs.”
24 Eusebius Pamphili 
(c. 260-340), of vast learning, was a teacher in the theological 
school in Caesarea. He used the great library of his teacher, Pamphilius, for the sources for 
his famous church history. As bishop of Caesarea he occupied a prominent place in the Coun­
cil of Nicea 
(a.d. 325). He was seated at the right of Emperor Constantine, and made the 
opening address. He was the leader of the moderate party m the controversy over Arianism. 
However, he believed in Innate Immortality, and in ultimate restorationism for all the wicked.
Immortal-Soulist 
and 
Restorationist—following 
Origen— 
hence his castigation of others as holders of “false opinions.”
“About the same time [latter part of third century] others arose in 
Arabia putting forward a doctrine foreign to the truth. They said that 
during the present time the human soul dies and perishes with the body, 
but that at the time of the resurrection they will be renewed together. And 
at that time also a synod of considerable size assembled, and Origen, being 
again invited thither, spoke publicly on the question with such effect 
that the opinions of those who had formerly fallen were changed.” 28
Four points are to be noted: (1) The group in Arabia 
denied the life and consciousness of the dead between death 
and the resurrection. (2) Both soul and body live again at the 
resurrection. 
(3) Believers in this unconsciousness-in-death 
doctrine were still sufficiently numerous to require a consider­
able council to repress them. (4) Origen was “again” requested 
to discuss the soul question in this council—indicating that 
at least once previously he had been called upon to defend 
this new doctrine of the immortality of the soul, for it was 
chiefly through Origen and Tertullian that this teaching came 
to be established in the church.
1. Conditional Immortality “No New Doctrine.”—Dr. 
Johann Neander, of Heidelberg and Berlin, likewise refers 
to this Arabian group. He states that this older teaching—and 
the fact that immortality is not based upon the “nature of 
the soul,” but is a “gift” from God—was the Hebrew teaching 
of the Old Testament, “transferred from Judaism to Christi­
anity” and “predominant” from “ancient times.” He says:
“We may here mention another instance of this kind, that a controversy 
had been excited by a party among the Arabian Christians, who asserted, 
that the human soul died with the body and that it was to be revived only 
with the body at the resurrection,—an ancient Jewish notion. Perhaps, too, 
in these districts, whose situation brought them into frequent contact with 
the Jews, it was no new doctrine, but one which had prevailed there from 
ancient times.” 28
2. Origen Established “Immortal-Soulism” 
in Alex­
25 Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, book 6, chap. 37, in NPNF, 2d series, vol. 1, p. 
279. Cf. Mosheim, Historical Commentaries on the State of Christianity (Vidal tr.), vol. 2, 
pp. 242, 243.
29 Johann A. W. Neander, Church History, vol. 1, p. 710.
910 
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
CONDITIONALIST OPPONENT OF CORNELIUS 
911
andria.—Neander27 frankly states the historical fact that it 
was Origen who “first” fastened this “doctrine of the natural 
immortality of the soul” upon the church at Alexandria, which 
later obtained “universal acceptance.” Meanwhile the Arabian 
Christians, who had “maintained the old opinion,” now 
appeared “heretical,” though the “old,” formerly predominant 
opinion, had “previously” “pronounced itself against” “the new 
opinion.” That was why a “great synod” was necessary, and 
Origen’s presence requested to quiet the controversy.
“Perhaps it was first brought about through the influence of Origen,— 
in whose system the doctrine of the natural immortality of the soul, which 
is related to God, held an important place,—that this latter doctrine now 
became here the more general one, and the small party who still adhered 
to the old opinion, appeared to be heretical; if the case really was, that 
the prevailing voice had expressed itself thus early against them. Hence it 
is explained, how the convention of a great synod came to be thought 
necessary for the purpose of settling disputes. As they could not come to 
an agreement, Origen was sent for; and it was brought about by his influ­
ence, that the opponents of the soul’s natural immortality confessed and 
renounced their error.” 28
So it was that this lay Christian group in Arabia held fast 
to the ancient doctrine of the sleep of the dead, and denied 
the new inherent-immortality-of-the-soul postulate. Not until 
this intensive effort by Origen, in the middle of the third 
century, were they weaned away from it. Thus the controversy 
continued in different parts of the empire.
IV. Clementine Homilies—Fictional Views by “Clement’s” 
Fabricated Characters
The Clementine Homilies, falsely attributed to Clement 
of Rome, usually dated in the third century, are early 
ecclesiastical “fictional” writings. In other words, the characters 
are not real, but fabricated. And the identity of the author is
27 The noted German church historian Dr. Johann A. W. Neander (1777-1850) was a 
converted Jew and hence well qualified to state the original Jewish doctrine on immortality. 
He was professor of theology at Heidelberg, and of church history at Berlin. As to his compe­
tency, his General History of the Christian Religion and Church earned for him the title Prince 
of Church Historians.
28 Neander, op. cit., p. 444.
912
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
not known. Many of the Homilies are in dialogue form, one 
character arguing against the viewpoint of another. They are 
clearly fictional, so their words cannot be taken as an authori­
tative statement of the theological beliefs of the day.
They do, however, demonstrate that the question of Innate 
Immortality was already under discussion, and constitute a 
reflection of variant views of the time. Inherent immortality 
was denied by one of Clement’s characters, “Simon Magus,” 
meaning the “magician,” and affirmed by another—“Peter,” 
as he was named. Their historical prototypes, whose names are 
thus invoked, are not, of course, to be held accountable.29 The 
Homilies clearly contain “much legendary matter.” 80
1. 
Clashing Views and Uncertain Dating.—There has 
been much discussion as to whether the Clementine Recog­
nitions (in ten books) preceded his Homilies (in twenty dis­
courses), or the reverse.31 It is generally believed that there is 
a definite connection between the two.32 The Recognitions are 
likewise usually dated in the third century. Many feel that there 
is probably a common background—a single basic unit—for the 
Clementina in a lost document.33
Translator Thomas Smith dubs “Clement’s” writings 
“strange and curious documents,” not intended to be, or 
presented as, historical facts. He says:
“Choosing the disciples of Christ and their followers as his principal 
characters, he [“Clement”] has put into their mouths the most important 
of his beliefs, and woven the whole together by a thread of fictitious nar­
rative.” 44
Smith also cites Hilgenfeld as believing that there are
28 The Clementine Homilies, in ANF, vol. 8, pp. 223-346; Edgar J. Goodspeed, History
of Early Christian Literature, pp. 127; 128. Best of all is Johannes Quasten, Patrology, vol. 1, 
pp. 59-63. Cf. H. J. Schoeps, Urgemetnde, Judentum, Gnosis (1956); also B. Rehm, Geichische 
Christliche Schriftsteller, vol. 42.
30 ODCC, art., “Clementine Literature,” p. 301.
31 B. M. Riddle, “Introductory Note to the Pseudo-Clementine Literature,” in ANF, 
vol. 8, pp. 69, 70; ODCC, loc. cit. Hilgenfeld, Cave, Whiston, Rosenmüller, and Staüdfin held 
that the Recognitions came first, but Ulhorn, Schmidt, and Cullmann place the Homilies first. 
See also Möhler, Lücke, and Schliemann.
32 ODCC, loc. cit.
33 Ibid. Cf. A. C. Headlam, The Clementine Literature, in J.T.S., iii, and F. J. A. Hort, 
Notes Introductory to the Story of the Clementine Literature. See also “Introductory Notice to 
the Recognitions of Clement,” in ANF, vol. 8, p. 73.
34 “Introductory Notice,” in ANF, vol. 8, p. 73.
CONDITIONALIST OPPONENT OF CORNELIUS 
913
“many interpolated passages of a much later date.” 36 The testi­
mony of the Homilies is not therefore determinative. But it is a 
record of the talk of the times. With such an understanding, let 
us now note the testimony of these documents.
2. Ranges Over Creation, Life, Death, Punishment.— 
Homily I raises the question of life and death—“ceasing to 
exist”—and punishment. And it queries “whether the soul is 
immortal or mortal.” 33 In Homily II “Clement” raises the issue 
of “Future Rewards and Punishments,” and still presses on 
the question of whether the soul is “immortal,” and of present 
“punishment” in Hell.”37 This appears further in chapter 
twenty-nine, where “Simon Magus” is not convinced that the 
“soul of man is immortal.” 38 Then in Homily III “Clement” 
turns to the problem of the punishment of the wicked, and 
has “Simon” observe:
“He [God] brings the soul to Himself by reason of His love towards it. 
And although it be sinful, it is His nature to save it, after it has been suit­
ably punished for the deeds it hath done. But if any one shall deny Him, 
or in any other way be guilty of impiety against Him, and then shall repent, 
he shall be punished indeed for the sins he hath committed against Him, 
but he shall be saved, because he turned and lived.” 38
3. Wicked Consumed and Destroyed by Fire.—Clement 
makes “Simon” quite positive in his declaration concerning 
the complete destruction of the wicked:
“But those who do not repent shall be destroyed by the punishment 
of fire, even though in all other things they are most holy. But, as I said, 
at an appointed time a fifth [“Perhaps, rather, ‘the greater;’ ” note 2] part, 
being punished with eternal fire, shall be consumed. For they cannot endure 
for ever who have been impious against the one God.” 40
It is observed, by translator Riddle, that “the first twenty- 
eight chapters of this homily have no exact parallel in the 
Recognitions, much of the matter is peculiar to this work”— 
the Homilies
33 ibid.
38 The Clementine Homilies, chap. 4, in ANF, vol. 8, pp. 223, 224.
37 Ibid., chap. 13, p. 231.
38 Ibid., chap. 29, p. 234. 
40 Ibid. (Italics supplied.)
39 Ibid., chap. 6, p. 240. 
41 Ibid., p. 239, footnote 1.
914
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
4. Clement Sets Forth “Peter” as Immortal-Soulist.— 
There are periodic allusions to God as the Creator of man 
(Homily III, chapter six), creation by divine “fiat” (chapter 
thirty-three), also to the “Wiles of the Devil” (chapter eight), 
the “Eating of the Forbidden Fruit” (chapter twenty-one), 
Adam’s responsibility (chapter eighteen), and how man may 
become “immortal,” have “continuance,” and become “incor­
ruptible” (chapter thirty-seven).
Homily IX (chapter fourteen) calls on Christians to repent 
in view of the “judgment,” for at the time of the judgment the 
wicked will be punished with unquenchable fire and the right­
eous receive their recompense in the flesh. Then in Homily XI 
(chapter eleven) Clement projects “Peter” as contending that 
all souls are immortal—“the soul even of the wicked is immor­
tal”—with endless torture as unavoidable punishment. Here are 
“Peter’s” alleged words, as fabricated by Clement:
“And though by the dissolution of the body you should escape punish­
ment, how shall you be able by corruption to flee from your soul, which is 
incorruptible? For the soul even of the wicked is immortal, for whom it 
were better not to have it incorruptible. For, being punished with endless 
torture under unquenchable fire, and never dying, it can receive no end 
of its misery.” 42
This thought is continued in chapter sixteen, where 
Clement refers to “universal judgment” and “eternal punish­
ments.” 43 But in Homily XV (chapter eight) he contrasts man’s 
choice as of “the present evil or the future goods.” “
5. Free Will Explains Presence of Sin and Death.— 
Next, in Homily XIX, chapter fifteen (“Sin the Cause of Evil”), 
Clement contends that “had not man sinned” death “would not 
have come to the race.” He adds that man “lost his immortal­
ity on account of his sin,” with suffering and death coming as 
a consequence. Then he asks and answers this question:
“Why, then, was the nature of man made at the beginning capable of 
death? I will tell you, because of free-will; for if we were not capable of
«Ibid., p. 286.
43 Ibid., p. 288.
44 Ibid., p. 310.
CONDITIONALIST OPPONENT OF CORNELIUS 
915
death, we could not, as being immortal, be punished on account of our 
voluntary sin.” 45
6. Immortalized Through Christ’s Reign.—Finally, in 
Homily XIX, chapter twenty (“Pain and Death the Result of 
Sin”), Clement has “Peter” saying that “death is the separation 
of the soul from the body,” with the body “dissolved,” but the 
soul continuing on in existence. Then he states, curiously, 
“Man becomes immortal through the prevalence of the peaceful 
reign of Christ.” And he adds, “He will suffer no pain, so that 
he will not be mortal.” 48
Two conflicting viewpoints are thus set forth—framed in 
the words of fictional characters. So the dual evidence of the 
Homilies, as pertains to our quest, ends. It is not conclusive, 
but it mirrors the clashing views of the time. And some feel 
that “Clement” himself favors the Conditionalist view.
7. Subsequent “Recognitions” Sustain “Homilies” Por­
trayal.—Inasmuch as the Clementine Recognitions probably 
sprang from the same author, since they have the same fictional 
characters and characteristics, it is well to note that in the 
Recognitions the same “Simon” 
(Magus) still questions 
“whether the soul is immortal.” 47 That was being strongly 
advocated in the third century. And in chapter forty-one, after 
acknowledging the “judgment to come,” “Simon,” used as a sym­
bol of the wickedness of the Early Church, continues to chal­
lenge the claim that “the soul is immortal,” and declares, “For 
as soon as they die, their soul shall at the same time be extin­
guished” 48 Then in book four (chapter twelve) “Peter” says 
that Enoch was “translated to immortality.” 49 But in book five 
(chapter twenty-eight), “Eternity of Punishments,” the fabri­
cated Immortal-Soulist “Peter” is made to say:
‘‘But if any persist in impiety till the end of life, then as soon as the
« Ibid., p. 335.
“ Ibid., p; 337.
47 Recognitions of Clement (Thomas Smith, tr.), book 3, chap. 39. in ANF, vol. 8, 
p. 124. In the Recognitions, Gnostic elements are to be noted. (Cf. ODCC, p. 301: also 
ANF, vol. 8, pp. 69-74.)
48 Ibid., p. 125. (Italics supplied.)
Ibid., p. 137.
soul, which is immortal, departs, it shall pay the penalty of its persistence 
in impiety. For even the souls of the impious are immortal, though per­
haps they themselves would wish them to end with their bodies. But it is 
not so; for they endure without end the torments of eternal fire, and to 
their destruction they have not the quality of mortality.” 50
Here, then, is the same conflict of views by the same oppos­
ing characters.
Thus it is seen that the Eternal-Torment concept is already 
coupled as an inseparable corollary to the basic Immortal-Soul- 
ism in the contention of this developing second school of 
thought. Then to this “Peter” adds, in book nine, chapter thir­
teen (“Retribution Here or Hereafter”), that “their punish­
ment He [God] defers to the future.” He closes by referring to 
the “punishment of eternal fire in hell; and there their souls 
shall seek repentance, where they shall not be able to find it.” “ 
So there is continuance in the clashing testimony of “Clement’s” 
two treatises. They simply constitute a reflection of the eddying 
currents of the times, and of the paralleling but conflicting 
schools on the nature and destiny of man, already in vogue. 
Innate Immortal-Soulism is definitely on the gain.
916 
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
“> Ibid., p. 150. 
« Ibid., p. 186.
CHAPTER 
FIFTY-FOUR
Arnobius of Africa—Last Ante- 
Nicene Conditionalist Spokesman
I. Final Extinction of Incorrigibly Wicked
Approximately a century after the martyrdom of Irenaeus, 
Arnobius (fl. c. a.d. 297-310), of Africa, called the Elder, one 
of the bright ante-Nicene lights of the first decade of the fourth 
century, brought forth a notable confession of his newly 
espoused Christian faith. Arnobius, last great apologist of the 
ante-Nicene period of the Early Church, had been a prominent 
pagan professor of rhetoric at Sicca, in Northern Africa, near 
Carthage. There his philosophic learning and eloquence had 
brought him fame during the reign of Diocletian.
Sicca at that time was notorious for its bestial foulness and 
polytheism, in vivid contrast with the strict purity enjoined 
by the Christians. While a pagan, Arnobius was noted for his 
intense hatred of Christianity. Like Saul of Tarsus, he fought 
it relentlessly. Nevertheless, he admired the heroic courage of 
the martyrs under the terrible Diocletian persecution, which 
sought to overwhelm Christianity in a deluge of flame and 
blood in what was paganism’s dying struggle. And, like a new 
Saul of Tarsus, Arnobius at last embraced Christianity, evi­
dently between a.d. 303 and 310. And again, like the converted 
Paul before him, he was at first distrusted by those whom he 
had long opposed, and was refused baptism and admission into 
the church.
In order to dispel their fears Arnobius published an open 
attack on paganism called Adversus Gentes (“Against the
917
918
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Pagans”), in which he boldly avowed his new convictions, as 
proof of his sincerity. This courageous act, as well as its apolo­
getic power and logical appeal, removed all doubt, and the 
doors of the church were thrown open to him. That is what 
we are now to survey, for an important section bears on the 
problem of immortality. Arnobius was an enthusiastic convert, 
and his fearless voice carried weight. He became the teacher 
of the brilliant Lactantius, to be noted later in our survey, 
whom he profoundly influenced. Incidentally, Arnobius had 
in turn been influenced by Lucretius.
1. 
Meets Paganism 
on 
Its Own Ground.—Arnobius’ 
book, though written before his actual baptism, is a statement 
of mature convictions. Here on heathenism’s own ground he 
meets the arguments, the taunts and reproaches, brought against 
Christianity by the stalwarts of paganism. And he not only 
repels their charges but undertakes to persuade them that Chris­
tianity is fully demonstrable by evidence. He does not quote 
heavily from Scripture, which was largely unknown to his 
readers—and would not be admitted as evidence by them any­
way—so he presents the facts of Scripture rather than actual 
quotations from the text. He seeks to impress them with the 
fatal weakness and fallacy of their own reasoning, and the folly 
of polytheism. He contends that Christians, who worship the 
self-existent God, are not less religious than those who worship 
subordinate deities.
Heathenism, he earnestly contends, is outworn and must 
inevitably disappear. His is the most sustained counterattack 
upon the contemporary pagan cults, and especially the “cult of 
the emperor,” written by any of the Church Fathers. Dr. George 
E. McCracken, of Drake University, in his recent Arnobius of 
Sicca—the Case Against the Pagans (1949), calls it “in many 
ways the most remarkable patristic document now extant,” 1 
although it was long neglected and many attempts were made 
to discredit it.
1 George E. McCracken, Arnobius of Sicca, Introduction, p. 3, in the new Catholic 
“Ancient Christian Writers” series.
LAST ANTE-NICENE CONDITIONALIST SPOKESMAN 
919
2. Immortality for Righteous; Extinction for Wicked. 
—It is not to be wondered that many negative criticisms have 
been leveled against this treatise, for Arnobius was a militant 
Conditionalist. Putting aside all the reserves and circum­
locutions of the Greek Fathers, he was the first Latin writer 
of note to declare clearly the doctrine of the ultimate extinction 
of the wicked. He taught explicitly that the incorrigibly im­
penitent sinner is destined, after a due and determined period 
of punishment, to pass out of existence.
To Arnobius the human soul, with its inherent sin and 
imperfection, could not of itself be inherently immortal, becom­
ing such only by the grace and gift of God. For the unrepentant 
unrighteous there must be a second death, a Gehenna of un­
quenchable fire, which gradually consumes and at last extin­
guishes the wicked, without leaving any “residuum.”
3. Man Created Capable of Either Destiny.—Arnobius 
took the position of the “intermediate” nature of man—that 
he was originally created neither mortal nor immortal, but 
capable of either destiny.2 Such a teaching was, of course, detri­
mental to his reputation in those quarters where universal 
Innate-Immortality of the soul was now being militantly taught, 
with the consequent Eternal-Torment-of-the-wicked and resto- 
rationist corollaries. But Arnobius was in line with Justin 
Martyr, Tatian, Irenaeus, Theophilus of Antioch, and the 
entire group of the Apostolic Fathers before them. Thus the 
two concepts of the nature and destiny of man were now mili­
tantly existent side by side, until the gradual and final sub­
mergence of Conditionalism came about.
Thereafter, for centuries, there were only occasional Con­
ditionalist voices. (See Tabular Chart F, on page 758, for Arno­
bius’ allocation.) But we may also well note here Prof. Charles 
Hudson’s significant observation that Arnobius’ views were not 
censured until long after his day, and that the opposite (Innate- 
Immortality) view was not made a declared universal Catholic
2 Likewise with Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Nemesius, which see.
920
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
article of faith for twelve hundred years thereafter,3 that is, 
not until the Bull of Leo X, in 1513, in connection with the 
Fifth Lateran Council. The lateness of the timing is most 
significant.
That Arnobius’ views were as here stated is recognized, 
for example, by Anglican Dean F. W. Farrar, of Canterbury, 
who asks: “Can there be any reasonable doubt as to the opinion 
of Arnobius? ... It appears, then, that this Christian 
apologist did not hold endless torments to be a matter of 
faith.” 4 And Catholic Dr. McCracken states, “For Arnobius 
the Soul can only be mortal and he appears of the opinion 
that this view is orthodox Christianity.”6 Others, like Dr. 
S. D. F. Salmond, could be similarly cited.9
The beginning of Arnobius’ career as a Christian we know, 
but not the end. The terrible persecution then sweeping over 
the Roman world and engulfing unnumbered Christians 
probably included Arnobius among them, for we hear no more 
of him. And he could scarcely have failed to have been heard 
from further had he lived.
II. Comprehensive Survey of Arnobius’ Arguments 
and Evidences
1. 
Arnobius Presents the Case for Christ.—Point by 
point and step by step in book one, in logical sequences and 
close reasoning, Arnobius answers the charges and insinuations 
of paganism by counterattacking and exposing the foibles and 
fallacies of the heathen gods of wood and stone he had formerly 
worshiped, and boldly avows his faith in Christ as both God 
and man. “Led into the paths of truth,” he now declares of 
Christ, “He is God in reality and without any shadow of a 
doubt.” T Then He appeared among men “in human shape,”
3 Hudson, Debt and Grace, p. 303.
* Farrar, Mercy and Judgment, p. 248.
6 McCracken, op. cit., p. 20.
•S. D. F. Salmond, The Christian Doctrine of Immortality, pp. 594, 595.
7 Arnobius, Against the Heathen, book 
I, 
chaps. 39, 42, in ANF, 
vol. 6, pp. 423, 424.
LAST ANTE-NICENE CONDITIONALIST SPOKESMAN 
921
taking the “form of man,” and was “cut off by death,” dying 
in our stead on the cross,8 that we might have life.
2. Christ Opened the Gate of Immortality.—In book 
two, coming directly to the issue of immortality, Arnobius 
declares that it is Christ who has “prepared for you a path 
(note 4: or “opened paths . . . and the gates of immortality”) 
to heaven, and the immortality for which you long.” He care­
fully explains that “He neither extended the light of life to 
all, nor delivered all from the danger which threatens them 
through ignorance (note 1: “danger of destruction”).” 9 Some 
refuse. And as the pagans believe Plato, so, Arnobius states, 
“we [Christians] believe and confide in Christ.” And “if we 
choose to compare cause with cause, we are better able to 
point out what we have followed in Christ, than you to 
point out what you have followed in the philosophers.”10 
And he decries their “speculative quibblings.” 11
Book two was clearly the peak of his presentation. Here 
Arnobius argues at length on the “error” of the Platonic claim 
of the soul’s inherent immortality. Once lost in the blindness 
and error of paganism himself, and devoted to the worship of 
images brought forth from the furnace and made with human 
hands, Arnobius now rejoices in the truth of Life Only in Christ, 
who is our Supreme Creator.12 He had already clearly declared 
that the pagan gods “are not immortal.” And that death “ends 
all things, and takes away life from every sentient being.” 13 And 
Arnobius was a fitting champion of the cause he had espoused.
3. Searching Questions on Life, Death, and Hereafter. 
—In chapters thirteen and fourteen Arnobius propounds a 
cumulative series of searching questions leading up to the 
question of the destruction of the wicked. Addressing the pagan 
philosophers, particularly the followers of Plato and Pythagoras, 
he points out the inconsistency of their quibbles, and turns 
the argument upon them. Hear him:
«Ibid., chaps. 60, 62, pp. 430. 431.
9 Ibid., boot 2, chap. 1, pp. 433, 434.
10 Ibid., chap. 11, p. 437.
u Ibid., chap. 12, p. 438.
“ Cf. book 1, chap. 39, p. 423.
13 Ibid., chap. 18, p. 418.
922
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
"Do you dare to laugh at us because we revere and worship the Creator 
and Lord of the universe, and because we commit and entrust our hopes 
to Him? . . . Does he [Plato] not exhort the soul to flee from earth? . . .
"Do you dare to laugh at us, because we say that there will be a resur­
rection of the dead? . . . Does not he [Plato] say that, when the world has 
begun to rise out of the west and tend towards the east, men will again 
burst forth from the bosom of the earth? . . .
“Do you dare to laugh at us because we see to the salvation of our 
souls? ... You, indeed, do not take every pain for their safety.” 14
"Do you dare to laugh at us when we speak of hell, and fires, which 
cannot be quenched? . . . Does not your Plato also, in the book which he 
wrote on the immortality of the soul, name the rivers Acheron, Styx, 
Cocytus, and Pyriphlegethon, and assert that in them souls are rolled 
along, engulphed, and burned up?” 15
4. A Destruction That Leaves Nothing Behind.—After 
referring to paganism’s problem of a soul that is “immortal, 
everlasting, and without bodily substance,” yet being “pun­
ished” and made to “suffer pain,” Arnobius asks, “But what 
man does not see that that which is immortal, which is simple 
(note 17: “i.e., not compounded of soul and body”), cannot 
be subject to any pain; that that, on the contrary, cannot be 
immortal which does suffer pain?” He then speaks of those who, 
being cast into the flames, are “annihilated,” and “pass away” 
in “everlasting destruction.” 16
5. Ultimate “Annihilation” Is Man’s “Real Death.” 
—Arnobius next declares that according to Christ “theirs [the 
souls’] is an intermediate state”—there are those that “may on 
the one hand perish if they have not known God, and on the 
other be delivered from death if they have given heed to His 
threats and proffered favours.” 17 Then follows Arnobius’ clear 
definition of man’s “real death”:
"This is man’s real death, this which leaves nothing behind.18 For that 
which is seen by the eyes is only a separation of soul from body, not the 
last end—annihilation: this, I say, is man’s real death, when souls which 
know not God shall be consumed in long-protracted torment with raging 
fire.”18
14 Ibid., book 2, chap. 13, p. 439. 
17 Ibid., pp. 439, 440.
18 Ibid., chap. 14, p. 439. 
18 “Haec nihil residuum faciens.”
16 Ibid. 
18 Ibid., p. 440.
LAST ANTE-NICENE CONDITIONALIST SPOKESMAN 
923
Arnobius clearly distinguishes between the first death and 
the final death, and declares that in the true, or final, death 
of the wicked there is “nothing left behind”—absolute destruc­
tion after the final death agonies. He warns against the pre­
sumption of Innate Immortality. Continuance of life, he holds, 
is conditional.
6. Man Not “Immortal” Like God; Only “Creatures.” 
—Next Arnobius speaks of those who are obsessed with “an 
extravagant opinion of themselves, that souls are immortal, next 
in point of rank to the God and ruler of the world.” 20 Then 
Arnobius appeals earnestly to the Platonists to lay aside their 
prideful claim to being “immortal,” which is only a pretense, 
and to remember that we are but “creatures.” He appeals:
“Will you lay aside your habitual arrogance [note 12: “that pride of 
yours”], O men, who claim God as your Father, and maintain that you are 
immortal, just as He is? Will you inquire, examine, search what you are 
yourselves, whose you are, of what parentage you are supposed to be, what 
you do in the world, in what way you are born, how you leap to life? Will 
you, laying aside all partiality, consider in the silence of your thoughts 
that we are creatures either quite like the rest, or separated by no great 
difference?” 21
7. Sweeping Survey of Paganism’s Inadequacy.—With 
keen satire Arnobius then launches into a vivid description of 
human nature as it is, to refute the argument then current for 
the “extravagant opinion” of the soul’s immortality.22 In sweep­
ing strokes he paints the over-all picture—covering whole 
chapters. Follow it:
Is man divine? Why is he half animal? 23 Is the soul a thing 
of reason? Let man show himself rational.21 Then the arguments 
from human skills, the sciences and the fine arts, and man’s 
hopes and fears, are duly considered.“ Also the argument from 
the nature of the soul as a simple substance—as “divine, and 
therefore immortal”; and from its supposed reminiscences of 
a pre-existent state.28 Then there are the practical tendencies
20 Ibid., chap. 15, p. 440. 
24 Ibid., chap. 17, p. 441.
24 Ibid., chap. 16, p. 440. 
* ¡bid., chaps. 18-26, pp. 441-444.
22 Ibid., chap. 15, p. 440. 
28 Ibid., chaps. 27, 28, p. 444.
23 Ibid., chap. 16, p. 440.
924
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
of this and that belief. Must not whatever is immortal, be ever 
free? What reason for alarm, then, if such a soul should revel 
in vice? 27
And what is the ground of hope if, as Epicurus held, the 
soul must die? 28 The “golden mean” is a mingled hope and 
fear, based on the doctrine of a soul that must either live or 
die.29 Are souls indeed a divine and royal offspring? How un- 
royally do they behave!30 And the notion of a pre-existent 
state is met with a long list of questions as to why man is 
reduced to his present state.31 If God created souls not only 
where they are, but as they are, is He not the author of evil? 32 
But are there too few good men to allow the belief that they 
alone will live? Then by what rule of induction do they 
immortalize the race? 33 It is a compelling outline.
8. 
Claims 
and Assumptions 
of 
Immortal-Soulists.— 
Touching in chapter sixteen on the popular concept of trans­
migration of “immortal souls” from man to beast,34 and the 
position in chapter twenty-two that the souls of men are divine 
and therefore immortal,33 Arnobius then discusses, in chapters 
twenty-six and twenty-seven, the nature of the soul and the 
concept that the soul is deprived of remembrance of former 
existences by being “fettered” with the human body.39 Next, 
he deals with the claim that sentence cannot be pronounced 
on “immortal” souls who, on such a premise, are equal with 
immortal God, “seeing there is the same immortality in both.” 37
9. “Enriched With Eternal Life” Through Christ.— 
And now, in chapter thirty-two, he observes that “souls are set 
[born] not far from the gaping jaws of death,” but that “they 
can, nevertheless, have their lives prolonged by the favour and 
kindness of the Supreme Ruler if only they try and study to 
know Him.” And he urges them to “be ready for that which
27 Ibid., chap. 29, p. 445. 
33 Ibid., chaps. 49, 50, pp. 452, 453.
28 Ibid., chap. 30. p. 445. 
31 Ibid., chap. 16, p. 440.
29 Ibid., chaps. 31-34, pp. 
446, 
447. 38 Ibid., chap. 22, p. 442.
30 Ibid., chaps. 37, 38, p. 448. 
30 Ibid., chaps. 2d, 27, p. 444.
31 Ibid., chaps. 39-42, pp. 
449, 
450. 37 Ibid., chap. 29, p. 445.
32 Ibid., chaps. 43-48, pp. 
450-452.
LAST ANTE-NICENE CONDITIONALIST SPOKESMAN 
925
shall be given.” 38 In chapter thirty-four he reminds his readers 
that neither Plato nor any other philosopher had promised “a 
way to escape death,” but that Christ has “not only promised 
it” but can bring His promises to reality, thus to “escape a 
death of suffering” and “be enriched with eternal life.” 38
III. Boon of Immortality Is God’s Gift
1. Assured Immortality Versus Blotting Out of Exist­
ence.—In chapter thirty-six Arnobius alludes to the claim that 
“gods are said to be immortal,” but to the Christian, “the 
boon [note 16: “bestowed, assured immortality”] of immor­
tality is God’s gift” upon those who receive it. “In the same way 
will He deign to confer eternal life upon souls also, although 
fell death seems able to cut them off and blot them out of exist­
ence in utter annihilation [note 18: “reduced to nothing with 
annihilation, not to be returned from”].” 40
2. “Gift” of Immortality Is the “Grant” 
of God.— 
Denying in chapter forty-eight that souls are the “offspring of 
God,” Arnobius repeats his contention, in chapter fifty-three, 
that souls “are of a neutral character”—that is, capable of 
entering into either life or death—and are made “subject to 
the law of death” and “perishable.” But, he adds, they “are 
gifted with immortality, if they rest their hope of so great a 
gift on God Supreme, who alone has power to grant such 
blessings41 Here again the Conditionalist aspect is pointed 
up by the frequently used “if.”
3. 
Either 
Salvation 
or 
Destruction Awaits 
All.— 
Bringing his lengthy argument toward its close, after declaring 
that “nothing is made by Him except that which is for the 
well-being of all,” 43 and denying the contention that “the world
38 Ibid., chap. 32, p. 446.
38 Ibid., chap. 34, p. 447.
*° Ibid., chap. 36, p. 447.
41 Ibid., chap. 53, p. 454.
12 Ibid., chap. 55, p. 455.
was not created, and will never perish,” 43 Arnobius earnestly 
appeals to his pagan readers with the plea:
“Your interests are in jeopardy,—the salvation, I mean, of your souls; 
and unless you give yourselves to seek to know the Supreme God, a cruel 
death awaits you when freed from the bonds of body, not bringing sudden 
annihilation, but destroying by the bitterness of its grievous and long- 
protracted punishment.” M
But the “long-protracted punishment” ends in ultimate 
cessation of being, he repeatedly attests.
4. God Alone Is Immortal and Everlasting.—Warning 
against the “empty delusions” of pagan promises—that “souls 
become divine, and are freed from the law of death” by certain 
performances—Arnobius solemnly declares:
“None but the Almighty God can preserve souls; nor is any one besides 
who can give them length of days, and grant to them also a spirit which 
shall never die, except He who alone is immortal and everlasting and 
restricted by no limit of time." 46
5. The Great Alternatives Are Placed Before All.— 
Declaring in chapter sixty-three that “Christ was sent by God 
for this end, that He might deliver unhappy souls from ruin 
and destruction”—souls in a “mortal state before He came” * 
—Arnobius says that this deliverance is free to all who will 
accept. “To all, He says, the fountain of life is open, and no 
one is hindered or kept back from drinking.” 47 But he warns:
“God compels no one, terrifies no one with overpowering fear. For 
our salvation is not necessary to Him, so that He would gain anything or 
suffer any loss, if He either made us divine, or allowed us to be annihilated 
and destroyed by corruption.” 48
6. “Prize of Immortality” Is Before Us.—Then he adds 
this word: “The Almighty Master of the World has determined 
that this should be the way of salvation,—this the door, so to 
say, of life; by Him alone is there access.” 49 Such is the “prize 
of immortality” set before us.50
926 
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
48 Ibid, chap. 56, p. 455. 
47 Ibid., chap. 64, p. 458.
44 Ibid., chap. 61, 
p. 457. 
48 Ibid.
45 Ibid., chap. 62, 
pp. 457, 458. 
49 Ibid., chap. 65, p. 459.
46 Ibid., chap. 63, 
p. 458. 
50 Ibid., chap. 66, p. 459.
LAST ANTE-NICENE CONDITIONALIST SPOKESMAN 
927
Arnobius ends his remarkable appeal by declaring:
“The times, full of dangers, urge us, and fatal penalties threaten us; 
let us flee for safety to God our Saviour, without demanding the reason of 
the offered gift. When that at stake is our soul’s salvation and our own 
interests, something must be done even without reason. . . . Let us commit 
ourselves to God, . . . lest. . . the last day steal upon us, and we be found in 
the jaws of our enemy, death.51
And all this, be it ever remembered, was not only set forth 
as Arnobius’ faith, but was accepted as sufficient evidence of 
his Christianity to open for him the gates of Christian church 
membership. Nor is it to be forgotten that these two views of 
man were both held at the time, and that the view of Arnobius, 
and that of the many holding with him, was accepted as equally 
the Christian view. Conditionalism, therefore, still was one of 
the accepted and recorded beliefs of the church in the early 
fourth century.
51 Ibid., chap. 78, p. 463.
CHAPTER 
FIFTY-FIVE
Athenagoras—First Ecclesiastic to 
Assert Innate Immortality
Second of Three Schools of Theological Trilemma Emerges
—Crystallizes Dogma of Eternal Torment of the Wicked
Beginning with this chapter we will next trace the revolu­
tionary new 
Universal Innate-lmmortality 
postulate 
that 
henceforth parallels and erelong overshadows the original Con- 
ditionalist position (subapostolic and ante-Nicene), which we 
have been following up to this point. This innovation eventuates 
in the second school in the theological trilemma, now in process 
of development. And a few chapters further on the third school 
in this intriguing theological trilemma will emerge. From 
thenceforth these three schools continue concurrently in cease­
less conflict. And they persist to this day.
The developments may be visualized on Chart F (page 
758), as they are allocated and grouped in their respective cate­
gories. To this the reader is invited to turn for the chronologi­
cal placement (in the vertical columns), as well as the cate­
gorical arrangement in the paralleling (or horizontal) readings. 
Identification and classification for each individual and group 
in the respective categories, or schools of thought, under survey 
may thus be had. By referring to this comprehensive chart the 
over-all relationships and the cumulative and massed evidence 
needed for balanced conclusions may easily be visualized.
We now turn to the contrasting side of the picture—a 
very important side. The concept of the Innate Immortality 
of the soul as a "Christian” doctrine did not appear in patristic
928
Athenagoras — First Eccle­
siastic to Assert Universal 
Innate - Immortality Postu­
late, Based on Platonism.
Tertullian of Carthage — 
Projector of Eternal-Tor- 
ment Corollary for Immor­
tal Wicked, With Mystic 
Fire.
literature until toward the close of the second century. That 
long lapse of time is highly significant. And then it was intro­
duced by a Greek philosopher who, while nominally accepting 
Christianity, insofar as it did not invalidate his former views, 
retained the fundamental philosophic concept of Neoplatonism 
on the nature and destiny of man—despite its definite conflict 
with prevalent Christian teachings. The pathfinder on this 
revolutionary road was Athenagoras—apparently the first 
ecclesiastic to embrace the Immortal-Soul postulate publicly, 
and to advocate it on a purely Platonic basis. As stated in the 
Encyclopaedia Britannica, his theology is “strongly tinged with 
Platonism.” 1
However, it was Tertullian of Carthage (d. c. a.d. 240) 
who gave the great impetus to this emphasis, tying in with it 
the dogma of the endless torment of the lost. Then finally
1 Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th ed., vol. 2, p. 831, art. “Athenagoras.”
30 
929
930
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
came Augustine of Hippo (d. a.d. 430), whose great influence 
brought about the general acceptance by the church at large 
of the belief in the deathlessness of all souls, and also its fiery 
corollary of the endless existence and Eternal Torment of the 
reprobate. 
(For Athenagoras’ chronological and categorical 
placement, see Tabular Chart F, on page 758.)
I. Athenagoras—Pathfinder on Revolutionary Road
Though 
facts 
are 
meager 
concerning 
the 
life 
of 
Athenagoras (c. a.d. 127-190), he was born in Athens and was 
well trained in pagan Greek learning, especially in the philos­
ophy of Plato. Accepting the Christian faith, he became a 
catechist in Alexandria. He wrote a conciliatory Apology 
(c. a.d. 177) to the Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius, and his 
son Commodus. While Athenagoras refuted the false charges 
against Christians, his main burden seemed to be to show that 
Christianity and Platonism are really in fundamental accord, 
and that the great essentials of Platonic philosophy are actually 
embraced in Christianity. His was a philosophical defense of 
his new faith, and his writings were of an altogether new order, 
increasingly saturated with the teaching and phraseology of 
Plato, unquestionably the source of his views.
He sought to unite these two streams that they might flow 
on together. And while his arguments did not carry much 
weight in his own day, and his name was not well known to his 
own generation, his contentions gradually gained credence, as 
others began to press this revolutionary and really alien doctrine 
of Innate Immortality that involved the eternal existence of the 
reprobate. Although the foundations are barely discernible in 
the Apology presented to the emperor, Immortal-Soulism came 
out into the open in unabashed phrasing and argument in 
Athenagoras’ later treatise on The Resurrection. It was obvi­
ously a development that he himself did not at first envision. 
He was unquestionably the spearhead in the intrusion of uni­
versal Innate Immortality into the Christian Church.
FIRST ECCLESIASTIC TO ASSERT INNATE IMMORTALITY 931
1. 
Bases Contention on Philosophy, Not Scripture.— 
It is significant that Athenagoras based his contention as to the 
immortality of the soul, not on Scripture, but on philosophical 
argument. Precision in theological language had not yet found 
an established format. Athenagoras was clearly groping. But 
his main premise was that God’s purpose in creating man was 
that he should live—that the divine purpose of man’s existence 
is existence itself. And God’s purpose, he contended, cannot be 
defeated. It must be accomplished. It is therefore impossible 
for man to cease to exist. Such is his argument.
Athenagoras does not make perpetual existence a conse­
quence of righteousness or the triumph of morality. Rather, all 
men must live on forever—good and evil, happy and miserable. 
His was a compulsory immortality, so that in wickedness there 
is interminable suffering never to any advantage. On the con­
trary, the gospel that had previously been preached conditions 
unending existence on holiness. But this is obtained only by the 
exercise of human freedom and the development of character. 
Immortality depends upon the triumph of righteousness. Men 
of purpose lay hold upon it; it is not forced upon them. It is 
a gift of God.
Athenagoras implies that, as the wicked must live forever, 
they therefore live a life of eternal misery. But he does not state 
so dogmatically. That was left for others. Nevertheless, such 
reasoning is the source and origin of the dogma of eternal 
misery, as based on such premises. We reiterate the argument 
in all its baldness: The wicked must he miserable forever, 
because they must live forever; and they must live forever 
because God made them for the primary purpose of living! 
That is the logical fruitage of the acceptance of the Platonic 
pagan philosophy of Immortal-Soulism.
Now note the boldness of Athenagoras’ commitment in 
contrast with the Conditionalist position of the Apostolic 
Fathers, and then that of Justin Martyr and Irenaeus at the 
outset of the ante-Nicene period. It is as the contrast of dark­
ness and light. Let us trace it in detail.
932
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
2. Repeatedly Uses Plato’s “Immortal Soul” Phrasing. 
—In his earlier Plea, or Apology, Athenagoras did not person­
ally use either the thought or the phrase “immortal soul.” But 
a decade later it is repeatedly invoked in his Treatise ... on 
the Resurrection. A profound change of view had obviously 
taken place in the interim. And here it is employed, not once, 
but nine times in one short treatise. Moreover, Athenagoras 
drafts in addition upon a whole battery of supporting expres­
sions—variations of the one basic concept—in order to sustain 
this Platonic concept that he had now espoused. First observe 
this initial “immortal soul” phrasing, in about nine variant 
forms, that constituted both the thought and the terminology 
of Plato, whence it was clearly derived:
“Continuance of being in immortality” (chap. 13, in ANF, vol. 2, 
p. 156).
“He [God] made man of an immortal soul and a body” (ibid.).
“Composed of an immortal soul and a body” (chap. 15, p. 157).
"Wholly incorruptible and immortal” (chap. 16, p. 157).
“From the first created immortal” (ibid.).
“Continuance with immortality” (ibid.).
“The soul to remain by itself immortal” (chap. 20, p. 160).
“An immortal nature” (chap. 23, p. 161).
“Possessed of an immortal soul and rational judgment” (chap. 24,
p. 162).
3. Battery of Supporting Equivalents Employed.—And 
here are about seventeen supporting equivalents, running 
through this revolutionary Resurrection treatise, used to but­
tress this central concept: “Not liable to corruption” (chap. 
10, p. 154); “continuance of being” 
(chap. 12, p. 155); 
“perpetual duration” (ibid.); “perpetual existence” (ibid.); 
“preserved for ever” (ibid.); “remains in existence” (ibid.); 
“continuance of being” (chap. 13, p. 156); “continuance for 
ever” (ibid.); “must continue for ever” (chap. 15, p. 157); 
“interminable duration of the soul” (ibid.); “perpetual con­
tinuance” (ibid.); “continuance of being” (chap. 16, p. 157); 
“continuance according to its peculiar nature” (ibid.); “con­
tinuance invariable and unchangeable” (ibid.); “continue to 
exist without end” 
(ibid.); 
“unchangeable continuance”
FIRST ECCLESIASTIC TO ASSERT INNATE IMMORTALITY 933
(ibid.); and “incapable of dissolution” (chap. 20, p. 160)—and 
all found within the compass of only six pages!
Surely a more complete committal to this thesis could 
scarcely be imagined than these seventeen supplemental expres­
sions afford, added to the nine—or twenty-six in all. Language 
could hardly be more absolute, conclusive, or incriminatory. 
Athenagoras assuredly and openly now taught the innate, in­
alienable, indefeasible immortality of the soul. And he was, 
so far as can be determined, the first Christian ecclesiastic so 
to do. And this was about the year a.d. 187.
II. Earlier Plea—Devoid of “Innate Immortality” Concept
The thirty-two chapters of Athenagoras’ earlier “Apology,” 
or Embassy, constitute a really masterful “Plea,” as it was 
commonly called, presented to the emperor. Athenagoras is 
careful to designate himself, in the title, as “Philosopher and 
Christian.” His was a practiced pen and he was a polished 
writer. He protests the unjust discrimination shown toward 
Christians, and asks that they be accorded the same treatment 
as others when accused. Dealing with the three stock charges 
—of atheism, cannibalism (the “body” and “blood” statements 
regarding the Eucharist), and immorality—Athenagoras shows 
that Christians are not atheists, even the pagan poets and philos­
ophers testifying to the unity of a Supreme Being. His favorite, 
Plato, is cited in particular. The absurdities of polytheism are 
exposed, and he presents the unity of the Godhead as manifest 
in three Persons.
Athenagoras shows that pagan gods are but “created” fig­
ments, as poets and philosophers admit, along with their 
acknowledgments that “a thing is either uncreated and eternal, 
or created and perishable.”2 He rehearses the absurd represen­
tations and impure loves ascribed to the pagan gods. He then 
states, concerning the “One God, the supreme and uncreated
2 Athenagoras, A Plea for the Christians, chap. 19, in ANF, vol. 2, p. 137.
934
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
and eternal One,” that “the Deity is immortal, and immoveable, 
and unalterable.” 3 Again in chapter ttventy-three he presses 
significantly on the superiority of Plato over other writers. 
This special fondness obviously leads to his later championship 
of Plato’s Immortal-Soulism.
1. Angels Are Created Beings; Some “Fell.”—Discussing 
the angels, Athenagoras says in chapter twenty-four that they 
were “created by Him [God],” and that “this is the office of 
the angels,—to exercise providence [watchcare] for God over 
the things created and ordered by Him.” They were “created 
by God” as “free agents.” Some “continued in those things for 
which God had made and over Avhich He had ordained them”; 
others outraged both the constitution of their nature and the 
government entrusted to them,” and thus fell.4 Then in chapter 
twenty-seven Athenagoras touches on the “Artifices of the 
Demons,” how they plague the souls of men, and how they “lead 
men into error.” 5
2. 
Dubious Setting 
of 
Term 
“Immortal 
Soul.”—In
the same chapter he discusses the “diversity” of pagan views 
concerning the origin and nature of the “soul”—noted six times 
in a single paragraph—and uses such terms as “irrational,”
“fantastic,” “delusive,” and “empty visions,” in describing such 
views. It is in such a setting and connection that the much- 
publicized expression, 
“being immortal,” 
occurs in 
this 
sentence:
“And, taking possession of their thoughts, cause to flow in to the 
mind empty visions as if coming from the idols and the statues; and 
when, too, a soul of itself, as being immortal, moves conformably to reason, 
either predicting the future or healing the present, the demons claim the 
glory for themselves.” 0
Obviously that is a pagan, demonic claim, here cited by 
Athenagoras, not an assertion, or fact of truth, setting forth his 
own position.
8 Ibid., chap. 22, p. 140.
4 Ibid., chap. 24, p. 142.
5 Ibid., chap. 27, p. 143.
1 Ibid. (Italics supplied.)
FIRST ECCLESIASTIC TO ASSERT INNATE IMMORTALITY 935
3. Heathen “Gods” Simply Deified Men.—The heading 
of chapter twenty-eight is “Heathen Gods Were Simply Men,” 
with chapter twenty-nine as “Proof of the Same From the 
Poets.” Chapter thirty offers “Reasons Why Divinity Has Been 
Ascribed to Men.” Thus he disposes of the “gods.”
4. Fate of Sinners Worse Than “Annihilation.”—In 
chapter thirty-one Athenagoras’ initial statement appears on the 
hereafter of “those whose life is directed towards God,” who 
seek to be “blameless and irreproachable.” After stating that 
all things are known to God, he says:
“We are persuaded that when we are removed [“released”] from the 
present life we shall live another life, better than the present one, and heav­
enly, not earthly (since we shall abide near God, and with God, free from 
all change or suffering in the soul . . . ).”7
Then, speaking of the punishment of the sinner, “falling 
with the rest,” Athenagoras declares his fate to be “a worse one 
and in fire.” And he adds: “For God has not made us as sheep 
or beasts of burden, a mere by-work, and that we should perish 
and be annihilated.” 8
So the souls of men live on indefeasibly.
5. Our Bodies to Be Reconstructed at Resurrection.— 
Finally, in chapter thirty-six (“Bearing on the Doctrine of the 
Resurrection”), Athenagoras speaks of those who “believe that 
our bodies will rise again,” and that “the earth will give back 
the bodies held by it.”9 He contrasts such with those who 
mistakenly believe “there is no resurrection, but calculate on 
the soul perishing with the body, and being as it were quenched 
in it.” Then he declares that the body will be “punished” along 
with the soul. And he adds, “It is not our [the Christian’s] 
belief alone that bodies will rise again, but . . . many philoso­
phers also hold the same view.” Again he cites Plato as agreeing 
that “when the dissolution of bodies takes place, they should, 
from the very same elements of which they were constructed at
7 Ibid., chap. 31, p. 146.
8 Ibid.
9 Ibid., chap. 36, in ANF, vol. 2, p. 147.
936
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
first, be constructed again.” 10 This is as far as Athenagoras goes 
in this earlier Plea.
III. The Resurrection—Wholly Committed to 
Innate-Immortality Thesis
In Athenagoras’ final work, The Resurrection of the Dead, 
a strong undeviating current of innate Immortal-Soulism, not 
found in the previous Plea, flows throughout the treatise. We 
therefore pause at the outset to consider the familiar charge 
of “inconsistency,” “vacillation,” and “conflicting statements” 
leveled against Athenagoras’ position on immortality. This 
problem can be rationally explained and fairly answered by rec­
ognizing the simple fact that a distinct change of view took place 
between Athenagoras’ earlier Plea (c. a.d. 177) and this treatise 
a decade later (c. a.d. 187). There were inklings before, but 
never full commitment as here.
We should press the point that if the opposing expressions 
were scattered over both treatises, the charge would have some 
valid basis. But Athenagoras’ Immortal-Soulism is concentrated 
in this later Resurrection discussion. In the interim he had 
clearly swung over to outright championship of Innate Immor­
tality, and by the same token his former moderate views were 
abandoned. Athenagoras had made a complete about-face—a 
reversal of position. And the purpose of this new treatise is 
obviously to prove the resurrection of man, with soul and body, 
each constituting an integral part of the whole man, and there­
fore both sharing in the final, or common, destiny. The revolu­
tionary character of Athenagoras’ utterances here justifies a 
documented presentation.
1. 
Man Created for “Perpetual Existence.”—Athenag­
oras rests his entire case on the premise of the natural immor­
tality of man. But he bases this purely on the argument of
*> Ibid., p. 148.
FIRST ECCLESIASTIC TO ASSERT INNATE IMMORTALITY 937
reason, with no appeal to the authority of Scripture, not even 
invoking Christ’s resurrection as an assurance of ours. He here 
holds that God’s object in making man was that he might live. 
And God’s sovereign purpose, Athenagoras contends, cannot 
be defeated. It is, he insists, impossible not to exist. Therefore 
all men must live forever—good and evil, happy and miserable. 
He thrice states this in chapter twelve:
“For nothing that is endowed with reason and judgment has been 
created, or is created, for the use of another, whether greater or less than 
itself, but for the sake of the life and continuance of the being itself so 
created. . . . According to the view which more nearly touches the beings 
created, He made him [man] for the sake of the life of those created, which 
is not kindled for a little while and then extinguished.” 11
And again—
“Since this cause [of man’s creation] is seen to lie in perpetual exist­
ence, the being so created must be preserved for ever doing and ex­
periencing what is suitable to its nature.” 12
2. D
ua
l Pr
em
ise fo
r Et
er
n
a
l Exist
en
ce.—In presenting 
his position on the unlimited perpetuity of human existence, 
which he does as a matter of mere philosophical ethical prin­
ciple, Athenagoras builds his whole argument on two premises:
(1) God’s objective in bestowing such existence, and (2) the 
right employment of the rational nature by those who have 
received it. Eternity of bliss is for those who have employed 
their nature in accordance with the divine purpose in bestowing 
life upon them.
Athenagoras does not, at this stage, dilate on the term 
of future existence in store for the wicked. He says nothing 
here about their destruction, nor does he discuss either eternity 
of suffering or ultimate restoration. The germ of such a theory 
appeared in his Plea but was not developed.
3. G
ist o
f t
h
e R
esur
r
ect
ion A
r
g
u
m
en
t.—In his treatise 
on The Resurrection of the Dead (chapter ten) Athenagoras 
asserts that the resurrection in general is highly advantageous
11 Athenagoras, The Resurrection of the Dead, chap. 12, in ANF, vol. 2, p. 155. (Italics 
supplied.)
12 Ibid. (Italics supplied.)
938
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
to man. In chapter twelve the resurrection change in our being 
is for the better—nothing can occur to man that would be 
sufficient reason for his ceasing to be; his life is a proper end, 
therefore it should not be consumed and cease to be. Chapter 
thirteen holds that the resurrection effects a continuity of exist­
ence, and is just as much in accord with reason as the fact that 
man should exist at all.
In chapter nineteen it is claimed that the wicked must be 
punished in another life, for this life is too short and limited 
for a just recompense. And in chapter twenty-five each individ­
ual must be judged for himself, and rewarded or punished 
according to the good or evil done in this life. Thus the hope 
of the future is all vested in the resurrection. That Athenagoras 
places all hope of a future life on the resurrection is evident 
from these two excerpts:
“The cause of his [man’s] creation [the Creator’s “purpose” and the 
nature that man received] is a pledge of his continuance for ever, and 
this continuance is a pledge of the resurrection, without which man could 
not continue.” 18
“But it is impossible for him to continue unless he rise again. For if no 
resurrection were to take place, the nature of men as men would not 
continue.”14
4. 
Resurrected Bodies Will Be Incorruptible.—In his 
argument Athenagoras contends that a resurrection is not “im­
possible for God.” And in chapter three (“He Who Could 
Create, Can Also Raise Up the Dead”) he states:
“That same power can reunite what is dissolved, and raise up what 
is prostrate, and restore the dead to life again, and put the corruptible into 
a state of incorruptible.” 15
Throughout several chapters he holds that the resurrection 
body differs from the present in that it will be incorruptible, 
and he maintains that God can and will “raise up and bring 
together again a body which has been dissolved,” and make it 
“not liable to corruption.” 16
FIRST ECCLESIASTIC TO ASSERT INNATE IMMORTALITY 939
5. Destined for “Perpetual Duration,” Not Final Ex­
tinction.—In chapter twelve Athenagoras presses the argument 
for the resurrection, namely, “The Purpose Contemplated in 
Man’s Creation.” He was not created “at random,” but “for 
the sake of life and continuance of the being itself so created.” 17 
God made man “in pursuance of the goodness and wisdom 
which are conspicuous throughout the creation.” And Athenag­
oras adds that God did not make man to be “kindled for a 
little while and then extinguished.” 18 Men were brought into 
being for “perpetual duration.” Thus:
“To those who bear upon them the image of the Creator Himself, and 
are endowed with understanding, and blessed with a rational judgment, 
the Creator has assigned perpetual duration, in order that, recognising their 
own Maker, and His power and skill, and obeying law and justice, they 
may pass their whole existence free from suffering, in the possession of 
those qualities with which they have bravely borne their preceding life, 
although they lived in corruptible and earthly bodies.” 19
6. Unceasing Existence Forestalls Ultimate Annihila­
tion.—This being the purpose of man’s perpetual existence, 
ultimate annihilation is consequently unthinkable:
“That which was created for the very purpose of existing and living a 
life naturally suited to it, since the cause itself [of its existence] is bound 
up with its nature, and is recognised only in connection with existence 
itself, can never admit of any cause which shall utterly annihilate its exist­
ence. But since this cause is seen to lie in perpetual existence, the being so 
created must be preserved for ever, doing and experiencing what is suitable 
to its nature.” 20
Then he adds: “For the resurrection is a species of change, 
and the last of all, and a change for the better of what still 
remains in existence at that time.” 21
7. Pledged Continuance of “Being in Immortality.”— 
So in our “present state of existence” we “steadfastly hope for 
a continuance of being in immortality,” for Athenagoras con­
tends that He who “fashioned us,” “made man of an immortal
17 Ibid., chap. 12, p. 155. 
« Ibid.
18 Ibid. (Italics supplied.)
20 Ibid. (Italics supplied.)
21 Ibid.
940
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
soul and a body, and furnished him with understanding and 
an innate law” 22 suited to ‘‘intelligent existence,” that he might 
‘‘continue always” in such contemplation. Then he adds:
“The cause of his [man’s] creation is a pledge of his continuance for 
ever, and this continuance is a pledge of the resurrection, without which 
man could not continue. So that, from what has been said, it is quite clear 
that the resurrection is plainly proved by the cause of man’s creation, and 
the purpose of Him who made him.” 23
8. Man: An Immortal Soul in a Perishable Body.— 
Having dealt with ‘‘the purpose of God in forming men,” 
Athenagoras now comes, in chapter fifteen, to the ‘‘nature of 
the men created.” On this he explicitly declares:
“The whole nature of men in general is composed of an immortal 
soul and a body which was fitted to it in the creation, and if neither to the 
nature of the soul by itself, nor to the nature of the body separately, has 
God assigned such a creation or such a life and entire course of existence 
as this, but to men compounded of the two, in order that they may, when 
they have passed through their present existence, arrive at one common 
end, with the same elements of which they are composed at their birth and 
during life, it unavoidably follows, since one living-being is formed from 
the two.” 24
So the term ‘‘immortal soul” is now established. And 
Athenagoras is the first Christian to use it. It was an epochal 
development.
9. Resurrection Imperative So Body-Soul May Con­
tinue Forever.—Thus Athenagoras builds up an entire inte­
grated series—man’s creation, nature, life, doings, sufferings, 
existence—and the ‘‘end” suited to his nature, which makes it 
the same as its constitution. Thus: “The parts dissolved [in 
death] are again united for the constitution of the being.”25 
Then he reiterates:
“Man, therefore, who consists of the two parts, must continue for ever. 
But it is impossible for him to continue unless he rise again. For if no
22 Ibid., pp. 155, 156. (Italics supplied.) Previously stated in Plea, chap. 27, in ANF, 
vol. 2, p. 143.
23 Athenagoras, Resurrection, chap. 13, in ANF, vol. 2, p. 156.
2< Ibid., chap- 15, P- 157.
28 Ibid.
FIRST ECCLESIASTIC TO ASSERT INNATE IMMORTALITY 941
resurrection were to take place, the nature of men as men would not 
continue.” 29
10. Continuity of Being Interrupted by Death.—In 
chapter sixteen Athenagoras introduces death as a “sleep.” 
“Life,” he says at the outset, is “a continuance of being which 
is interrupted by death and corruption.” Some “superior 
beings,” like the angels, “are wholly incorruptible and im­
mortal,” and have no interruption. Such are “from the first 
created immortal, and continue to exist without end.” But 
men “have from their first origin an unchangeable continuance, 
but in respect of the body obtain immortality by means of 
change.” This is what is meant by the “doctrine of the resur­
rection.” 27 That is why “we both await the dissolution of the 
body, as the sequel to a life of want and corruption, and after 
this we hope for a continuance with immortality.” 28
11. “Sleep” of Death Involves Blackout of Conscious­
ness.—Athenagoras introduces this interesting analogy of death 
and sleep, calling “sleep the brother of death”:
“Although the relaxation of the senses and of the physical powers, 
which naturally takes place in sleep, seems to interrupt the sensational life 
when men sleep at equal intervals of time, and, as it were, come back to 
life again, yet we do not refuse to call it life; and for this reason, I suppose, 
some call sleep the brother of death.” 28
Then follows this statement of unconsciousness common 
to both death and sleep:
“Those who are dead and those who sleep are subject to similar states, 
as regards at least the stillness and the absence of all sense of the present 
or the past, or rather of existence itself and their own life.” 30
So the continuity of life, followed by the dissolution of 
death, “involves the resurrection,” although suffering is inter­
rupted for a time.
12. Reunion of Body and Soul Necessary for Recom­
pense.—In chapter eighteen man is recognized as clearly ac-
“ ibid.
21 Ibid., chap. 16, p. 157.
» Ibid.
29 Ibid., p. 158.
a" Ibid.
942
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
countable to his God and Maker, for “all created things require 
the attention of the Creator.” Man is “accountable for all his 
actions, and receives for them either reward or punishment.” 
But after the period of dissolution, when the soul is separated 
from the body, which no longer retains “the remembrance of 
its actions,” soul and body will be “again united,” to “receive 
what . . . has been done by the body, whether good or evil.” 31 
Passing over those who expect to “eat and drink, for to-morrow 
we die,” with life to terminate in “utter insensibility,” Athenag- 
oras observes that our present moral nature could not in this 
life bear “a punishment commensurate” with sin, for death 
“prevents the deserved punishment,” that is, “a penalty ade­
quate to these crimes.” 33
13. 
M
a
n’s Pu
n
ish
m
en
t N
ot Assigned t
o Soul A
l
o
n
e.—In 
chapter twenty Athenagoras maintains that “Man Must Be 
Possessed Both of a Body and Soul Hereafter, That the Judg­
ment Passed Upon Him May Be Just.” 33 Recognizing the cor­
ruptibility of the body with only two possibilities regarding 
the soul, he says:
“Either death is the entire extinction of life, the soul being dissolved 
and corrupted along with the body, or the soul remains by itself, incapable 
of dissolution, of dispersion, of corruption, whilst the body is corrupted and 
dissolved, retaining no longer any remembrance of past actions, nor sense 
of what it experienced in connection with the soul.” 34
But, he continues, if life is ultimately to be “utterly extin­
guished,” the logical drift of such life would be into atheism. 
And if the soul alone were to be immortal, no judgment would 
be equitable.35 Punishment must be for the sins done in the 
body. The same principle would be true of the body alone. 
But, according to chapter twenty-one, “the life of man is one, 
though composed of the two.”36 Then he adds, in chapter 
twenty-two, that it is absurd that “reward or punishment . . . 
should be assigned to the soul alone.” 37 And he refers again,
® Ibid., chap. 18, p. 159. 
38 Ibid.
33 Ibid., chap. 19, pp. 159, 160. 
33 Ibid., chap. 21, p. 160.
33 Ibid., chap. 20, p. 160. 
37 Ibid., chap. 22, p. 161.
“ Ibid.
FIRST ECCLESIASTIC TO ASSERT INNATE IMMORTALITY 943
at the close of chapter twenty-four, to “men possessed of an 
immortal soul and rational judgment.” 33
14. R
econst
it
ut
ion o
f Body and Soul Into Sa
m
e Bein
g. 
—In the concluding chapter (twenty-five), Athenagoras once 
more reiterates that man is a dual being, composed of two parts 
in this present life. But “the man cannot be said to exist when 
the body is dissolved.”38 Then comes 
his summarizing 
declaration:
“It is absolutely necessary that the end of a man’s being should appear 
in some reconstitution of the two together, and of the same living being. 
And as this follows of necessity, there must by all means be a resurrection 
of the bodies which are dead, or even entirely dissolved, and the same men 
must be formed anew, since the law of nature ordains die end not absolutely, 
nor as the end of any men whatsoever, but of the same men who passed 
through the previous life; but it is impossible for the same men to be 
reconstituted unless the same bodies are restored to the same souls." 10
15. T
hose Fa
il
ing G
od’s O
bject
iv
e Are Punished Pr
o­
po
r
t
io
n
a
t
el
y.—Thus, in the end, the “intelligent life and 
rational judgment” of the reconstituted man will “delight un­
ceasingly in the contemplation of Him who is”—the eternal 
God. But that “large number of those who fail of the end 
that belongs to them does not make void the common lot, 
since the examination relates to the individual and the reward 
or punishment of lives ill or well spent, is proportionate to 
the merit of each.” 41
16. D
enies U
l
t
im
a
t
e A
n
n
ih
il
a
t
io
n 
fo
r t
h
e W
icked.—
 
Athenagoras does not directly discuss the ultimate fate of the 
lost, nor does he indicate whether all will ultimately be 
saved. That is left for Tertullian and his school to declare, 
and for Augustine to climax. Nor does he consider Restora- 
tionism. That is left for Origen and those who follow him. 
But Athenagoras denies the ultimate annihilation of the 
wicked. And the body will share in man’s eternal destiny. 
In this he veers away from Plato, who claims immortality only
» Ibid., chap. 24, p. 162.
» Ibid., chap. 25, p. 162.
« Ibid.
« Ibid.
944
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
for the soul. Plato taught a natural and unconditional immor­
tality of the soul, and dealt with physical and metaphysical 
factors. Athenagoras deals with moral, practical, and circum­
stantial elements. But the trend was now clearly set.
17. 
Disregards and Repudiates the Biblical 
“Perish.” 
—Attention must be called to Athenagoras’ use of the Greek 
word for “perish.” He excelled in Greek, and knew well its 
meaning. Thus in one place he describes the Epicurean doc­
trine of annihilation of body and soul by saying that they 
maintained they are to “perish.” In another place he says it 
has the same meaning as “annihilate.” In a third he contrasts 
that which is perishable with that which is eternal. And in 
still another he describes the Stoic doctrine (that all things 
will one day come to an end) by saying they teach that they 
will perish.42
How then did Athenagoras use the term perish when he 
speaks of both just and unjust? He simply denies that the term 
can be applied to either class. He says that if the unjust were 
to perish, it would be equivalent to saying they would be 
annihilated—a Latin word (annihilatus) meaning “destroyed,” 
or “brought to nothing.” Accordingly, he boldly says of the 
unjust as well as the just, “God has not made us . . . that we 
should perish and be annihilated.” 43 Yet the Word repeatedly 
says the wicked will “perish”—and Athenagoras knew the 
meaning of his own Greek. He therefore flatly contradicted 
and abandoned the platform of Scripture in introducing his 
novel doctrine of eternal life in hell, even if not expressly stated.
IV. Logical Demands of Athenagoras' Reasoning
His was pre-eminently a rationalistic deduction. Thus: The 
wicked must be miserable forever, because they must live 
forever. And they must live forever because God made them
42 Athenagoras, Plea for the Christians, chaps. 36, 31, 4, 22, in ANF, vol. 2, pp. 147, 
148, 146, 131, 140.
« Ibid., chap. 31, p. 146.
FIRST ECCLESIASTIC TO ASSERT INNATE IMMORTALITY 945
for the purpose of living. Athenagoras does not advance one 
text in support—only Plato’s sonorous phrasings. With his 
master he takes his position immovably on the platform that 
the soul is intrinsically immortal. It must continue to live. It 
was made immortal at creation, and cannot be subjected to 
death, for it was, and is, and always will be incorruptible. That 
was his tangent argument. And this was written about a.d. 178.
But Athenagoras added to his master’s theory. Plato, as 
a pagan, dropped the body altogether at death—as a clog, 
prison, and curse to the soul. But Athenagoras as a Christian 
was compelled to advance a new or added line of reasoning. 
To him the body is, indeed, an essential part of man. The 
body, originally created to be immortal, became mortal through 
Adam’s sin. But Athenagoras held that at the resurrection the 
bodies of all—wicked as ivell as righteous—will reassume their 
original immortality. Paul’s description of the resurrection of 
the just, the glorious, immortalized change of their natural 
bodies to fit them for eternal life, is by Athenagoras now applied 
to describe as well the resurrection of the unjust. “The mortal 
body must put on immortality and incorruption if it is to 
endure an eternity of pain.”
If Athenagoras’ reasoning on the inevitability of God’s pur­
pose had been followed to its ultimate, it would have led him 
to Origen’s theory of Restorationism, not to Augustine’s dogma 
of Eternal Torment. But, as noted, in Athenagoras’ day the 
notion of a restoration from Hell had not yet been developed. 
The time had not yet come—not until the human mind was 
compelled to seek refuge in it from the horrors of Eternal 
Torment. Only thus could God’s object in creating man fail 
to be defeated. Moreover, God made man for Himself. So 
Athenagoras said:
“The final cause of an intelligent life and rational judgment, is to be 
occupied uninterruptedly with those objects to which the natural reason 
is chiefly and primarily adapted, and to delight unceasingly in the contem­
plation-of Him who is, and of His decrees.” 44
44 Athenagoras, Resurrection, chap. 25, in ANF, vol. 2, p. 162.
946
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Following this thought through, all men, however fallen, 
must in time be restored, in order logically to answer the end 
for which they were created. Such a consequence was demanded 
by Athenagoras’ principles as verily as the restoration of their 
bodies to immortality, or the eternal existence of the entire 
man. But the clear concept of universal Restorationism did 
not mature for another half century—under the celebrated 
Origen, likewise of Alexandria. But Athenagoras made the 
first epochal break.
CHAPTER 
FIFTY-SIX
Tertullian—Projector of 
Eternal'Torment Corollary
Latin Christianity had its birthplace in Africa. And it was 
there that the three leading lights of Northern Africa—Ter- 
tullian of Carthage, Origen of Alexandria, and Augustine of 
Hippo—brought Platonic Immortal-Soulism to triumph, but 
along sharply divergent paths. Omitting Greek-using Origen 
for the time, let us note the Latin school of North Africa— 
Tertullian, Minucius Felix, Cyprian, and Augustine—charac­
terized by the use of Latin instead of the Greek in which 
Christianity was first promulgated.
These men all shifted from emphasis on Greek metaphysics 
to the overshadowing atmosphere of Roman law. And the 
Latin Fathers, in contrast with the Greek, usually spoke less 
of the essential freedom of the will, and attached greater im­
portance to the necessities of government, both human and 
divine, the foreordination principle in embryo. To the inten­
sive and authoritarian teaching of this group, the dominance 
of the dogma of the Eternal Torment of the wicked is largely 
due.
Carthage, home of Tertullian, was one of the great cities 
of the time, a thriving Christian center, a noted commercial 
center and rival of Rome—and notoriously corrupt. From 
Carthage, 
Christianity 
spread 
out 
over 
all 
proconsular 
Northern Africa. Several councils were held at Carthage, each 
attended by not less than seventy bishops. But Carthage, it 
should be repeated, had little of the speculative spirit of 
Alexandria, home of Origen. And Tertullian was the direct
947
948
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
opposite of Origen, stressing literalism instead of allegorism.
The East, fascinated with subtle questions concerning the 
Trinity and the person of Christ, never concerned itself over­
much with the problems of law, penalty, atonement, pardon, 
and retribution. But the Western school, from Tertullian on­
ward, took its stand on eternal punishment as part of the system 
of law. Thus the foundations of Latin theology were laid, 
through which Augustinianism, as it came to be called, gained 
ascendancy in Europe, later giving rise to Calvinism and the 
systems springing therefrom. So it was in Africa, not Italy; 
at Carthage, not Rome; and from lawyers and rhetoricians, 
rather than speculative philosophers, that the Latin Church 
sprang.
I. Formulation of the Dogma of Endless Torment
Tertullian1 (c. a.d. 160-240), brilliant and versatile of 
mind, and master of the Latin tongue, was born in a heathen 
home at Carthage. He received a liberal Greco-Roman educa­
tion at Rome, including thorough legal training in Roman 
jurisprudence and forensic eloquence, and attained eminence 
as a legal consultant. Returning to Carthage, at about the age 
of forty, he was attracted by the martyr courage and life of 
holiness of the Christians, and embraced the Christian faith 
with all the fiery ardor of his tempestuous temperament. He 
considered that he had passed from darkness to light, and had 
no patience with those who fell short of his ideals, spurning 
any recognized compromise.
Tertullian was first a catechist, then a priest (c. a.d. 192), 
and finally bishop of Carthage. Doubtless he was the most 
conspicuous writer of his time, and the first theologian 
to write in Latin. He was the “great founder” 2 and father of 
Latin theology. Having a legally trained mind, he was able 
to make the Latin tongue, with its characteristic precision,
1 Quintus Septimius Florens Tertullianus, in full.
2 A. Cleveland Coxe, Introductory Note, in ANF, vol. 3, p. 5.
PROJECTOR OF ETERNAL-TORMENT COROLLARY 
949
the language of the church. He put Christian thought into 
Latin, thus laying the foundation upon which Cyprian and 
Augustine built. He prepared the language for the labors of 
Jerome, who brought forth the Latin Vulgate, which placed the 
Western churches on a parity with the East. Thus the Cartha­
ginian School profoundly influenced Christianity for centuries.
A voluminous writer, Tertullian was author of numerous 
apologetic, theological, polemical, and ascetic works in Latin 
and some also in Greek. He was a powerful reasoner and a born 
fighter, being constantly engaged in controversy. He was pre­
eminently the polemicist of his generation. And according to 
Jerome he had a “sharp and vehement temper,” and was the 
fearless champion of Christianity against pagans, Jews, and 
heretics. He had many adversaries—the Monarchians, who de­
nounced his prophetism while he assailed their views on the 
Godhead; the pagans, whose practices he exposed and con­
demned; the Jews, whom he answered; and the Gnostics, 
some of whose views he shared, though repudiating others.
1. 
T
er
t
u
l
l
ia
n’s Espousa
l 
o
f 
M
o
n
t
a
n
ism.—A few years 
after Tertullian became a priest, his views underwent an 
important change. As a reaction against the scandalous laxity 
in the discipline of the Roman Church under Zephyrinus, 
Tertullian’s rigorous and often eccentric views led him first 
to sympathize with and then to espouse the moral austerities 
and enthusiasms of the Montanists.3 He joined them about the 
year 199. It is supposed that he was driven to them by the envy 
and abuse of the Roman clergy.4
Following this lapse, his writings—about sixteen pre- 
Mon tanist and twenty-two Montanist, according to Neander’s 
classification—became more intense, some of them saturated 
with Montanist phraseology. In fact, he was the great theologian 
of the movement, which he called the “New Prophecy,” while
3 Montanism, named after Montanus, arose in Phrygia about 157, and was a reac­
tionary movement against Gnostic influences. The Montanists inclined toward extravagances, 
were strongly ascetic, claimed to be recipients of special revelations, and were intrigued by 
speculation over the last things. They continued until the fifth century.
4 Coxe, loc. cit.
950
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
advocating and systematizing the principles that led to the 
doctrines of celibacy, asceticism, and penance.
The Montanists, it should be added, claimed to be restor­
ing primitive Christianity, whereas the Manichaeans were 
attempting to reconstruct Christianity. The former condemned 
drunkenness, gluttony, and lust. Driven to despair by the laxity 
and drift of the church, they became fanatical in zeal for purity 
and separation, exalting virginity and celibacy as a reformatory 
reaction.
They lived under the vivid impression of the final catas­
trophe of the end of the world, and of the outpouring of the 
Holy Spirit, as manifested in their own prophets and proph­
etesses. They forbade flight in persecution and protested against 
the growing institutionalism and secularism of the church. 
(They were formally condemned by Zephyrinus, bishop of 
Rome.)
2. 
First to Formulate Dogma of Endless Torment.— 
Under Tertullian the smoldering fires of Immortal-Soulism 
blazed out, and its Eternal-Torment corollary was projected. 
He well knew that though the leading Platonic philosophers 
held “the soul to be immortal” the “crowd” derided the notion, 
supposing that nothing will survive after death. And, Tertullian 
observes, sometimes the “wise, too, join with the vulgar crowd 
in their opinion.” Then he adds, “There is nothing after 
death, according to the school of Epicurus. After death all things 
come to an end, even death itself, says Seneca to like effect.” 0 
So Immortal-Soulism was by no means universal among the 
pagans. And it encountered opposition.
Tertullian was apparently the first to formulate the doc­
trine of “traducianism”—the transmission of the soul by propa­
gation from parent to child. To him the soul is “distinct from 
the body” and is intrinsically “immortal.” But more than 
that, it receives “death by punishment in immortality.” And 
it was Tertullian who first affirmed that the torments of the
8 Tertullian, On the Resurrection of the Flesh, chap. 1, in ANF, vol. 3, p. 545.
PROJECTOR OF ETERNAL-TORMENT COROLLARY 
951
lost will be coequal and coexistent with the happiness of the 
saved.9 And he openly declared a relish for their torture. In 
dealing with future punishment he introduced a language 
entirely foreign to Scripture, its source being in this new 
doctrine.
And to sustain it he confessedly altered the sense of Scrip­
ture and the meaning of words, so as to interpret “death” as 
eternal misery, and “destruction” and “consume” as pain and 
anguish. “Hell” became perpetually dying, but never dead. 
In other words, death was simply another phase of endless 
immortal life. It was immortal suffering, without relief by ulti­
mate cessation; perishing, without ever being destroyed; 
slaughtered, but never succumbing to oblivion. It was perma­
nence of life under the death penalty. Tertullian was the first 
to formulate the concept of universal Innate Immortality and 
Endless Torment into a coordinated system.
3. 
Persecution Forms Background of Retributive Tor­
ment.—A tempest of violent persecution broke upon the 
church in the mid-second century. The fires of religious fanati­
cism burst into flame, with imprisonment, torture, and death. 
In this baptism of blood the African Church received her full 
share. Christians were thrown to the wild beasts, and burned 
as human torches. Church assemblies were deprived of their 
places of worship.
This persecution, raging in the reign of Septimius Severus, 
was most active at the height of Tertullian’s career. Tertullian’s 
Apology to the Roman rulers demanded a cessation of the 
persecutions of this martyr age, with equal rights and freedom 
of religion for Christians—the first plea for religious liberty 
as an inalienable right. Here again Tertullian’s legal training 
was observable in its judicial style.
The principles of the gospel, of course, forbade vengeance 
here on earth on the part of Christians. But the vehement
6 Dr. Charles F. Hudson’s masterful survey (Debt and Grace, p. 326) concurs: “He 
was the first, so far as we know, who expressly affirmed, and argued, that the torments of 
the lost would be co-eternal with the happiness of the saved.”
952
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
spirit of Tertullian impelled him to regard the retribution of 
Hell for such, as endless and unmitigated in the world to come. 
Hell would be a hideous field of carnage, a “perpetual 
slaughter” (aeterna occisio). So Tertullian’s fierce, vindictive 
spirit found solace in the contemplated eternal agonies of the 
lost. And within two centuries, under the powerful influence 
of Augustine, Tertullian’s fantastic assertions came to be gener­
ally accepted.
4. Influenced by Stoic “Philosophy” While Rejecting 
Its “Theosophy.”—Tertullian was influenced by the principles 
of Stoic philosophy in its later form, as is seen in his theological 
slant, though he had no patience with Gnostic theosophy. 
And he was the first Christian writer in whom both Gnostic 
principles and Roman law appear together as determining ele­
ments. He held a dualistic concept of opposing principles—light 
and darkness, life and death, animate and inanimate, through 
all eternity—holding evil to be an eternal fact and a philosophic 
necessity, much like the Dualism of Manes of Persia.
5. Characteristics of His Diversified Writings.—As to 
Tertullian’s diversified writings, genius is stamped upon his 
works. In his Apologeticus (Defense of Christianity), about a.d. 
197, addressed to the Roman officials, he maintains that Chris­
tians are good citizens, refusing divine honors to the emperor 
because they are monotheists. His polemical treatise, De 
Praescriptione Haereticum 
(Prescription Against Heretics), 
sets forth the Catholic principles of tradition and authority. 
Here he denies to all heretics the right to interpret Scripture. 
The Bible, he holds, is the possession of the church, to whom 
alone truth is handed down in succession from Christ and the 
apostles.7
His De Anima (A Treatise on the Soul) presents Ter­
tullian’s speculations on the origin, nature, and destiny of the
7 Bishop Bull observes that Tertullian’s works, after he became a Montanist, were not 
in defense of Montanism as against the church, but rather in defense of the common doctrines 
of the church and of Montanism, in opposition to all other heretics. (Cited by Coxe, Intro­
ductory Note, in ANF, vol. 3, p. 240.)
human soul. He maintains a certain corporeity of the soul— 
without appeal to, and in conflict with, Holy Scripture, and 
sometimes clashing with Plato. And his work, De Resurrectione 
Came (On the Resurrection of the Flesh, c. a.d. 208), intended 
as a confutation of the heresy that denied the resurrection of 
the body, maintains his theory of Immortal-Soulism and Endless 
Torment in all its baldness. These two works are vital to our 
quest.
Thus Tertullian’s capitalization upon the Platonic dogma 
of universal Innate Immortality gave tremendous impetus to 
the horrific doctrine of punishment as “eternal life in hell.” 
Tertullian, with his vivid imagination, became its great initial, 
third-century advocate. And despite his Montanist defection, 
and despite his strange hallucinations, he left a lasting immor­
tality impress upon the church of all succeeding centuries. 
He pushed Immortal-Soulism forward with a power far sur­
passing Athenagoras, who spearheaded it.
6. 
St
il
l H
eld t
o M
a
jo
r Pr
o
ph
et
ic O
u
t
l
in
e.—Strangely 
enough, Tertullian remained a rather remarkable expositor of 
Bible prophecy, holding that Christ is the “stone” that is to 
smite the symbolic image (of Daniel 2) of the nations.8 The 
appearance of the Antichrist, or Beast, and Man of Sin, was, 
he held, drawing near. Rome’s continuance delayed Antichrist’s 
appearance,9 and 
“Babylon” 
symbolized 
Rome.10 
Rome’s 
breakup would be the signal for the terrors of the end,11 with 
the millennium following the resurrection of the dead.12 (For 
a comprehensive account of Tertullian’s interpretation of 
the outline prophecies, see L. E. Froom, Prophetic Faith, vol­
ume 1, pages 256-260.)
And Tertullian still held to the two advents,13 with the 
resurrection at the Second Advent, not at death.11
PROJECTOR OF ETERNAL-TORMENT COROLLARY 
953
8 Tertullian, Against Marcion, book 3, chap.. 7, in ANF, vol. 3, p. 326.
9 Tertullian, On the Resurrection of the Flesh, chap. 
24. in ANF, vol. 3, p. 563.
10 Tertullian, An Answer to the Jews, chap. 9, in ANF, vol. 3, p. 162.
u Tertullian, Apology, chap. 32. in ANF, vol. 3, pp. 42, 43.
12 Tertullian, Against Marcion, book 3, chap. 35, in ANF, vol. 3, pp. 342, 343.
13 Tertullian, Apology, chap. 21, in ANF, vol. 3, p. 35.
14 Tertullian, On the Resurrection of the Flesh, chap. 
22, in ANF, vol. 3, pp. 560, 561.
954
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
II. Threefold Basis of “Eternal Life in Hell” Postulate
The theory of “eternal life in hell” received maximum 
power and force under the weight and influence of Tertullian, 
unprecedented advocate of the underlying dogma of universal 
Innate Immortality. He now stood in the forefront as the out­
spoken champion of these twin dogmas. Let us now note the 
basis of his contentions.
1. Three Axioms Underlying Eternal-Torment Postu­
late.—Three great axioms or principles, undergirded Tertul- 
lian’s entire teaching on future punishment. The first two were 
philosophical dogmas, without any pretense of support from 
Scripture. The third was allegedly, but fallaciously, drawn 
from Scripture. Specifically, these were: (1) The indefeasible 
immortality of all souls; (2) the presumptive distinction be­
tween “divine” and “common” fire in the punishment of the 
wicked; and (3) the devious turn given to such Bible terms 
as “destroy,” “consume,” “unquenchable.” Let us now examine 
the grounds upon which they were based, the arguments used 
to support them, and the conclusions to which Tertullian was 
led. They are vital to his thesis.
2. Invokes Plato in Affirming Immortal-Soulism.—As 
to the first premise, Tertullian held as strongly as Plato to the 
inalienable immortality of the soul.
It is to be particularly noted that all Christian Fathers 
who use this “immortal soul” phrase or thought were not only 
familiar with but likewise in accord with this position in the 
writings of Plato. And it is also to be observed that none of 
such early Christian writers ever sought for support for this 
doctrine by primary appeal to Scripture, but had recourse 
instead to arguments similar to those used by Plato. Thus 
Tertullian invokes Plato by name, both for term and teaching. 
In two separate treatises Tertullian links his position insepara­
bly to that of Plato, resting on him for support. Thus:
“Some things are known even by nature: the immortality of the soul,
PROJECTOR OF ETERNAL-TORMENT COROLLARY 
955
for instance, is held by many; the knowledge of our God is possessed by all. 
I may use, therefore, the opinion of a Plato, when he declares, ‘Every soul 
is immortal.’ ”1B
3. Rejects Plato’s Pre-existence Contention.—How­
ever, Tertullian as a Christian rejects Plato’s pre-existence 
contention—that souls are unborn and uncreated, and thus 
have existed from all eternity. Instead, Tertullian holds that 
they were created “substances,” having a beginning in time, 
thus again showing his familiarity with Plato’s teachings, to 
which he alludes:
“For when we acknowledge that the soul originates in the breath of 
God, it follows that we attribute a beginning to it. This Plato, indeed, 
refuses to assign to it, for he will have the soul to be unborn and 
unmade.” 16
But Tertullian remains in firm agreement with Plato by 
name, on the main point, when he asserts further: “It is essential 
to a firm faith to declare with Plato that the soul is simple; 
in other words uniform and uncompounded.” 17
But having once been born or created, the soul thenceforth, 
he contends, possesses a life of which it cannot be deprived. 
Its continued existence is like that of God. So Plato’s dogma, 
“ ‘Every soul is immortal/ ” 18 became Tertullian’s basic premise 
from which he never deviated. The “soul” could not die or 
cease to exist. Fallen or unfallen, righteous or wicked, redeemed 
or reprobate, it possessed an immortal life.
4. Definitive Declaration of Soul’s Origin.—This Im- 
mortal-Soul postulate Tertullian sought to sustain, without 
knowledge of the Hebrew, from the Biblical account of the crea­
tion of man in Genesis 2:7, holding that immortality is expressed 
by man’s becoming a “living soul.” (He failed to note, however, 
that the expression was likewise applied to the lower creatures 
in Genesis 1:20, 21, which neutralized his argument.) But he 
relied on the expression “God . . . breathed into his nostrils
15 Ibid., chap. 3, p. 547. (Italics supplied.)
16 Tertullian, A Treatise on the Soul, chap. 4, in ANF, vol. 3, p. 184.
17 Ibid., chap. 10, p. 189.
18 Tertullian, On the Resurrection, chap. 3, quoted in ANF, vol. 3, p. 547. (Italics
supplied.)
956
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
the breath of life,” drawing inconsistent deductions therefrom.
5. Tertullian’s Definition of the Soul.—And now we 
come to Tertullian’s amazingly definitive description of the 
soul:
“The soul, then, we define to be sprung from the breath of God, im­
mortal, possessing body, having form, simple in its substance, intelligent 
in its own nature, developing its power in various ways, free in its determi­
nations, subject to the changes of accident, in its faculties mutable [subject 
to change], rational, supreme, endued with an instinct of presentiment, 
evolved out of one (archetypal) soul.” 19
This “breath of God” concept appears in five places, in as 
many chapters (3, 4, 7, 9, 11). It was not, therefore, an 
inadvertent use.
Tertullian thus assumed the soul to have been made, or 
created, out of some part of God—His breath—and hence 
immortal. Yet he immediately declares it subject to “changes 
of accident” and “in its faculties mutable.” And in order to 
disagree with him, Tertullian cites Plato’s amazingly elaborated 
philosophic opinion that “the soul is immortal, incorruptible, 
incorporeal, . . . invisible, incapable of delineation, uniform, 
supreme, rational, and intellectual.” Little wonder that Ter­
tullian immediately adds, “What more could he [Plato] 
attribute to the soul, if he wanted to call it God?” 20
6. Conglomeration Leads Into Hopeless Perplexity.— 
Tertullian hastens to make this differentiation between the 
soul and God:
“We . . . who allow no appendage to God (in the sense of equality), 
by this very fact reckon the soul as very far below God; for we suppose it 
to be born, and hereby to possess something of a diluted Divinity, and an 
attenuated felicity, as the breath (of God), though not His spirit; and 
although immortal, as this is an attribute of divinity, yet for all that pas­
sible, since this is an incident of a born condition, and consequently from 
the first capable of deviation from perfection and right.” 21
In this Treatise on the Soul Tertullian not only contends
18 Tertullian, A Treatise on the Soul, chap. 22, in ANF, vol. 3, p. 202. (Italics supplied.) 
» Ibid., chap. 24, in ANF, vol. 3, p. 203.
21 Ibid.
that “the soul is the breath, or afflatus of God” (chaps. 3, 4, 11), 
but asserts its “immortality” (chaps. 2-4, 6, 9, 14; also 24, 38, 
45, 51, 53, 54); illustrates its “corporeity” (chaps. 5-8); its 
“endowment with form or figure” (chap. 9); its “simplicity in 
substance” (chaps. 10, 11); and its “inherent intelligence” 
(chap. 12). Its “rationality” “supremacy” and “instinctive 
divination” are treated in his De Anima. Such is Tertullian’s 
detailed concept of the soul.22
This effort to combine human philosophy and divine truth 
led Tertullian into hopeless perplexity. His philosophic theol­
ogy was but “emasculated Platonism,” as Constable aptly calls 
it.23 The soul is Godlike, but in its “mutability” it is like any 
other creature of time. Notwithstanding, man, Tertullian main­
tains, is possessed of an immortality akin to that of God, and 
in itself is part of the divine substance.24
7. 
Drew 
Supplemental 
Support 
From 
Montanist 
“Visions.”—But in addition to the two philosophical and the 
one “Biblical” argument for the soul’s Innate Immortality, 
Tertullian claimed to have supernatural support in the form 
of personal revelations through the prophetic gift—“We too 
have merited the attainment of the prophetic gift.” And he also 
produced the substantiating testimony of a second witness, 
a Montanist sister, “whose lot it has been to be favoured with 
sundry gifts of revelation,” and who had seen “visions” of an 
immortal soul.25
On the strength of these combined reasons and “revela­
tions,” Tertullian expounded the mystery of the character­
istics and qualities of the soul, as a “corporeal substance.” 28 
And he attributed to it “form and limitation,” together 
with that “triad of dimensions” (“length, and breadth, and 
height”), as well as “colour,” “substance,” “eyes,” “ears,” “a 
finger,” “bosom,” and “a tongue,” and other members! But
PROJECTOR OF ETERNAL-TORMENT COROLLARY 
957
22 Ibid., p. 202, note 9.
23 Constable, op. cit., p. 206.
24 Tertullian, Against Marcion, book 2, chap. 5, in ANF, vol. 3, p. 801.
25 Tertullian, A Treatise on the Soul, chap. 9, in ANF, vol. 3, p. 188.
23 Ibid.
958
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
he still insisted that the possession of these does not militate 
against the soul’s immortality. As to the “sister’s” revelation 
Tertullian said:
"After the people are dismissed at the conclusion of the sacred services, 
she is in the regular habit of reporting to us whatever things she may have 
seen in vision. . . . ‘Amongst other things,’ says she, ‘there has been shown 
to me a soul in bodily shape, and a spirit has been in the habit of appear­
ing to me; not, however, a void and empty illusion, but such as would 
offer itself to be even grasped by the hand, soft and transparent and of an 
etherial colour, and in form resembling that of a human being in every 
respect.’ This was her vision, and for her witness there was God.” 27
Amazing indeed 1
Such was Tertullian’s argument and belief on the “immor­
tality of the soul,” and the grounds thereof.
21 Ibid.
CHAPTER 
FIFTY-SEVEN
Tertullian Holds Wicked Ever 
Burn but Never Consume
I. Mystic Everlasting Fire That Never Consumes Victims
We have noted that there were two philosophical argu­
ments that carried Tertullian on into this theory of Endless 
Torment for the wicked. The first we have already surveyed— 
that the wicked are in Hell but cannot die there because the 
soul is immortal. The second argument concerns the body, 
which the eternal fire of Hell cannot consume, for in the very 
act of burning it repairs and endlessly sustains what it consumes. 
Such is Tertullian’s “fire of hell,” in which the body will 
scorch in pain and agony through all eternity. Observe the 
course of argument.
1. 
Nonconsuming Fire Causes Endless Torture.—In 
order to explain how the flames of Hell will sear the wicked 
perpetually, without ever devouring them, Tertullian has re­
course to the second philosophical notion, likewise borrowed 
from paganism—that of a special form of fire, a “secret,” or 
“divine,” fire, that though it burns does not consume, but 
repairs, reproduces, and restores while it consumes. Thus his 
doctrine of eternal punishment is inseparably tied in with the 
pagan idea of ignis sapiens. Observe the setting of his statement. 
He first refers to the “immeasurable ages of eternity.” And 
while the saints are, of course, saved forever throughout this 
eternity, the wicked are—
"consigned to the punishment of everlasting fire—that fire which, from its
959
960
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
very nature indeed, directly ministers to their incorruptibility.1 The 
philosophers are familiar as well as we with the distinction between a com­
mon and a secret fire. Thus that which is in common use is far different 
from that which we see in divine judgments . . . for it does not consume 
what it scorches, but while it burns it repairs.” 2
Thus the “philosophers” are again invoked in this second 
philosophical argument, and this “secret fire,” shared with 
them, is defined as being—
“the ‘fire eternal!’ a notable example of the endless judgment which still 
supplies punishment with fuel! . . . How will it be with the wicked and 
the enemies of God?” s
So this all stemmed from eternal fire and eternal destruc­
tion combined with the error that the soul is eternal and 
indestructible.
2. 
Exults Over Eternal Torment of Persecutors.—The 
horrors of this Eternal Torment are vividly portrayed, and 
Tertullian’s own satisfaction over their recompense is unabash­
edly set forth. In De Spectaculis (The Shows) Tertullian de­
scribes the “spectacle”—the “fast-approaching advent . . . the 
glory of the rising saints! . . . the kingdom of the just . . . that 
last day judgment with its everlasting issues . . . the world 
. 
. . consumed in one great flame.” * And now:
“How vast a spectacle then bursts upon the eye! What there excites my 
admiration? what my derision? Which sight gives me joy? which arouses me 
to exultation?—as I see so many illustrious monarchs, whose reception into 
the heavens was publicly announced, groaning now in the lowest darkness 
with great Jove [Jupiter or Zeus]5 himself, and those, too, who bore witness 
of their exultation; governors of provinces, too, who persecuted the Chris­
tian name, in fires more fierce than those with which in the days of their 
pride they raged against the followers of Christ. What world’s wise men 
besides the very philosophers, in fact, who taught their followers that God 
had no concern in ought that is sublunary, and were wont to assure them 
that either they had no souls, or that they would never return to the bodies 
which at death they had left, now covered with shame before the poor 
deluded ones, as one fire consumes them!”8
1 The question of the “incorruptibility” of the wicked will be noted separately. See 
pages 962, 963.
2 Tertullian, Apology, chap. 48, in ANF, vol. 3, p. 54.
3 Ibid.
4 Tertullian, The Shows, chap. 30, in ANF, vol. 3, p. 91.
5 Supreme deity of Greek ana Roman mythology, lord of the heaven.
9 Ibid.
And to these he adds “poets,” “tragedians,” “actors,” “the 
charioteer,” “the wrestlers,” “tossing in the fiery billows,” 
“those whose fury vented itself against the Lord.”
Charity demands that we remember Tertullian lived in 
an age of cruelty without pity, of heathen games, with blood 
gushing from the gladiator’s wounds, and above all, an age of 
pitiless pagan persecution—with Christians cast to the wild 
beasts and burned as human torches. All this was reflected in 
Tertullian’s stern concept of eternal life in Hell for such 
tormentors, as he exults over pagan persecutors now groaning 
in the hottest fires of Hell! Such was his cruel creed. Henry 
Constable made this searching comment back in 188G:
“The devouring flame supplies its inexhaustible fuel! Roaring, crack­
ling, raging, scorching, paining, in the lurid vaults of hell, it supplies the 
bones, and marrow, and blood, and flesh, round which it roars, and crackles, 
and rages, with a noise as loud as the shrieks and wailings of the damned. 
Such was the philosophical theory which forced Tertullian to his view of 
future punishment. Men now laugh at the philosophical dogma. [But] they 
accept the diabolical conclusion which was based upon it!”7
One cannot read Tertullian’s treatises and compare them 
with the earlier Christian writings without sensing the fact that 
it was Tertullian who gathered up the scattered ideas and gave 
force and prevalence to these new and revolutionary views—the 
Innate Immortality of all souls, now coupled with the Endless 
Torment of the wicked.
3. 
Eternity of Sin Involved in Monstrous Concept.— 
Tertullian’s description of the eternal anguish of the damned 
surpassed any and all predecessors. He drew no veil of mercy 
over their agony. The pain of endless dying was brought out 
with terrible vividness. The cruelty of the age was clearly 
reflected in Tetullian’s horrific postulate. And God was made 
the author of it all! Omnipotence was made to put forth His 
power to stay any mitigations and prevent any escape. Forever 
and ever! Millions and billions of years, and yet no nearer to its 
close. Endless cries, ceaseless groans, interminable despair.
WICKED EVER BURN BUT NEVER CONSUME 
961
7 Constable, op. cit., p. 209.
31
962
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
That is but Manichaean Dualism—the eternal principle 
of evil coexistent with the eternal principle of good. Such a 
monstrous concept turns the God of love into a fiendish 
torturer who would be eternally cursed by His innumerable 
victims. If that were true, then pity, horror, anguish, and 
revulsion would fill every celestial breast, since sin would be 
perpetuated forevermore.
II. Alters Basic Scripture Intent to Sustain “Torment” Theory
We have seen how the two philosophical arguments—the 
concept of the Innate Immortality of all souls and the figment 
of a divine, or secret, fire—were put forward by Tertullian 
to establish the postulate of the eternal punishing of the wicked. 
And this involved a terminology totally at variance with Scrip­
ture. But even more serious, in his Biblical argument the plain 
intent of the explicit declarations of Scripture pertaining to the 
doom of the lost was systematically altered, and sometimes 
reversed in meaning. And a turn was given that was not only 
foreign, but utterly opposed, to the intent of Holy Scripture.
This opened the way for scholars across the centuries 
to level against Tertullian the grave charge of manipulating 
Scripture to sustain his theory of the universal immortality of 
all souls and the Endless Torment of the eternally damned. 
As a consequence, he has often been accused of deliberately 
perverting the plain intent of Scripture ideology concerning 
life, death, and destiny, in order to justify his philosophical 
notions.
1. 
“Incorruption” Misapplied to Wicked in Hell.—For 
example, Tertullian speaks of the “incorruptibility” of the 
wicked,8 body and soul, in Hell, whereas Scripture confines 
both the term and the state of “incorruption” to the immortal­
ized saints. “Incorruptibility” is primarily a Pauline term—
8 Tertullian, Apology, chap. 48, in ANF, vol. 3, p. 54.
WICKED EVER BURN BUT NEVER CONSUME 
963
appearing five times, as concerns man, in First Corinthians:
(1) We strive for an “incorruptible” crown (1 Cor. 9:25).
(2) The corruptible bodies of the saints are to be raised in 
“incorruption” (1 Cor. 15:42).
(3) Corruption does not inherit “incorruption” (v. 50).
(4) “This corruptible must put on incorruption,” when we 
are immortalized (v. 53).
(5) When “incorruption” shall have been put on, death is 
swallowed up (v. 54).
The term is also applied by Paul to the “uncorruptible 
God” (Rom. 1:23), “who only hath immortality” (1 Tim. 6:16).
Peter also writes of an “inheritance incorruptible” that 
is reserved for us (1 Peter 1:4). It is connected with the “resur­
rection” (v. 3).
It is to be revealed in the “last time” (v. 5).
And it is only for those “born again” of “incorruptible” 
seed (v. 23).
2. 
“Immortality” Wrongly Applied to Wicked.—Fur­
ther, in his works on the Soul and the Resurrection, Tertullian 
repeatedly speaks of the natural immortality of the incorrigibly 
wicked as verily as of the resurrection of the righteous, whereas 
Scripture says that God “only hath immortality” (1 Tim. 6:16), 
and that the saints must “put on” immortality at the resurrec­
tion and the Second Advent (1 Cor. 15:53). And Tertullian
fantastically asserts that man was made of the breath of
the immortal God, and refers to the soul as having a divine
nature and an eternal substance8—a concept and a phras­
ing likewise totally at variance with the repeated declarations 
of Holy Writ. God, on the contrary, dwells “in the light which 
no man can approach unto” (1 Tim. 6:16). He alone is the
“King eternal, immortal” (1 Tim. 1:17).
Such were two of the frequent twists and turns employed.
8 See page 956.
964
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
3. “Destruction’s” Plain Intent Set Aside.—Again, the 
most common scriptural description of the punishment of the 
wicked is that they will be “destroyed,” or suffer “destruction” 
in Hell, or Gehenna. Tertullian, thoroughly understanding 
Greek, well knew that “destruction” meant the annihilation, 
end, or cessation of the organized being. This is clear from 
various allusions. One was to Epicurus’ dual use of the term 
to convey the concept of utter cessation of existence at death.10 
In another place Tertullian states that “destruction” differs 
altogether from change, for to be changed is merely “to exist 
in another condition.”
“To perish,” he said, “is altogether to cease to be what a 
thing once was,” 11 to cease to have existence, to be identical 
with the annihilation of any substance. Elsewhere, he tells us 
that the condition of the body in the grave, when it has seen 
corruption, is that of destruction; and that if God were to leave 
the body forever in this condition it would be His “abandon­
ing it to everlasting destruction.” So he clearly understood 
the terms in their ordinary usage. His turn on “destruction” 
will be noted next.
4. “Immortal Souls” Cannot Perish in Hell.—In chap­
ter thirty-four, on the resurrection, commenting on Christ’s 
coming "to seek and to save that which is lost,” Tertullian asks, 
“What do you suppose that to be which is lost?” The answer is, 
“The whole man, of course,” in “both his natures”—body and 
soul. But then he says naively: “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 he con­
tinues, “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 is “subject to 
destruction.”
Then he adds: "If the soul is also perishable,” and “not
10 Tertullian, A Treatise on the Soul, chap. 42, in ANF, vol. 3, p. 221.
11 Tertullian, On the Resurrection, chap. 55, in ANF, vol. 3, p. 588.
WICKED EVER BURN BUT NEVER CONSUME
965
immortal,” the Lord would purpose to “save” it.12 And he again 
refers to the “two substances,” of body and soul, and asserts 
that “the Lord purposes to save that part of him which perishes 
[the body], whilst he will not of course lose that portion [the 
soul] which cannot be lost.” 13 But these hazy statements become 
clearer as we continue.
5. 
“Body” Destined for “Eternal Killing” in Hell.— 
Then in chapter thirty-five Tertullian turns to Christ’s warn­
ing in Matthew 10:28—“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.” Tertullian 
very properly equates the “kill” in the first clause with “destroy” 
in the second.
He also recognizes that God is able to do what He declares 
He will do with the wicked in Hell. But he immediately adds, 
“Here, then, we have a recognition of the natural immortality 
of the soul, which cannot be killed by men; and of the mortality 
of the body, which may be killed.” He observes that “the 
resurrection of the dead is a resurrection of the flesh; for 
unless it were raised again, it would be impossible for the flesh 
to be ‘killed in hell.’ ” u
Tertullian again speaks of “both substances” (body and 
soul), as he conceived them, and the distinction to be made 
between them, for it is the “flesh” which will be “destroyed in 
hell.” Then he adds, “So also will it [the body] be restored to 
life eternal” 15—but meaning eternal life in torment, as will 
become clear. And now follows this remarkable passage denying 
the literal destruction of body or soul in Hell:
“If, therefore, any one shall violently suppose that the destruction of 
the soul and the flesh in hell amounts to a final annihilation of the two 
substances, and not to their penal treatment (as if they were to be con­
sumed, not punished), let him recollect that the fire of hell is eternal— 
expressly announced as an everlasting penalty; and let him then admit 
that it is from this circumstance that this never-ending ‘killing’ is more for-
13 Ibid., chap. 34, in ANF, vol. 3, p. 569. (Italics supplied.)
33 Ibid., p. 570.
14 Ibid., chap. 35, in ANF, vol. 3, p. 570. (Italics supplied.)
15 Ibid.
966
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
midable than a merely human murder, which is only temporal. He will 
then come to the conclusion that substances [of both body and soul] must 
be eternal, when their penal ‘killing’ is an eternal one." 18
There is no cessation of being, he declares, no end, no 
annihilation of the body and soul of the wicked.
6. Resurrection of Flesh Is for “E
ternal K
illing.”—
 
Tertullian then continues his argument:
“Since, then, the body after the resurrection has to be killed by God 
in hell along with the soul, we surely have sufficient information in this 
fact respecting both the issues which await it, namely the resurrection of 
the flesh, and its eternal ‘killing.’ Else it would be most absurd if the flesh 
should be raised up and destined to ‘the killing in hell,’ in order to be put 
an end to, when it might suffer such an annihilation (more directly) if not 
raised again at all.” 17
7. Perverts Meaning of “Death” and “Dying.”—Tertul­
lian knew and acknowledged that certain words used in Scrip­
ture to express future punishment properly have a certain con­
sistent meaning. But this theory of Eternal Torment of the 
wicked did not permit these words to be used in their true, 
normal, and proper sense. Consequently, they had to be given an 
improper and unnatural turn in order to sustain his view. 
But surely any theory that requires such violence to be done 
to the language of Scripture is manifestly unscriptural.
Nevertheless, such was Tertullian’s philosophy, and such 
was his consequent practice. For example, Tertullian warps 
the meaning of “death” and “dying” into being a change 
of life, for the worse of course. Note his definition of “dead”:
“The word dead expresses simply what has lost the vital principle 
[animani], by means of which it used to live. Now the body is that which 
loses life, and as the result of losing it becomes dead. To the body, there­
fore, the term dead is only suitable. Moreover, as resurrection accrues to 
what is dead, and dead is a term applicable only to a body, therefore the 
body alone has a resurrection incidental to it.” 18
Thus Tertullian held that the terms “to die,” “to be
16 Ibid., pp. 570, 571. (Italics supplied.)
» Ibid., p. 571.
18 Tertullian, Against Marcion, book 5, chap. 9, in ANF, vol. 3, p. 447.
destroyed,” and “death”—all synonymous to him—were not 
“suitable” to apply to the soul, and could properly be affirmed 
only of the body after death and until resurrection.
8. 
Forced to Give Im
proper Turn to Term
inology.—
 
Tertullian was thus in a strait betwixt his correct knowledge 
of the true meaning of the words of Scripture and his revolu­
tionary theory of future punishment. These words, which he 
could not (according to his theory) apply to the soul at any 
time, but could apply to the risen bodies of the wicked only 
after the resurrection, were nevertheless applied to both body 
and soul of the wicked.
What therefore to do? He could not remove them from 
Scripture. And he could not deny the fact that God could 
destroy both body and soul in Hell. Furthermore, he could 
not deny that the only “suitable” sense of those words demands 
that body and soul would be annihilated, and ultimately cease 
to be or exist. So, rather than yield his theory, he put a forced, 
improper, and “unsuitable” sense upon the words of Scripture!
This he did, for example, with Matthew 10:28 (“destroy 
both soul and body in hell”) in denying that the wicked would 
ever cease to exist in Hell. Denying the contention of the “final 
annihilation of the two substances” (body and soul) “as if 
they were to be consumed,” in contrast with being “punished,” 
Tertullian stresses that “the fire of hell is eternal,” and is 
“an everlasting penalty,” and is therefore a “never-ending 
killing.” 1B
His reasoning was simply this: The loss of existence by 
one who might have had existence forever is no punishment! 
Tertullian differentiated “destruction” from “punishment,” 
holding that destruction is not “punishment.” He maintains 
that “being killed,” “being destroyed,” and “being consumed,” 
is no punishment. He phrases it, “As if they were to be con­
sumed, not punished.” So, to Tertullian, consuming, or being
WICKED EVER BURN BUT NEVER CONSUME 
967
18 Tertullian, On the Resurrection, chap. 35, in ANF, vol. 3, p. 570.
968
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
deprived of an eternal existence, was not punishment. Thus he 
was impelled to distort the intent of Scripture.
9. 
Employs Devious A
rtifice of D
istortion.—In chapter 
nineteen, On the Resurrection, Tertullian severely castigates 
the artifice of “heretics” in perverting the “true meaning of 
the important words” of Scripture by recourse to “figurative 
and allegorical language.” Thus they distort “the most clearly 
described doctrine of the resurrection” into “some imaginary 
sense.” He specifies their giving to “death” a purely “spiritual 
sense.” “They say that that which is commonly supposed to be 
death is not really so . . . : it is rather the ignorance of God.” 
That is “held to be the resurrection” when a man is reanimated 
by access to the truth, and “having dispersed the death of 
ignorance, . . . has burst forth from the sepulchre of the 
old man.” 20 The propriety and scope of his censures is crystal 
clear.
It therefore seems amazingly strange that Tertullian’s 
astute mind should permit him to censure the artifice of 
“heretics,” and yet turn about and himself employ the same 
devious device of rendering “death” as “endless misery,” and 
“destruction” and “consuming” as eternal “pain and anguish.” 
Thus Tertullian’s contorted treatment of the language of 
Scripture led him into an interminable maze of confusion and 
contradiction, as we have seen.
But this much is very clear: The source of Tertullian’s 
new terminology is to be found in his revolutionary theory 
of human destiny. And his devious treatment of the terminology 
of Scripture is the obvious condemnation of the system. That 
is the inescapable indictment of Tertullianism.
20 Ibid., chap. 19, in ANF, vol. 3, pp. 558, 559.
CHAPTER 
FIFTY-EIGHT
Universal Restoration Substituted 
for Eternal Torment
Third School Now Completes Theological Trilemma— 
Origen Replaces Endless Torment With Universalism
Alexandria was not only the seat of a famous Catechetical 
School but a gathering place for numerous groups of philoso­
phers, Gnostics, Christians, and heretics of all sorts. Especially 
was it the rallying point for Platonic philosophy, or more ac­
curately of Neoplatonism. From here and from other North 
African centers such as Carthage and Hippo the blight of 
Platonism continued to obscure the light of the gospel more 
and more, until at last, after a few centuries, the church was 
encompassed by the midnight of the Dark Ages. The evidence 
is overwhelming that from the third century onward Chris­
tianity was increasingly perverted by the penetrations of Neo- 
platonic philosophy.
1. 
Significance of the A
lexandrian School.—Prior to 
OrigCn, Christian writers had fully and freely discussed and 
defended individual doctrines. But this was usually because of 
attacks made upon them by heretics. None had previously at­
tempted a systematic exposition of the Christian faith as a 
whole. Now, however, such a bold scheme got under way at 
Alexandria around the close of the second century. And as 
Alexandria was the primal seat of speculative philosophy, it 
was but natural that Alexandrian Christianity should assume 
a speculative form.
969
Origen of Alexandria—Pro­
jector of New Universal- 
Restoration Theory, Coun­
tering Tertullian’s Eternal- 
Torment Concept.
Clement of Alexandria — 
First a Conditionalist; Then 
Switches to Bald Immortal- 
Soulism.
The Alexandrian Christians were Platonists, and sought 
to explain Christianity according to Platonic categories, just 
as two centuries prior, in that same city, Philo had similarly 
attempted to explain Judaism in the Platonic framework. In 
fact, these Christian Platonists were definitely indebted to 
Philo, as well as to Plato. But that was not all. While most of 
the other Christian writers of the time still held to the divine 
authority of the Old and New Testaments in their most obvi­
ous meaning and form, the Alexandrians came to pay little heed 
to the historico-literal sense in interpretation. The allegorical 
method of exegesis was reduced to a system.
And significantly enough, the chief speculations of this 
group turned to the Godhead, the problem of evil, and the 
origin, nature, will, and destiny of man, and the related con­
summation of all things—the subject of our survey. Thus it 
was that Alexandria became the spawning ground of many a 
far-reaching and subversive development.
970
RESTORATION SUBSTITUTED FOR ETERNAL TORMENT 971
2. C
haracteristics of New A
lexandrian School.—The 
new Alexandrian School emphasis was eclectic in principle. 
Certain philosophers had devised the plan of gleaning the 
“good” from the various systems of philosophy—Egyptian, 
Oriental, Pythagorean, Platonic, and now the dynamic Chris­
tian faith. But Platonism formed the integrating bond, and 
the postulate of the Innate Immortality of the soul assumed 
a central place. Ammonius Saccas gave new life to this coali­
tion of opinions, and the virility of the new Christianity gave 
it new impetus. So it was that Neoplatonism gradually 
crowded all other contenders into the background, and like 
the rising sun began to eclipse every lesser light.
Moreover, it had wide appeal, both to Christian and to 
pagan, for the transition in emphasis was easy. But it became 
the nursery school of error, for Plato’s doctrine of Innate Im­
mortality was now incorporated as one of the main planks in 
its platform. In fact, Immortal-Soulism became the corner­
stone of the new system, and men were urged to free the im­
mortal spirit from all encumbering influences. Even the per­
plexing restoration, or resurrection of the dead, was so 
interpreted as to accommodate it to the tenets of the Greek sages.
3. 
H
our 
of 
Peril 
for 
Expanding 
Church.—And now 
we turn to the second great hour of peril for the rapidly ex­
panding church. It had reached another determinative fork in 
the road, as had previously confronted it when Tertullianism 
arose. And from this new turning point onward a major seg­
ment of the church began to veer farther and farther away 
from her original primitive position and course. The finger 
boards at this new fork had been turned at a divergent angle 
by the Platonic philosophers, and now pointed down the tan­
gent road of departure. As a consequence there were progres­
sive digressions during the third, fourth, and fifth centuries, 
stemming from the aggressive teachings and illustrious names 
of Tertullian, Origen, and finally Augustine.
In the departure from, and actual abandonment of, the
972
CONDITIONAL!ST FAITH
apostolic principles of historical and literal Biblical interpre­
tation, Origen now led the way with a new boldness—breaking 
away from the older accepted landmark principles of Biblical 
exegesis. He was, in fact, the first to reduce the allegorical 
method of interpretation to a definite system, like that of 
Philo for the Jews.
His aim was to harmonize the Scriptures with the Pla­
tonic modes of thought, which had become the essence of his 
own thinking. In this he exerted a profound influence, for 
from his day until the time of Chrysostom (d. 407) there was 
scarcely a commentator who did not borrow heavily from his 
words,1 and pattern his method of exegesis more or less after 
Origen’s revolutionary Allegorical School of Interpretation.
4. 
Grave 
Involvem
ents 
of 
Origenism.—It may there­
fore be fairly said that, perhaps more than any other single 
individual of that era, Origen—scholar, philosopher, Immor- 
tal-Soulist, and allegorizer—set in motion those diverting 
forces that ultimately crowded the Advent hope and expect­
ancy into the background. Prior to Origen, church leaders 
had looked for the triumph of righteousness to be brought 
about through the supernatural interposition of Christ at His 
second advent, and the concurrent literal resurrection of the 
righteous dead. And these were tied in with the cataclysmic 
end of the world, which was expected by many within a 
fairly short time—at most by a.d. 500.
But Origen now introduced his theory of the ultimate 
establishment of Christianity in this present world by gradual 
growth, and throughout the universe by the ultimate universal 
restoration of all the wicked. However, in order to establish 
his postulate Biblically, he was compelled to spiritualize the 
resurrection, to mysticize and neutralize the Second Advent, 
as well as to allegorize the prophecies concerning the last 
things.
1 Farrar, Mercy and Judgment, p. 321.
RESTORATION SUBSTITUTED FOR ETERNAL TORMENT 973
He thus struck at the very heart of the primitive Christian 
hope, substituting therefore a radically new type of Christian­
ity, and implanting a new concept of the relationship be­
tween God, man, and sin, and of the destiny of the race. It 
was a fateful day for the church, fraught with far-reaching 
consequences.
5. 
Roseate 
Expectations, 
But 
Gross 
Perversions.— 
Origen’s speculative scheme for resolving the moral problems 
of life, death, and destiny, consistent as he thought with di­
vine love and justice, was his revolutionary theory of universal 
restoration. It was a new and enticing concept. Salmond calls 
it “the dreamland, the enchanted land of theology.” 2 Another 
refers to it as “ ‘the cloudland looming with rose-tinted peaks 
in the far aionian future.’ ” 3 It was all that, and more. It in­
volved a radically new eschatology.
But it was all curiously shot through with the notion of 
the pre-existence and transmigration of souls, the baptism of 
purifying fire in the other world, the ministry of spirits in the 
afterlife, and the persistence of something in every life su­
perior to evil, leading at last to the triumph of righteousness 
for all. It was a roseate picture, appealing to the natural heart 
of man. But even according to Origen this was not an absolute 
restoration, but one that might, alas, be followed by new falls 
and new restorations. So, quite apart from its antiscriptural 
basis, it was not without its drawbacks, reservations, and un­
certainties.
And not all, by any means, followed Origen’s philosophi­
cal and theological speculations. In fact, their projection 
caused grave concern to a large and powerful group, and re­
sulted in open opposition. As a consequence, the Christian 
Church, as concerns the nature and eternal destiny of man, 
became divided into three major groups, each battling the 
other vigorously. Irenaeus had taught the final annihilation
2 S. D. F. Salmond, The Christian Doctrine of Immortality, p. 630.
3 Quoted in Salmond, loc. cit.
974
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
of the wicked, Tertullian their eternal torment, and now 
Origen their ultimate restoration.
The tension of the contending forces mounted. Gradually, 
however, the Tertullian-Augustinian position of Eternal Tor­
ment gained the ascendancy, and the other two views (eternal 
death and ultimate restoration for the wicked) were rele­
gated to the background. Note the progressive steps of accom­
plishment in broad outline.
6. The 
Progressive 
Path 
of 
D
eparture.—Origen fol­
lowed the tangent path of departure through to its ultimate. 
His third-century spiritualization of the resurrection and the 
Second Advent—blended with his allegorization of the rest of 
Scripture—coupled with the postulate of the indefeasible im­
mortality of the soul, together constituted the first fatal step 
in the great departure from the earlier Christian faith.
The second step followed in the fourth century under 
Eusebius, likewise an Immortal-Soulist, who conceived the 
newly elevated Christian Church, now under imperial prefer­
ment, protection, and patronage, to be the prophesied “king­
dom of God.” 4 Thus he carnalized, or materialized, the king­
dom aspect of Early Church expectation.
The third step, constituting the climax of the progressive 
departure, came under Augustine’s fifth-century contention 
(along with retention of the previous two) that the predicted 
thousand-year binding of Satan had already begun with the 
First Advent. Augustine maintained that they were, in fact, al­
ready living in the millennial period.5 And all three men— 
Origen, Eusebius, and Augustine—held, of course, to the basic 
Neoplatonic postulate of universal Innate Immortality.
And now, under Augustine’s powerful influence this elab­
orated thesis became virtually universal. By this time the 
early simple Christian faith was so mangled and overwhelmed 
that it was scarcely recognizable, and remained under a virtual
4 Constantine’s public espousal of Christianity introduced within a single generation 
the most remarkable revolution in the thoughts, laws, and customs of an empire recorded in 
history, and thus afforded a plausible basis for the revolutionary “kingdom 
concept, when 
not checked with Scripture.
5 For a full portrayal see L. E. Froom, Prophetic Faith, vol. 1, chaps. 14-20.
RESTORATION SUBSTITUTED FOR ETERNAL TORMENT 975
blackout for more than a thousand years. Not until Reforma­
tion times and influences did it emerge from the long eclipse, 
as the light of the gospel dispelled the darkness of departure.
7. Platonic Influence Supersedes That of Apostles. 
—The influence of Plato was now definitely impressed upon 
the thought and language of all who followed either Tertul­
lian or Origen, especially on those of philosophic background. 
Upon some it had profound effect. But both groups followed 
Plato implicitly in asserting that “every soul is immortal.” 
Indeed, this proposition became the common bond of unity 
between these two conflicting schools of theological thought 
as to the destiny of the soul.6
On this point of Innate Immortality Plato was now defi­
nitely placed above the prophets and apostles, and accorded a 
deference and an authority greater and wider than he had 
ever contemplated. In fact, Plato was actually dominating the 
church under the guise of the authority of Christ, and often 
in opposition to, and subversive of, the explicit doctrines of 
the apostles.
Particularly in Alexandria, through Origen, were these 
new, unnatural, and far-fetched meanings read into the lan­
guage of both the Old and New Testaments through mysticiz- 
ing, allegorizing, and spiritualizing away their natural sense. 
The nature and destiny of man was now definitely Platonized. 
Thus it was that the teachings of Plato came to be palmed off 
on the church under the sanction of Scripture. But even more 
tragic, the actually uncertain and merely tentative suggestions 
of Plato on the soul were now boldly taught by the schools of 
Tertullian and Origen as established truth in the realm of the 
soul.
8. Baleful 
Effects 
of 
Accepting 
Platonism.—The 
baleful effects of accepting the Platonic thesis of the immor­
tality of the soul soon began to appear. The body came to be
6 “Tertullian and Origen, whose views differed on other subjects, agreed in this one 
point, that they, in accordance with their peculiar notions concerning the nature of the soul, 
looked upon its immortality as essential to it.”—Hagenbach, Compendium of the History of 
Doctrines, vol. I, p. 163.
976
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
despised and held in contempt. It was consequently disci­
plined and weakened, in order that the "spark of divinity” in 
the immortal spirit might be exalted and freed. And as the 
"immortal soul” was considered imprisoned and debased by 
the body, its corporeal habitation, so it was held that in pro­
portion to disengagement from this encumbrance would the 
soul be prepared for its restoration to purity. Thus asceticism 
and devotion to a life of seclusion and solitude followed, ac­
companied by the upspringing of monasteries, abbeys, hermits, 
and anchorites.
Celibacy likewise developed out of the same rootage. And 
this, in turn, was followed by the worship of saints and relics, 
and the concept of patron saints and the intercession of saints, 
inasmuch as after death the saints were believed to be more 
active and powerful than before, now having free access to 
Heaven and to God. Purgatory was introduced to mitigate the 
terrors of the Eternal Torment of Tertullianism. The soul 
was held to be part of the divine nature but confined to the 
body. And the sins that clung to it must be purged away, and 
the soul purified from sin.
Such were the blighting effects resulting from the intro­
duction of Platonism into the precincts of the church. So we 
say that beyond controversy Origen’s innovations were largely 
instrumental in accelerating the early great apostasy of the 
church. To these we now turn. His doctrine of the progressive 
final triumph of the church on earth, which undermined the 
Biblical doctrine of the kingdom of God, and his ridicule of 
Chiliasm, all paved the way for the later Augustinian concepts 
of the millennium as embracing the Christian Era, and the 
earthly church as constituting God’s promised kingdom, and 
the soul as innately immortal. These, in turn, gave rise to the 
full-blown Catholic system of the Middle Ages.
9. 
Origenism Banned Under Justinian.—Although Ori- 
genism never became general, it had numerous adherents, 
especially in the East, including Gregory Thaumaturgus, 
Pamphilus, Titus of Bostia, Basil, Diodorus, Didymus, and
Gregory of Nyssa. But there were opponents—Cyprian, Am­
brose, Chrysostom, and Jerome. But in the age of Justinian 
free inquiry was proscribed, and all such questions came to be 
settled by authority. The keys of Heaven and Hell were by 
now in the hands of the hierarchy, through the exclusive privi­
lege of the priesthood to administer the sacraments, and thus 
admit or exclude souls from the church and Heaven.
In 544, at an imperial synod of bishops, held at Constan­
tinople, Origen’s name appears in the list of those condemned 
and anathematized as heretical. Thus Origenism, in the sixth 
century—in the sense of Universal Restorationism—came to 
be treated as a heresy, as Augustinianism rose to dominance. 
It was suppressed by the church for a thousand years. It did 
not, in fact, reappear until post-Reformation times, and then 
in modified form.7 But the allegorical principle of exegesis 
persisted, and was widely employed—and still is by many to 
this day.
RESTORATION SUBSTITUTED FOR ETERNAL TORMENT 977
7 Under Petersen. Bengel, 
Oetinger, 
and Michael Hahn in Germany, 
Newton 
in 
England, and Lavater of Zurich, et cetera.
CHAPTER 
FIFTY-NINE
Rise and Spread of Neoplatonic 
Restorationism
I. Clement of Alexandria—Reverses Position in Transition Hour
Let us now search into the beginnings of Restorationism. 
By the close of the second century the church had spread from 
Britain to the Ganges. It was flourishing in Gaul and in other 
regions of the West, and had established itself firmly in the 
Delta of the Nile. At Alexandria the Catechetical School had 
gathered a group of intellectuals, both teachers and students, 
somewhat on the order of a Christian university.
We are now in that transition hour in the expanding 
church, when some begin to change over from their former 
Condidonalist views to the developing Innate-Immortality 
concept that was creeping in as a result of attempting to syn- 
cretize the Christian faith with Platonic philosophy. And this 
development had, as noted, its focal point chiefly in Alexan­
dria and its famous school.
One of the first to shift his views in this way was Clem
ent 
of A
lexandria (c. 150-c. 220), brilliant contemporary of Ire- 
naeus of Gaul, the noted Conditionalist. He was born of non- 
Christian parents, probably in Athens or Alexandria. On be­
coming a Christian, Clement traveled widely in Greece, Italy, 
Palestine, Egypt, and the East, seeking truth at the feet of 
masters of thought representing sundry religious and philo­
sophical views. (For chronological placement see Chart F, page 
758.)
Returning to Egypt, Clement felt that under Pantaenus,
978
/
RISE OF NEOPLATONIC RESTORATIONISM 
979
devout Gnostic head of the Catechetical School in Alexandria, 
he found what he had been searching for. Clement was al­
ready deeply versed in pagan Greek philosophy and literature 
when he came in touch with philosophical Christianity under 
Pantaenus. Accepting this form of Christianity, he was or­
dained a presbyter. Then he succeeded Pantaenus as head of 
the school about a.d. 190. He continued as such until a.d. 202, 
when he was driven from his post by persecution under Sep- 
timius Severus, and fled to Palestine and Asia Minor. And he 
was in turn succeeded by his brilliant pupil Origen.
Clement agreed with the Gnostics in making gnosis (reli­
gious knowledge or illumination) the chief element in Chris­
tian perfection. At the same time he sought to supplement 
Christianity with Greek philosophy, which he regarded as 
likewise a divine gift to mankind. But he still held that true 
gndsis presupposes the apostolic faith and divine revelation as 
its core. To him, Christ became man in order to give a su­
preme revelation, and in order ‘'that through Him men might 
partake of immortality.” 1
Clement made no formal statement like Justin Martyr, 
no elaborate exposition of principle like Irenaeus, no strict 
argument like Athenagoras. But all the way through his ear­
lier writings he taught immortality in the sense of endless 
existence for the saved. In these initial treatises he held that 
immortality is not the common property of humanity. It is 
the special addition of something distinct from one’s self, or 
nature. There is nothing eternal, he maintained, except what 
God gives. And contrariwise, there is no getting of what is 
eternal, and no continuance of any, but only death to the diso­
bedient.
1. 
Develops 
Introduction 
to 
Philosophic 
Christian­
ity.—Clement was considered one of the most accomplished 
Christian scholars prior to Origen. He had mastered Greek, 
as well as Gnostic and Christian literature, and was an ele-
1 ODCC, art., “Clement of Alexandria,” p. 300.
980
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
gant writer in Greek. He wrote the treatises upon which his 
fame rests while teaching in Alexandria. Profoundly specula­
tive, he sought “the true, the beautiful, and the good” wher­
ever they were to be found, seeking to blend them into a 
harmonious “Christian” system. So the noble is sometimes inter­
mingled with the fantastic and the puerile.
As noted, it was in Alexandria that the influence of Greek 
philosophy upon Christianity reached its height, tinged with 
a fatal blend of Gnostic elements. According to Harnack, 
Clement’s impress was epoch making. He increasingly intro­
duced Stoic, Platonic, and Philonic ingredients not in harmony 
with Christianity but which in time gained the ascendancy. 
His chosen objective was to develop a suitable introduction to 
philosophic Christianity to appeal to the intelligentsia. He 
even came to regard ignorance and error as more evil than 
sin, and developed an “optimistic view of the ultimate destiny 
of even the most erring.” 2 In other words, in his last great 
work he planted the seed thought of ultimate Restorationism 
that bore such baleful fruit under Origen.
2. 
M
eeting 
Point 
of Two Converging 
Lines.—Clem­
ent’s three greatest works, forming a trilogy, are Exhortation 
to the Heathen (the Protrepticus), The Instructor (or Paeda- 
gogus), and the Miscellanies (or Stromata). This latter work 
was filled with a vast number of quotations from authors of 
all kinds and from all countries, and could only have been com­
posed near an extensive library such as that of Alexandria.
There also his Outlines of Scripture Interpretation (or 
Hypotyposes) was brought forth. This constituted the boldest 
literary undertaking in the history of the Early Church. It 
sought to put Christianity into the form of profane world 
literature. In Clement’s view the gospel is not so much a new 
departure as the meeting point of two converging lines of 
progress—Hellenism and Judaism. To Clement, history is one 
because “truth is one.”
2 ibid.
RISE OF NEOPLATONIC RESTORATIONISM 
981
His Exhortation to the Heathen (c. 194) was a defense 
of Christian truth designed to prove the superiority of Chris­
tianity and to win the pagan to the philosophic gospel. It con­
tains a withering exposure of pagan abominations. The In­
structor, as its name indicates, was to guide new converts in 
daily living. The later Miscellanies dealt with the various 
points of Christian theology. Its full title is significant—“Titus 
Flavius Clement’s Miscellaneous Collections of Speculative 
(Gnostic) Notes Bearing on the True Philosophy.” The Out­
lines are comments on the Old and New Testaments. And 
among his numerous lost works, of which “we have no trace,” 
other than reference by Clement himself, were two, On the 
Soul and On the Resurrection.9 It is regrettable that these are 
not available.
3. 
Swings to 
Im
m
ortal-Soulism
 
in Latest Treatise.—
 
To Clement, God the Father is the “Remoter Cause,” whereas 
the Son embodies the timeless and unoriginated Principle of 
Existence, and was the agent in creating and governing the 
universe. Clement stressed man’s free will. But to him the 
temptation and Fall were but allegory, yet with Christ coming 
to deliver man from sin and death. Tertullian, of Carthage, 
with his asceticism and repression of human nature, was the 
very opposite of Clement of Alexandria, with his humani- 
tarianism for attaining exaltation of character.
It is to be particularly noted that in his earlier writings 
Clement did not speak of the soul as immortal. That was still a 
Gnostic and Platonic expression not yet held or employed by 
Christians. But by the time of his later and major treatise he 
had definitely switched over to Immortal-Soulism, as will be 
seen in section V, page 991.
Although he held that true Christian knowledge is de­
rived principally from Scripture, he believed it was also re­
ceived from Plato and from Hellenic philosophy. Philosophy, 
he maintained, was the divinely ordained preparation of the
3 “Introductory Note to Clement of Alexandria,’’ in ANF, vol. 2, p. 169.
982
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Greeks for faith in Christ, just as the law had been for the 
Hebrews. Hence Clement contended for the value of Greek 
literature and philosophic culture against those who regarded 
such learning as useless and dangerous. He proclaimed himself 
an eclectic,4 believing in the existence of fragments of truth in 
all systems, but which must be separated from error. How­
ever, Clement still held theoretically that truth in its greatest 
purity and completeness is found supremely in Christ. Such is 
the highly complex setting of Clement’s witness.
II. Earlier Declarations Couched in Conditionalist Terms
1. Immortality a Reward to Be Received.—Clement’s 
clearest and most direct earlier statements on the nature and 
destiny of man appear in the unique Who Is the Rich Man 
That Shall Be Saved?—a practical treatise, showing that “the 
disposition of the soul is the great essential.” It was one of his 
earlier works, and comprises forty-two sections. Its precise 
date is not known, but at the very outset Clement speaks of 
gaining “the prize of everlasting life,” B as Christ sets before 
the rich young ruler “the way to the life to come.”
Comparing the course of life to “the case with athletes,” 
to use common things to illustrate the “great and immortal,” he 
shows how the one deprived of attaining has failed to submit 
to the discipline and training required, and thus has “re­
mained uncrowned.” So Christ counsels the wealthy, “Nor let 
him, on the other hand, expect to grasp the crowns of immor­
tality without struggle and effort.” Rather, let him put him­
self “under the Word as his trainer.” Then, when the last 
trumpet shall sound, he may “present himself victorious be­
fore the Judge who confers the rewards,” amid the “acclama­
tions of angels.” 9
2. “True” and “Sure” Immortality Is “Gift of Eter-
4 Clement, The Stromata, or Miscellanies, book 1, chap. 7, in ANF, vol. 2, p. 308.
5 Clement, fYho Is the Rich Man That Shall Be Saved? secs. 1 and 2, in ANF, vol. 
2, p. 591; cf. p. 169, Introductory Note.
6 Ibid., sec. 3, pp. 592, 593. (Italics supplied.)
nal Life.”—In section six, the ruler’s question propounded to 
Christ is rehearsed, pertaining to ‘‘the Truth respecting the 
true immortality,” the ‘‘Perfect respecting the perfect rest,” 
and the ‘‘Immortal respecting the sure immortality,” in ob­
vious contrast with false and phantom immortality. The pro­
viding of the ‘‘true” necessitated Christ’s incarnation among 
men—the “essence of the gospel”—which is none other than 
the “gift of eternal life.” These are Clement’s exact words re­
garding this supreme question:
“The Life respecting life, the Saviour respecting salvation, the Teacher 
respecting the chief doctrines taught, the Truth respecting the true immor­
tality, the Word respecting the word of the Father, the Perfect respecting 
the perfect rest, the Immortal respecting the sure immortality. He was asked 
respecting those things on account of which He descended, which He in­
culcates, which He teaches, which He offers, in order to show the essence 
of die Gospel, that it is the gift of eternal life.” 7
To proffer life and immortality, then, was the supreme 
purpose of Christ’s coming. And Clement adds that God is the 
“first and only dispenser of eternal life,” which is given to us 
through the Son.8
3. God Is Giver of Everything Eternal; Otherwise 
Death.—Clement’s declaration is unequivocal: God is the 
“giver of what is eternal,” for both “being” and “non-being” B 
are derived from Him. Without Him there is only “death,” 
while in and with Him is the “only life.” Here is his further 
statement:
"To know the eternal God, the giver of what is eternal, and by knowl­
edge and comprehension to possess God, who is first, and highest, and one, 
and good. For this is the immutable and immoveable source and support 
of life, the knowledge of God, who really is, and who bestows the things 
which really are, that is those which are eternal, from whom both being 
and the continuance [or “non-being”] of it are derived to other beings. 
For ignorance of Him is death; but the knowledge and appropriation of 
Him, and love and likeness to Him, are the only life.” 10
4. Immortality 
Came 
Not 
Through 
Law, 
but 
Through 
Christ.—Stressing that the law came through
7 Ibid., sec. 6, p. 593. (Italics supplied.) 
9 Ibid., sec. 7, p. 593. note 1.
8 Ibid. 
10 Ibid. (Italics supplied.)
RISE OF NEOPLATONIC RESTORATIONISM 
983
984
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Moses, while grace and truth came through Christ, Clement 
declared that the law did not “confer” immortality, otherwise 
one would not need to seek from Christ for what would be 
“another immortality.” Thus:
“The gifts granted through a faithful servant [“Moses”] are not equal 
to those bestowed by the true Son. If then the law of Moses had been 
sufficient to confer eternal life, it were to no purpose for the Saviour Him­
self to come and suffer for us, accomplishing the course of human life from 
His birth to His cross; and to no purpose for him who had done all the 
commandments of the law from his youth to fall on his knees and beg from 
another immortality.” 11
Immortality is therefore not man’s innate possession.
5. Turned Away From Sole Source of Life.—“Self-de­
termination” is the privilege of the soul, states Clement, 
and “choice” depends on a man’s “being free.” But the “gift” re­
mains in the hand of God. We must ask, then we will acquire.12 
In the case of the rich young ruler Christ sets before His in­
quirer the “one thing which was especially required by the 
Saviour, so as to receive the eternal life which he desired.” 
But the yourtg ruler turned away from the offer. He “did not 
truly wish life” and “the grace of Him who offered everlasting 
life.” 13 Only those who know “God and God’s righteousness” 
will be the “possessors of everlasting life.” 11
6. Destruction Is Penalty for Disobedience.—Clement 
then adds a warning concerning destruction: “But he who 
uses the body given to him chastely and according to God, 
shall live; and he that destroys the temple of God shall be de­
stroyed.” 15
He then turns from anything deemed “inherent in your 
soul” to those things which “minister everlasting life,” and 
gives this assurance to those who respond to the provisions of 
God: “There shall accrue to you endless reward and honour, 
and salvation, and everlasting immortality.” 18
u Ibid., sec. 8. p. 593.
12 Ibid., sec. 10, p. 593.
13 Ibid., p. 594.
11 Ibid., sec. 
11, p. 594.
15 Ibid., sec. 
18, p. 596.
18 Ibid., sec. 
19, p. 596. (Italics supplied.)
RISE OF NEOPLATONIC RESTORATIONISM 
985
Thus he distinguishes between immortality and the vir­
tues of which it is the crown and reward.
7. Immortality Set Over Against Destruction.—Set­
ting forth the adequacy of Christ as satisfying “bread,” and 
that He is able to supply “the drink of immortality,” Clem­
ent brings in the contrast with inexorable death:
“ ‘I am He who feeds thee, giving Myself as bread, of which he who has 
tasted experiences death no more, and supplying day by day the drink 
of immortality. I am teacher of supercelestial lessons. For thee I contended 
with Death, and paid thy death, which thou owedst for thy former sins 
and thy unbelief towards God.' ”17
Then he admonishes:
“Better is the kingdom of God to a man with one eye, than the fire 
to one who is unmutilated. Whether hand, or foot, or soul, hate it. For 
if it is destroyed here for Christ’s sake, it will be restored to life yonder.” 18
And he adds that wealth may become the “author and 
patron of death.” 19
8. Everlasting 
Habitations; 
Immortality; 
Eternal 
Mansions.—Then, in section thirty-two, Clement exalts the 
superiority of the exchange—“everlasting habitations,” “im­
mortality,” and an “eternal mansion in the heavens.” And 
finally he bursts into an apostrophe of praise to Him who has 
delight in giving:
“Then to appoint such a reward for liberality,—an everlasting habi­
tation! O excellent trading! O divine merchandise! One purchases immor­
tality for money; and, by giving the perishing things of the world, receives 
in exchange for these an eternal mansion in the heavens! Sail to this mart, 
if you are wise, O rich man! If need be, sail round the whole world. Spare 
not perils and toils, that you may purchase here the heavenly kingdom.” 20
But he warns: “It is possible for you to neglect some that 
are loved by God; the penalty for which is the punishment of 
eternal [aidnion] fire.”21
17 Ibid., 
sec. 23, p. 598. (Italics supplied.)
18 Ibid., 
sec. 24, p. 598. (Italics supplied.)
19 Ibid., 
sec. 26, p. 598.
20 Ibid., 
sec. 32, p. 600.
21 Ibid., 
sec. 33, p. 600. (Italics supplied.)
986
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
He closes by assuring us that we may have the “King of 
eternity dwelling” in us,22 and be “encircled as with a dia­
dem.” 23
9. Angels Conduct Redeemed to Eternal Life.—Clem­
ent closes by telling a traditional story of the triumphant 
course the apostle John followed in restoring a wanderer, 
who became—
“a great example of true repentance and a great token of regeneration, a 
trophy of the resurrection for which we hope; when at the end of the 
world, the angels, radiant with joy, hymning and opening the heavens, 
shall receive into the celestial abodes those who truly repent; and before 
all, the Saviour Himself goes to meet them, welcoming them; holding forth 
the shadowless, ceaseless light; conducting them to the Father’s bosom, to 
eternal life, to the kingdom of heaven.” 24
10. The Soul Is “Not Naturally Immortal.”—Noth­
ing could be more explicit and unequivocal than Clement’s 
earlier conclusion on the mortality of men, which appears in 
one of his Fragments (No. I, on “First Epistle of Peter”). 
Denying any transmigration of the soul—“The soul never re­
turns a second time to the body in this life”—and referring to 
the necessity of “the salvation of your souls,” Clement ex­
pressly states: “Hence it appears that the soul is not naturally 
immortal; but is made immortal by the grace of God, through 
faith and righteousness, and by knowledge.” 28
Such is Clement’s remarkable early testimony.
III. Exhortation to the Heathen Still Stresses Life Only in Christ
1. 
Christ Offers “Immortality”; Sin Brings “Destruc­
tion.”—In timing, Clement’s Exhortation to the Heathen was 
followed by The Instructor, and finally by The Stromata, 
produced between c. a.d. 194 and c. 202. But the Exhortation, 
designed to win pagans to the Christian faith, is first of all a
22 Ibid., sec. 35, p. 601. 
23 Ibid., sec. 36, p. 601.
21 Ibid., sec. 42, p. 604.
25 Clement, Fragments, No. I, “From the Latin Translation of Aurelius Cassiodorus,”
in ANF, vol. 2, p. 571. (Italics supplied.)
RISE OF NEOPLATONIC RESTORATIONISM 
987
devastating exposure of the abominations, impostures, and 
sordidness of paganism. It contrasts them with the truths of 
inspired Scripture, the true God, and Christ the Saviour of 
men. But it already breathes the spirit of philosophy through­
out, and abounds in quotations from Greek philosophers and 
poets—which were destined to increase in his writings. In 
chapter nine Clement presents the call of God and warns 
against being ashamed of the Lord:
“He offers freedom, you flee into bondage; He bestows salvation, you 
sink down into destruction; He confers everlasting life, you wait for pun­
ishment, and prefer the fire which the Lord ‘has prepared for the devil and 
his angels.’ ”38
2. 
Christ Brings Light of Eternal Life.—Clement re­
fers to Christ as the one who gives light—the “Sun of the Res­
urrection,” who “with His beams bestows light.” He warns 
against the “threatening” and the “punishment” foretold of 
those who flout the “grace” that becomes the “wrath” of the 
God, who rules the “never-ending day” that “extends over 
eternity.” And he warns against those who “make light of im­
mortality.” 27 In chapter ten Clement exhorts:
“Believe, and receive salvation as your reward. Seek God, and your 
soul shall live. He who seeks God is busying himself about his own salva­
tion. Hast thou found God?—then thou hast life. Let us then seek, in order 
that we may live. The reward of seeking life is with God.” 28
Then he comments, “A noble hymn of God is an immor­
tal man, established in righteousness, in whom the oracles of 
truth are engraved.” 29
In chapter eleven he rehearses the “Benefits Conferred 
on Man Through the Advent of Christ.” Man was made free 
in Paradise, but became “fettered to sins.” But to man, who 
has “wandered in error” and was “buried in darkness, shut 
up in the shadow of death, light has shone forth from heaven. 
. . . That light is life eternal.” Thus the “Sun of Righteous­
ness”—
28 Clement, “Exhortation to the Heathen, chap. 9, in ANF, vol. 2, p. 195. (Italics 
supplied.)
»Ibid., p. 196. 
28 Ibid., chap. 10, p. 201. 
28 Ibid.
988
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
“hath changed sunset into sunrise, and through the cross brought death 
to life; and having wrenched man from destruction, He hath raised him 
to the skies, transplanting mortality into immortality, and translating 
earth to heaven.” 30
Salvation or destruction—those are the alternatives.
3. Eternal Life Versus Eternal Death.—Then Clem­
ent adds, “Sin is eternal death,” and admonishes that the 
Word brought salvation, so that repentant men “might be 
saved”; or, “refusing to obey, they might be judged.”31 Then 
he exhorts:
“I urge you to be saved. This Christ desires. In one word, He freely 
bestows life on you. And who is He? Briefly learn. The Word of truth, the 
Word of incorruption, that regenerates man by bringing him back to the 
truth—the goad that urges to salvation—He who expels destruction and 
pursues death—He who builds up the temple of God in men, that He may 
cause God to take up His abode in men.” 32
4. Perfect “Boon of Immortality” Bestowed.—Clem­
ent then presents “Jesus, who is eternal,” and is the “one 
great High Priest of the one God,” as exhorting men, saying:
“For to you of all mortals I grant the enjoyment of im­
mortality. ... I want to impart to you this grace, bestowing on 
you the perfect boon of immortality ” 33
And Christ adds, “I desire to restore you according to the 
original model, that ye may become also like me.”84
5. Christ Offers to Conduct Us to Immortality.— 
Clement’s closing exhortations are:
“Let us haste, let us run, let us take His yoke, let us receive, to con­
duct us to immortality, the good charioteer of men . . . and having yoked 
the team of humanity to God, directs His chariot to immortality, hastening 
clearly to fulfill, by driving now into heaven, what He shadowed forth 
before by riding into Jerusalem. A spectacle most beautiful to the Father 
is the eternal Son crowned with victory.” 35
Thus we will obtain the “greatest of all things which are 
incapable of being harmed—God and life.” And “our helper
30 Ibid., chap. 11, p. 203.
a Ibid., p. 204.
32 Ibid.
33 Ibid., chap. 12, p. 205. (Italics supplied.)
34 Ibid.
35 Ibid., p. 206. (Italics supplied.)
RISE OF NEOPLATONIC RESTORATIONISM 
989
is the Word.” Clement’s final appeal is to choose—choose 
“salvation.” Weigh “which will profit you most—judgment or 
grace,” and he presents the contrast, “destruction.” 38
IV. The Instructor Intertwines Our Immortality With Christ
1. Christ’s Commands Are “Paths to Immortality.”—In 
The Instructor, or Tutor, written next and still holding to 
Conditionalism, Clement states at the very outset, in chapter 
one, that when the Word was “inviting men to salvation, the 
appellation of hortatory [exhortation] was properly applied 
to Him.” Clement says, “Let us then designate this Word ap­
propriately by the one name Tutor (or Pcedagogue, or Instruc­
tor).” 37 And in chapter three, after referring to the creation of 
man for the highest ends, he urges:
“Wherefore let us regard the Word [Christ] as law, and His commands 
and counsels as the short and straight paths to immortality; for His pre­
cepts are full of persuasion, not of fear.” 38
2. Are to Put On Immortality of Christ.—In chapter 
six Clement tells us that, after being “illuminated, which is 
to know God,” we are to go on to perfection, following in the 
steps of Christ, with immortality as the climax:
“The same also takes place in our case, whose exemplar Christ became. 
Being baptized, we are illuminated; illuminated, we become sons; being 
made sons, we are made perfect; being made perfect, we are made 
immortal." 38
Having passed from death to life, Clement says, we are to 
put on immortality:
“Truly, then, are we the children of God, who have put aside the old 
man, and stripped off the garment of wickedness, and put on the immor­
tality of Christ; that we may become a new, holy people by regeneration, 
and may keep the man undefiled.” 40
3. Present 
Chastisement 
Deters 
From 
Everlasting
33 ibid.
37 Clement, The Instructor, book 1, chap. 1, in ANF, vol. 2, p. 209.
38 Ibid., chap. 3, p. 211. (Italics supplied.f
39 Ibid., chap. 6, p. 215. (Italics supplied.)
40 Ibid., p. 217. (Italics supplied.)
990
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Death.—In chapter eight, on God’s care for man, Clement al­
ludes to “ ‘rousing the sleeper from deep sleep,’ which of all 
things else is likest death.” Clement states that “God does not 
inflict punishment from wrath, but for the ends of justice.” 
“This same Word who inflicts punishment is Judge.” Then he 
states, “Each one of us, who sins, with his own free-will chooses 
punishment, and the blame lies with him who chooses. God is 
without blame.” “ Then he adds that the punishment of the 
disobedient is for the “good and advantage of him who is pun­
ished,” the aim of reproof being “the salvation of those who 
are reproved.” 42 And Clement speaks of “the time to wound 
the apathetic soul not mortally, but salutarily, securing ex­
emption from everlasting death by a little pain.” 43
4. 
To Put On Robe of Immortality.—Thus present chas­
tisement, now in this present life, saves from everlasting death. 
Clement refers to the Saviour as the “ ‘fountain of life,’ ” 
and says of us that we are “dead, we need life.” 44 And speaking 
of our Instructor, Clement says, “He wishes to save my flesh 
by enveloping it in the robe of immortality ” Then he adds 
that those who pass “over to immortality shall not fall into cor­
ruption.” Thus Christ gives us the “greatest of all gifts, His 
own life,” because “He died for us.”
His purpose in inflicting punishment on the sinners is, “if 
possible, to drag them back from their impetuous rush towards 
death.” 46 In chapter ten, on how God “Restrains From Sin by 
Threatening, and Saves Humanity by Exhorting,” Clement 
says concerning the life of the righteous:
“These words [Eze. 18:4-9] contain a description of the conduct of 
Christians, a notable exhortation to the blessed life, which is the reward 
of a life of goodness—everlasting life.” 48
He thus distinguishes between immortality and the virtues 
of which it is the crown and reward.
41 Ibid., chap. 8, p. 226.
42 Ibid., p. 227.
« Ibid., p. 228.
44 Ibid., chap. 9, p. 230.
40 Ibid., p. 231. (Italics supplied.)
4a Ibid., chap. 10, p. 233. (Italics supplied.)
RISE OF NEOPLATONIC RESTORATIONISM 
991
V. Switches in Stromata to Bald Immortal-Soulism
We now come to Clement’s Stromata, or Miscellanies, his 
latest and crowning work, written after a radical change of view 
had taken place in his concept of life and immortality. Clem­
ent’s avowed acceptance of Platonic philosophy altered the en­
tire current of his thinking and brought about dire conse­
quences. He began to affirm what he had formerly denied, and 
profess what he had before condemned. Thus he executed a 
complete turn-about-face. He even sought to make Christ, 
Paul, Peter, and John appear in the light of Platonists.
But Plato had taught both the pre-existence and the imper­
ishability, or immortality, of the soul. And Clement soon fol­
lowed his teachings to their ultimate.47 He began to use the 
very arguments, in embryonic form, that his brilliant pupil 
and successor, Origen, carried to their ultimate. Clement can 
rightly be designated the father of the Alexandrian Christian 
philosophy, as he now held in incipient form the departures 
that Origen developed into his revolutionary system, as will 
soon be seen.
1. 
Exempts Platonism From Paul’s Strictures.—Clement 
lays the groundwork for it all by asserting that “philosophy is 
in a sense a work of Divine Providence.” 48 And in chapter five, 
headed “Philosophy the Handmaid of Theology,” he declares 
that “before the advent of the Lord, philosophy was necessary 
to the Greeks for righteousness.” 49 Then in chapter eleven 
(“What Is the Philosophy Which the Apostle Bids Us Shun?”) 
Clement asserts, significantly, that the apostle Paul is “brand­
ing not all philosophy, but the Epicurean,” and the “Stoics 
also.” 60 He thus exempts Plato and Platonism. The philoso­
phers, he maintains, have “laid down some true opinions.” 61 
And soon he is citing and substituting the subtilties of Plato 
for the verities of the Word.
47 Photius says that Clement, in his Outlines (Hypotyposes), even taught the doctrine 
of metempsychosis, or transmigration of souls.
48 Clement, The Stromata, or Miscellanies, book 1, chap. 1, in ANF, vol. 2, p. 303.
*9 Ibid., chap. 5, p. 305. 
50 Ibid., chap. 11, p. 311. 
61 Ibid., chap. 19, p. 321.
992
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
2. O
ld Testam
ent Law Leads to Im
m
ortality.—Refer­
ring to the Old Testament law, Clement says, “The law . . . 
conducts to immortality.” 62 And in book 2, chapter 2, he speaks 
of the “discipline of wisdom, . . . causing pain in order to 
produce understanding, and restoring to peace and immortal­
ity.” 53
He does, however, make several interesting observations 
concerning “those who had fallen asleep.” Thus, the Shepherd 
says, “ ‘The apostles and teachers, who had preached the name 
of the Son of God, and had fallen asleep, in power and by faith, 
preached to those that had fallen asleep before.’ ” 34 This is 
immediately followed by the statement:
“ ‘But those, who had fallen asleep before, descended dead, but as­
cended alive. By these, therefore, they were made alive, and knew the 
name of the Son of God.’ ” “
And the Shepherd adds, “ ‘They fell asleep in righteousness 
and in great purity, but wanted only this seal.’ ”58
Clement makes no further explanation of these expres­
sions. His transition to erroneous doctrine was not yet com­
plete.
3. Knowledge of God Communicates Im
m
ortality.—In 
book 4, chapter six (on the Beatitudes), Clement observes that 
“ ‘he that loveth his life shall lose it, and he that loseth his life 
shall find it,’ if we only join that which is mortal of us with the 
immortality of God.” We shall find that the “knowledge of 
God” is the “communication of immortality.” 57 But he does 
not here explain how.
4. Im
m
ortality of Soul Openly Avowed.—And now the 
characteristic mysticism of the Alexandrian School appears 
openly. Chapter four, book five, is headed, “Divine Things 
Wrapped Lip in Figures Both in the Sacred and in Heathen
62 Ibid., chap. 27, pp. 339, 340. 
“ Ibid.
53 Ibid., book 2. chap. 2, p. 348. (Italics supplied.) 
66 Ibid.
w Ibid., chap. 9, p. 357.
57 Ibid., book 4, chap. 6, pp. 413, 414.
RISE OF NEOPLATONIC RESTORATIONISM 
993
Writers.” Chapter six is on “The Mystic Meaning of the [Mo­
saic] Tabernacle and Its Furniture.” This is followed in turn, 
in chapter seven, by ‘‘The Egyptian Symbols,” then “The Use 
of the Symbolic Style by Poets and Philosophers,” chapter 
eight, and the “Reasons for Veiling the Truth in Symbols,” 
chapter nine.
Clement frankly discusses “Greek Plagiarism From the He­
brews,” chapter fourteen. In this connection he says that “pun­
ishments after death,” and “penal retribution by fire,” were 
“pilfered from the Barbarian philosophy both by all the poetic 
Muses and by the Hellenic philosophy.”58 He quotes from 
Plato’s Republic a story of the tortures of some in the nether 
world. “The fiery men” in the story he calls angels, and quotes 
Psalm 54:4. He then makes the startlingly revolutionary ob­
servation “It follows from this that the soul is immortal.” 59
The philosophers, he says, got the story of Creation from 
Moses, along with the concept that “the rational soul zoas 
breathed by God into man's face.” This was regarded as “the 
addition of the soul.” 90 “And founding on the formation of 
man from dust, the philosophers constantly term the body 
earthly.” 01
5. 
All Punishment Regarded Restorative.—Clement 
now begins to teach that all punishment is remedial and re­
storative. God uses it, he says, to reform and purify men after 
death, when the soul, separated from the body, is no longer 
hindered by the flesh—appealing for proof to Peter’s statement 
that Christ went and preached literally to the spirits in prison.82 
So the concept of Hell was changed over into a vast sort of 
Purgatory, where evil is destroyed and the evildoer purged 
and restored. Sin is blotted out, but the sinner is preserved. 
Clement seized upon the Biblical idea of the final extinction
68 Ibid., book 5, chap. 14, p. 465.
69 Ibid., p. 466. (Italics supplied.)
60 Ibid. (Italics supplied.)
61 Ibid., p. 468.
82 However, in an obviously earlier Fragment, when Clement still held to Condition-
alism, he gave this interpretation: “ ‘For this cause was the Gospel preached also to the dead’
—to us, namely, who were at one time unbelievers” (Fragments, No. I, in ANF, vol. 2, p. 572).
32
994
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
of evil but not of the evildoer. Hell is therefore temporary, 
and all souls will in the end be saved. This is Restorationism.®3
6. Purged by the “Fire of Wisdom.”—The purgation is 
effected by so-called “discreet fire,” later called by the Latin 
Fathers the ignis sapiens, a mystical fire of which Clement says:
“We say that the fire sanctifies not flesh, but sinful souls; meaning not 
the all-devouring vulgar fire, but that of wisdom, which pervades the soul 
passing through the fire.”81
But in speaking of this fire, which purifies the condemned, 
Clement refers to the conflagration spoken of by the Stoics, 
and again to supporting passages from Plato, and an Ephesian 
philosopher, possibly Heraclitus. That is the support he cites 
—pagan philosophy, not the Word of God.
7. Christ Preaching the Gospel in Hades.—In book six, 
chapter six (“The Gospel Was Preached to Jews and Gentiles 
in Hades”), Clement openly takes the position that Christ 
preached to the “prisoners” who were “inward” in Hades, to 
bring “repentance” and “conversion.” But in immediate con­
nection Clement ties in the declaration of Matthew 27:52 that 
“many bodies of those that slept arose,” and then adds, “plainly 
as having been translated to a better state.” 00 Then he asks:
“If, then, He preached the Gospel to those in the flesh that they might 
not be condemned unjustly, how is it conceivable that He did not for 
the same cause preach the Gospel to those who had departed this life before 
His advent?”86
8. Dubious Fragments Assert Soul’s Immortality.—We 
will only refer to the dubious Fragment allegedly From the 
Book on the Soul, by Antonius Melissa, twelfth-century monk, 
and not necessarily authentic, which reads:
63 This Restorationism was called apocatastasis, the Greek term for the “doctrine that
ultimately all free moral creatures—angels, men, and devils—will share in the grace of salva­
tion.” Started by Clement, it was fully developed by Origen (ODCC, art., “Apocatastasis,”
p. 67).
64 Clement, Stromata, or Miscellanies, book 7, chap. 6, in ANF, vol. 2, p. 532.
86 Ibid., book 6, chap. 6, pp. 490-492. Cf. book 2, chap. 9, p. 357, where the ex­
pression occurs, “ ‘The apostles and teachers, who had preached the name of the Son of God. 
and had fallen asleep, in power and by faith, preached to those that had fallen asleep before.’ ’ 
Again, “ ‘Those, who had fallen asleep before, descended dead, but ascended alive.’ ”
«Ibid., p. 492.
RISE OF NEOPLATONIC RESTORATIONISM 
995
“Souls that breathe free of all things, possess life, and though sepa­
rated from the body, and found possessed of a longing for it, are bourne 
immortal to the bosom of God.” 87
And the Barocc. Manuscript, on the same Fragment, 
allegedly quotes:
“All souls are immortal, even those of the wicked, for whom it were 
better that they were not deathless. For, punished with the endless 
vengeance of quenchless fire and not dying, it is impossible for them to 
have a period put to their misery.” 88
But its genuineness can be challenged, as Clement now 
held to Restorationism, not Eternal Torment. Dean Farrar 
well states it:
“Though he [“Clemens of Alexandria”] does not express himself with 
perfect distinctness, yet the whole drift of his remarks proves that he could 
not have held an unmitigated doctrine of endless punishment, but only of 
a punishment which would necessarily cease when its remedial object 
was attained.” 88
Such is the tragic and confused ending of this brilliant 
scholar, caught in the entangling toils of Neoplatonic philos­
ophy.
87 Clement, Fragments, No. 6, From Antonius Melissa, in ANF, vol. 2, p. 580.
88 Ibid.
89 Farrar, Eternal Hope, p. 157.
CHAPTER 
SIXTY
Origen—Projector of Universal- 
Restoration Theory
As with Tertullian, we will first take an over-all view of 
Origen’s basic positions, without pausing at this point for doc­
umentation. The specifics will be set forth in detail in the next 
chapter—with exact quotations and full references provided.
Like Tertullian of Carthage, Origen (c. a.d. 185-254) was 
a son of Northern Africa. He was born into a Christian home, 
evidently in Alexandria. A youthful prodigy with a precocious 
thirst for knowledge, he seemed destined for a stellar role. 
Remarkable for sheer genius of learning, he came to be ac­
knowledged as the most accomplished scholar of his genera­
tion. He was always restlessly seeking for the inner meaning, 
and became the revolutionary exponent of the Allegorical 
School of Interpretation that did such incalculable injury to the 
church by its introduction of Platonic mysticism.
Origen’s knowledge embraced all branches—especially 
philosophy, philology, and theology—and all this just as the ec­
clesiastical language of the church was being formulated, and 
before the great councils had defined the limits of “orthodoxy.” 
He was first a student in the Catechetical School in Alexandria 
under the noted Clement, covering the time of violent persecu­
tion under Septimius Severus in 202. Upon the martyrdom of 
his father Leonides, Origen had to be restrained from offering 
himself for martyrdom.
1. 
Became Head of Catechetical School at Eighteen.— 
Possessed of a vivid imagination, Origen carried on his philo-
996
sophical speculations to the point where they resulted in auda­
cious theories and devices. For example, Creation was to him a 
continuous process. Personally, he practiced a rigorous asceti­
cism. He possessed but one coat and no shoes, devoted himself 
continuously to study, and slept on the bare floor. And when 
Clement had to flee from Alexandria to save his life, leaving 
his school without a head, Origen was appointed catechist in 
Clement’s place, in 203, when only eighteen. The school rose to 
new heights of fame under its youthful director.
To gain greater influence over his students, Origen re­
solved to master the various contemporary systems of religion. 
And in order successfully to combat them, he made an exhaus­
tive study of the leading heresies of his age. In the process he be­
came steeped in Greek philosophy. He attacked and refuted 
the enemies of the Christian faith. But in so doing he mixed 
with that faith allegorical mysticism and Platonic philosophy— 
tragically bringing Christian truth down to the level of pagan 
philosophy. And his admiring students sedulously spread his 
views all over the empire. It has been said that there is scarcely 
a later heresy that has blighted the church whose inception 
cannot be traced to Origen.
The Platonic philosophy had but recently come into promi­
nence under the leadership of Ammonius Saccas,1 and Origen 
studied that system under its greatest representative, absorb­
ing its principles. And now his own reputation had spread afar 
because of his advancing a new method of explaining Scrip­
ture that removed the disagreement between the Bible and 
philosophy. Large numbers attended his lectures. Then after 
thirteen years of oral teaching Origen began his written ex­
positions, which treatises, large and small, reached the almost 
unbelievable total of six thousand items.2 A great library was 
provided for Origen by the wealthy Ambrosius, of Alexandria,
PROJECTOR OF UNIVERSAL-RESTORATION THEORY 
997
1 Ammonius Saccas 
{c. 
a.d. 
175-243), 
reputed 
founder 
of Neoplatonism, 
was 
an 
Alexandrian by birth, of high philosophical repute. He greatly influenced Plotinus of Rome 
(who said, “This is the man I was looking for”), as well as Origen. He was said to be a lapsed 
Christian (Eusebius, Church History, book 6, chap. 19, in ANF, vol. 4, p. 265, note 2).
2 “Introductory Note to the Works of Origen,” in ANF, vol. 4, p. 229.
998
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
who also facilitated the publication of his completed works. It 
was thus given wings.
2. 
Finally Deposed and Deprived of Office.—In order 
to better understand the Old Testament, Origen also mastered 
Hebrew. And he traveled to Rome, where he met Hippolytus, 
as well as to Arabia, Palestine, and Greece. He was ordained 
a presbyter at Jerusalem, and was thus brought under the disci­
pline of Bishop Demetrius of Alexandria, who summoned pro­
vincial councils in 230 and 231 that pronounced his ordination 
invalid, condemned him for false doctrine and self-mutilation,® 
deposed him from office, and deprived him of his Catechetical 
School.
Driven into exile, Origen took refuge in Caesarea, where 
he started a similar school, which also prospered. He spent the 
remainder of his life in Palestine, where he died about a.d. 
254 as a result of imprisonment and torture, inflicted under 
Decius. Because of his deviations from the faith and the error 
of his Restorationist philosophy, he was again condemned, 
about 544, at a later synod, and anathematized as a heretic.4 
Origenism was thus suppressed throughout the empire and 
crushed as a distinct movement, though it was never without 
individual supporters.6
I. Depreciates Literalism; Exalts Mystical and Spiritual
1. 
Master Mind of Mystical Interpretation.—As al­
ready stated, Origen was rated as one of the most learned men 
and profound thinkers of ante-Nicene times, profoundly in­
fluencing the doctrinal positions of the church. He engaged
3 Committed in his youth in supposed obedience to Christ’s injunction in Matthew 19:12. 
Such mutilation, according to then-current ecclesiastical law, incapacitated him for ordination.
* C. J. Hefele, A History of the Councils of the Church, vol. 4, book 13, secs. 255-257,
pp. 217-228; and book 14, chap. 2, sec. 274, pp. 336, 337.
8 Origen was assailed by Methodius (d. 311), who denied the eternity of the creative 
processes, the fall of the soul in a pre-existent state, its probationary imprisonment in the body, 
and the spiritualizing of the resurrection. But he was defended by Eusebius and Pamphilus. 
And Theophilus (d. 412) catalogued his heresies—particularly his teaching of the ultimate 
restoration of evil men, fallen angels, and the devil himself. He denounced Origen as “the 
hydra of all heresies.”
in constant controversies, these continuing to harass the 
church until the sixth century. Having become profoundly 
persuaded of the “philosophical truth” of the Innate Immor­
tality of the soul, he recast his Christian views to meet the 
pattern of his Platonic philosophy. This involved virtually 
every vital doctrine.
Always inclined to be erratic, he was at first an extreme 
literalist. Then, swinging to the other extreme, he became 
the master mind of the School of Mystical Interpretation, re­
ducing it to a system. How could the Platonic postulates be 
harmonized with the Bible? The genius of Origen devised a 
way—the Bible was to be understood allegorically, not liter­
ally, or as metaphors, under which its latent sense and real 
truth were concealed. By this ingenious method the Bible 
could be made to teach Platonic positions without unavoid­
able contradiction.
2. Allegorization Determined Entire Exegesis.—Ori­
gen, most voluminous of the early writers, was the initiator of 
textual criticism. His crowning work in Biblical criticism was 
his Hexapla—six versions in parallel columns. It required 
eighteen years to produce. His commentaries cover the Bible. 
His great apologetic work was his able Contra Celsus, meeting 
the most scurrilous attack of the time against Christianity.
Origen’s chief dogmatical work, De Principiis (On the 
Principles), the first systematic theological exposition of 
Christian doctrine, was written before he left Alexandria, and 
was the most speculative of all his works. He here conjectured 
about God and heavenly things, and man and the material 
world—together with free will and its consequences, and im­
mortality, eternity, eternal life, et cetera—all the subject of 
our quest. But all of these were covered with a veil of allegory. 
And this allegorization determined the whole pattern of his 
exegesis.
3. Origen’s Three “Senses” to Scripture.—To Origen 
there were three senses to Scripture—the literal, moral, and
PROJECTOR OF UNIVERSAL-RESTORATION THEORY 999
1000
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
spiritual. The literal (which he called earthly, sensual, carnal, 
Jewish) had little value, was not true. The moral, or deeper 
sense (celestial, intelligible, symbolical, mystical, secret), re­
lates to moral matters and the religious life on earth. And the 
spiritual pertains to the heavenly life in the world to come— 
his principal interest. The “common and historical sense,” was 
for the “more simple,” but the advanced were to be “edified 
by the very soul of Scripture.” 8
Origen did not deny that the Scriptures taught a literal res­
urrection, a personal Second Advent, and a millennium—if 
taken in a literal sense. But such, he contended, was not the 
true and inner sense. So Origen deprived the Scriptures of all 
force by adopting the allegorical method of exegesis.
II. Universal Restorationism Origen’s Answer to 
Tertullian’s Eternal Torment
1. 
Distorts an Obvious Bible Truth.—Origen brought 
forward a neglected Bible truth missed by Tertullian, but in 
such tragically distorted form as to nullify the inspired provi­
sion. That truth was the ultimate extinction of all moral evil. 
Origen understood the Bible to declare that sin will be 
brought to an end. Evil will not be permitted to exist forever. 
He saw that God’s righteousness, justice, mercy, and power 
are pledged to that end. But Origen erred grievously as to 
the means and method of accomplishment. At that point he 
left the Scripture platform completely, to follow human tradi­
tion.
The reason for his error is not hard to find—the false 
Platonic assumption of the universal Innate Immortality of 
the soul. That was the ignis fatuus (fool’s fire, or will-o’-the- 
wisp) that led him astray and emboldened him into promis­
ing life to those upon whom God had threatened death. And 
in proclaiming restoration to the incorrigibly wicked, instead
8 Origen, De Principiis, book 4, chap. 1, sec. II, in ANF, vol. 4, p. 359.
of the destruction decreed, he contradicted God and deceived 
men. While his theory was captivating, it was nonetheless 
false, invalid, and wholly misleading. That was his gravest sin­
gle error—Universal Restorationism instead of the ultimate 
extinction of all unrepentant sinners.
2. Plato the Sponsor of Both Views.—But both Ori­
gen’s and Tertullian’s philosophies of the destiny of the soul 
had, strangely enough, been sketched out long before either 
advocate was born—for Plato had sponsored both views. In 
his Tartarus Plato had given the prototype of Tertullian’s 
Hell. But Plato confined his endless misery for the wicked to 
a few “incurables.”
The vast majority, he held, were curable. And his scene 
of their punishment after death was the place of their purga­
tion—an Acherusian lake of woe into which the vast majority 
of souls would go, and from which after a suitable period of 
suffering they were released or restored. Even in Tartarus, 
for the incurables, some of the very wicked came forth after 
complete purgation.7 So Plato’s pagan philosophy had sug­
gested the slightly variant ideas both to Origen and to Tertul- 
lian.
3. Life Falsely Promised Instead of Death.—Origen 
altered the intent of the plainest language of Scripture to 
pledge eternal life to those on whom God had decreed eternal 
death. Pressing on the Biblical promises of the utter extinc­
tion of all evil, he so manipulated the Scriptures thereon as 
to make them utterly untrustworthy as a guide and authority. 
Tertullian had made evil, destined to pass with time, to be 
evil for eternity. He thus violated God’s designated difference 
between time and eternity. Tertullian had evil existing 
throughout all eternity in God’s realm of righteousness.
Origen, on the contrary, held to the final extinction only 
of sin, and not of sinners. With him evil was transitory and
PROJECTOR OF UNIVERSAL-RESTORATION THEORY 1001
7 F. J. Church, Plato’s Phaedo (107, 108, 114), in Library of Liberal Arts, no. 30, 
pp. 62 , 63, 69.
1002
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
would pass. But he made death to be the magic means of sal­
vation. That was his tragic reversal.
It must in fairness be said that Origenism has as much 
truth (distorted as it therein is) as the rival view of Tertul- 
lian; and it presents a more pleasing view of God. But it was 
only a human system that contradicted the Word of God, 
which in a hundred places declares there is no hope for those 
condemned in the judgment. When evil has at last been pun­
ished, the reprobate will have passed out of being.
Origen therefore falls under the condemnation of those 
who strengthen “the hands of the wicked, that he should not 
return from his wicked way, by promising him life” (Eze. 13: 
22). But in that future age that shall have no end there will 
be no reprobate, either in Heaven, where Origen had placed 
them, or in Hell forever, as Tertullian had contended, for 
there will be a clean universe, brought to pass in God’s way— 
and not that of Tertullian’s nor of Origen’s.
4. 
Two Equally Injurious Perversions.—So it was not 
without reason that the apostle Paul warned against the sub­
tleties of human philosophy (Col. 2:8; Acts 20:29, 30) and the 
deceptive “traditions of men,” and predicted a grave departing 
from the apostolic faith after the passing of the apostles (2 
Thess. 2:3). It was the adoption of one alien philosophic dogma 
that led one school of highly trained men,8 following Tertullian 
of Carthage, to overstress divine justice and to portray God as 
a tyrant of unutterable cruelty.
And now another school of theology,8 following Origen of 
Alexandria, seeking to free the character of God from the 
charge of injustice and cruelty swung to the opposite ex­
treme. It stressed the restorative power of God and glossed 
over the sinfulness of sin. This school became fully as injuri­
ous to the cause of truth and righteousness, and gilded the 
blackness of sin with seductive light.
8 Including Hippolytus, Cyprian, Ambrose, Chrysostom, and Jerome.
• Including Gregory Thaumaturgus, Pamphilus, Eusebius, Titus, Basil, Diodorus, Didy- 
mus, and Gregory of Nyssa.
Both departures were the outgrowth of perversions of 
Bible truths, developed diversely but under the common 
impulse of the same philosophic fallacy—universal Innate 
Immortality. The revolting picture of God painted by Tertul­
lian, with his postulate of Eternal Torment, created an un­
derstandable revulsion. As a result, a quarter of a century 
later Origen had stepped forward to counteract it with his 
countertheory of universal restoration. While Tertullian had 
consigned reprobate man to Endless Torment in Hell, Ori­
gen now converted Hell into a vast Purgatory for the purifica­
tion of reprobate men and demons, with ultimate restoration 
of all to joy at the right hand of God forevermore. It was the 
old story of the pendulum swinging from one extreme to the 
other—with truth lying between, and sharply separated from, 
the two false concepts.
5. 
Avoids One Pitfall Only to Fall Into Another.— 
Thus we see that Origen, earliest known church writer to 
formulate the theory of Restoration ism,10 put it forth in op­
position to what he considered to be the vindictive, contra- 
dictive, and fantastic assertions made by Tertullian on the 
Eternal Torment of the wicked. But he avoided one pitfall 
only to fall into another. He saw that Tertullian, though led 
by Plato, had plainly fallen into a theological ditch.
But Origen, though noting the fall of Tertullian into an 
obvious error, did not perceive the cause of that fall. So he 
took the hand of the same philosophical guide, Plato, and 
holding to the same premise of universal Innate Immortality, 
fell into a different ditch, but one just as deep and delusive, 
and just as alien to Biblical truth. It was a double tragedy.
Tertullian’s doctrine of an eternal Hell of ceaseless tor­
ture had presented a glaring target for the shafts of the pagan 
philosopher Celsus, and for his fierce attacks on such a God as 
execrable. This helped to drive Origen into the opposite fal-
PROJECTOR OF UNIVERSAL-RESTO RATION THEORY 1003
10 Canon Constable rightly remarks, “We cannot find, either among heretical or ortho­
dox teachers, the name of a single writer who advocated the theory before Origen” (Duration 
and Nature of Future Punishment, p. 228).
1004
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
lacy. Origen countered Tertullian’s eternal Hell postulate 
with Scripture declarations concerning the final eradication of 
evil and God’s promise of a sinless universe. But, by connect­
ing these promises of a clean universe with his preconceived 
notion of the indefeasible immortality of all souls, Origen ar­
rived, logically and inevitably enough, at the erroneous con­
clusion of a final restoration of even the most incorrigible sin­
ners, and not only of demons but of Satan himself.
As might be expected, with such a view Origen utterly 
rejected the idea of punishment by literal fire. To him punish­
ment would be by process of intellectual and moral forces, 
such as remorse of conscience, fiery trial, and the like. These 
would purify the soul from sin. And death was likewise figura­
tive, and the predicted destruction was not of sinners, but of 
sins. So the purifying fires of Gehenna would purge away the 
dross, preparing the soul for the never-ending bliss of Heaven. 
Yet it was only an ingenious sophistry, brought about by dis­
carding the literal for the metaphysical.
III. Pivotal Christian Doctrines Assailed by Origen
Before turning to documented detail in the next sections, 
let us take a bird’s-eye view of the major depredations made 
by Origen upon the pivotal doctrines of the primitive faith. 
This will bring the larger picture before us in broad outline, 
with the details to be filled in later. Here are nine basic 
points.
1. 
Scriptures 
Robbed 
of 
Authoritative 
Force.—As 
noted, Origen maintained that the literal sense of Scripture is 
not its true meaning. Indeed, that was perhaps his primary 
emphasis in exegesis. Following the allegorical method of 
Plato and Philo, he so spiritualized the intent of the Scrip­
tures as to deprive them of all authority and force. He denied 
the literality of the Bible narratives, such as the Creation nar­
rative and the Fall, and many New Testament historical rec-
ords as well, declaring them actually to be fabrications. He 
declared the prophecies to be filled with dark sayings, and he 
muddied even the clearest and most explicit statements of 
Holy Writ by his mysticism.
2. Swept Apostolic Faith Into Discard.—The basic 
doctrines and eschatological teachings of the apostolic faith— 
the Second Advent, bodily resurrection, cataclysmic end of the 
world by divine interposition, millennium, destruction of sin 
and sinners, and the establishment of the kingdom of God at 
the end of the age—were thus all swept into discard by Ori- 
gen’s allegorizing interpretation as the darkness of mystic phi­
losophy increasingly supplanted the light of Scripture truth.
3. Pre-existence Coupled to Restoration ism.—Origen 
felt a compulsion to develop and enunciate what he conceived 
to be the foundational principles concerning the universe, 
God, and man. Two distinctive fundamentals of his system 
were (1) the pre-existence of the soul, and (2) the universal 
restoration of all souls. Without pre-existence he could not ex­
plain and defend the present state of things in the world or 
bring them to accord with is view of the justice of God. And 
without universal restoration of all to righteousness he could 
not bring his system to a final issue, he thought, worthy of 
God’s justice and mercy. Moreover, his system must embrace 
man’s free will, which must not be coerced. So universal res­
toration became the keystone in his theological arch, without 
which his whole system would collapse.
4. Impinged 
Vaunted 
Freedom 
of 
Will.—Origen 
rightly held that God made man capable of good or evil, with 
power to choose as he might elect. And yet Origen would 
make God bound to win (or force) that responsible free 
moral agent back to the life he had chosen to forsake—thus ac­
tually violating the freedom-of-the-will principle he had set 
forth. God truly made man capable of choosing either life 
and immortality or evil and death. But Origen said, No, the
PROJECTOR OF UNIVERSAL-RESTORATION THEORY 1005
1006
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
evil you chose shall be removed from you, irrespective of 
what you do, and the good that you did not choose to cherish 
shall be enforced upon you. Origen thus reduced the free 
moral agent, made to walk in the freedom of choice, to a crea­
ture regulated by the irresistible law of control.
5. 
Relationships to the Empire Revolutionized.—In 
the more mundane sphere the teachings of Origen likewise 
led logically to another revolution of thought and attitude on 
a vital question lying at the foundation of all theological and 
social developments—namely, Christianity’s relationship to 
the state, or empire. Prior to Origen, the Christian commu­
nity abstained from involvement in political life, refusing to 
make appeals to tribunals and declining to participate in mili­
tary activities. They sought to guard themselves from the 
contaminations of the age by the simple device of separation.
Before Origen, the conversion of the Roman Empire had 
not been expected. Christians were in but not of the world. 
It had been generally believed that the empire would be de­
stroyed by the speedy return of Christ, with His millennial 
reign following. But Origen planted the seed of the revolu­
tionary concept of the gradual conversion of the empire to 
Christianity. He relentlessly exposed the chiliastic extrava­
gances of the day, and laid the foundation for the revolution­
ary task of preparing Christianity for a new destiny—its 
establishment on earth and the restoration of all souls to the 
fellowship of God and the purity of heaven.
IV. Revolutionary Concepts of Life, Death, and Destiny
1. 
Strange 
Contentions 
in 
Anthropology.—In the 
area of anthropology Origen held that in the original Creation 
all created intelligences were alike. But, through the exercise 
of freedom some developed into a higher order, whereas 
others fell into sin and became either demons or souls im­
prisoned in bodies. Death, he held, does not finally decide the 
fate of the soul, which may turn into an angel or a demon—
this ascent or descent going on indefinitely until the final 
apocatastasis,u when all creatures will be saved.“ This was per­
haps his most controversial theory.
2. Adam’s 
Fall 
Made 
Allegorical.—The material 
world, Origen believed, was created out of nothing, and be­
came the abode of the fallen spirits. But Adam’s fall was re­
garded as only allegorical, representing the fate of the whole 
class of fallen, embodied spirits. It was a type, taking place 
everywhere, at all times. Man, Origen held, is threefold. He 
has a material body, a soul, or vital principle, and a spirit.
Through apostasy man’s reason was darkened and he was 
deprived of spiritual life, yet his will remained free to choose 
evil. All subsequent changes result from its exercise, and may 
effect the repeated rise and fall of all finite beings. But no sal­
vation is absolutely final, according to Origen. Evil remains 
as an eternal vicissitude or threat.
3. Revolutionary Concepts of Eschatology.—As to 
his eschatology, a strong current of mysticism flows all through 
his treatise De Principiis (“On the Principles”). Origen thus 
rejected the doctrine of the resurrection of a material body, 
which instead would be but spiritual. And he believed in the 
final restoration and complete harmony of the spiritual world. 
The end is to be as was the beginning. The damned, the de­
mons, and even the devil himself will, he supposed, after disci­
plining punishment be brought again into ultimate subjec­
tion to Christ. This, however, was vigorously challenged.
4. Mystical Interpretation Invoked to Evade Liter­
alism.—When confronted with inspired passages that ex­
pressly declare the destruction of the wicked, Origen simply 
invoked the aid of mystic interpretation. His argument was 
simply this: The sinner will not be destroyed, for the simple 
reason that he is indestructible. He possesses an immortality
PROJECTOR OF UNIVERSAL-RESTORATION THEORY 1007
11 Greek term for the doctrine that all free moral creatures—angels, men, and demons 
—will ultimately be saved.
12 ODCC, art., “Origen,” pp. 991-993.
1008
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
of which he cannot be deprived. It is consequently only the 
sinner’s sin that will be consumed in the baptism of fire. Hell 
will only retard, for a longer or shorter period, the entrance 
of all its inhabitants into Heaven. Indeed, under Origen 
Hell became no longer Hell, only a vast Purgatory, trans­
formed into a sort of vestibule to the abode of the blessed.1*
This mystical interpretation has been called the “pest of 
exegesis,” 14 from which the church has never been completely 
delivered. While there are types, symbols, allegories, parables, 
and prophecies in Holy Writ which must, perforce, be taken 
figuratively, nevertheless the principle is widely recognized 
that the metaphorical meaning is allowed only where the lit­
eral meaning is inadmissible and absurd. That principle 
Origen flaunted. To his mind there was nothing absurd, for 
instance, in the supposition that a being which had had a begin­
ning 15 could never come to an end—despite the seeming 
contradictions of Holy Writ.
V. Documented Definitions and Usages
Before surveying Origen’s specific teachings, first note a 
few definitions of key expressions and usages that pinpoint 
his meaning.
1. Men Are Souls in Bodies.—Origen defines “men” 
simply as “souls that are placed in bodies.” 16
2. Soul Is Immaterial, Invisible, Immortal.—Origen 
repeatedly refers to the “soul” as a “substance,” 17 partaking 
of the “eternal nature,” which “should last forever.” It is 
“immortal and incorruptible,” sharing the nature of God. 
And “every substance which partakes of that eternal nature
13 Origen, De Principiis, book 1. chap. 6, in ANF, vol. 4, pp. 260-262, cf. Origen, 
Against Celsus, book 6, chap. 26, in ANF, vol. 4, p. 585.
14 Petavel, The Problem of Immortality, p. 281.
15 Yet Origen had said that rational beings were “created” in the “beginning.” They 
“did not previously exist,” or “did not always exist.” And what is bestowed can be “taken 
away, and disappear” (De Principiis, book 2, chap. 9, sec. 2, in ANF, vol. 4, p. 290).
19 Ibid., book 4, chap. 1, sec. 14, p. 362.
17 Ibid., book 2, chap. 8, sec. 1, p. 286.
PROJECTOR OF UNIVERSAL-RESTORATION THEORY 1009
should last for ever, and be incorruptible and eternal.” 18 Be­
cause of the importance of the term we add two citations as 
examples:
“The soul over which He exercises this providential care is immortal; 
and as being immortal and everlasting, it is not, although not immediately 
cared for, excluded from salvation, which is postponed to a more con­
venient time.” 19
“For God deals with souls not merely with a view to the short space 
of our present life, included within sixty years or more, but with reference 
to a perpetual and never-ending period, exercising His providential care 
over souls that are immortal, even as He Himself is eternal and immortal. 
For He made the rational nature, which He formed in His own image 
and likeness, incorruptible; and therefore the soul, which is immortal, is 
not excluded by the shortness of the present life from the divine remedies 
and cures.” 20
These souls, Origen elsewhere soberly avers, are as im­
mortal, eternal, and incorruptible as God Himself!
3. Death Neither Perishing Nor Destruction.—Death, 
according to Origen, is nothing more than a departure. Man, 
created for life, will not be destroyed. Death produces only a 
change. Its ‘‘substance certainly remains.” And “according to 
the merits of the indwelling soul,” the fleshly body will “ad­
vance to the glory of a spiritual body.” n
“For death is nothing else than a departure from life—and as it was 
not to follow that those beings which had once been created by God for 
the enjoyment of life should utterly perish, it was necessary that, before 
death, there should be in existence such a power as would destroy the 
coming death.” 22
4. “Destruction” Is Not Ceasing to Be.—As to de­
struction, Origen denies that it eventuates in nonexistence. 
The soul was created to live and cannot cease to be. It is inde­
feasible.
“Its [the soul’s] destruction, therefore, will not be its non-existence, but 
its ceasing to be an enemy, and (to be) death. For nothing is impossible to 
the Omnipotent, nor is anything incapable of restoration to its Creator:
18 Ibid., book 4, chap. 1. sec. 36, p. 381.
19 Ibid., book 3, chap. 1, sec. 13, p. 313.
20 Ibid., p. 314.
21 Ibid., book 3, chap. 6, sec. 5, p. 346.
22 Ibid., book 1, chap. 2, sec. 4, p. 247.
1010
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
for He made all things that they might exist, and those things which were 
made for existence cannot cease to be.”23
Then he adds, concerning those things “created by God 
for the purpose of permanent existence,” that—
“for those things which agreeably to the common opinion are believed to 
perish, the nature either of our faith or of the truth will not permit us to 
suppose to be destroyed.” 24
5. “Fire” Consumes Fuel of Sin.—The fire by which 
each wicked person is punished is his “own fire.”
“Every sinner kindles for himself the flame of his own fire, and is not 
plunged into some fire which has been already kindled by another, or was 
in existence before himself.” 26
Of this fire, he adds, the “fuel and food are our sins”— 
the “hay and stubble.” Evil “boils up to punishment, and is 
set on fire to chastisements.” 28
6. “Consuming Fire” Simply Refines.—The reference 
to God as a “consuming fire” calls for understanding of the 
“deeper meaning,” says Origen. He will “purify His own peo­
ple,” and the “things” which are evil—the “wickedness”— 
will be “consumed by God.” Thus this “consuming fire” is to 
“refine the rational nature,” to “thoroughly cleanse away the 
evil.” 27
7. Earth’s “Change” Is Not Annihilation.—When the 
heavens and the earth are changed they do not perish. “If the 
fashion of the world passes away, it is by no means an annihila­
tion or destruction,” but a “kind of change of quality and 
transformation of appearance.” Everything is “tending to that 
goal of happiness,” in which God will be “ ‘all and in all.’ ”28
8. “World’s End” Is Its Subjugation.—The expression, 
“end of the world,” indicates its “perfection and completion.” 
It comes to pass when all enemies are “subdued to Christ,”
23 Ibid., book 3, chap. 6, sec. 5, p. 346.
21 Ibid.
25 Ibid., book 2, chap. 10, sec. 4, p. 295.
28 Ibid.
27 Origen, Against Celsus, book 4, chap. 13, p. 502.
28 Origen, De Principiis, book 1, chap. 6, sec. 4, p. 262.
when all beings in Heaven and earth bend the knee to Christ.® 
That is the great consummation.
9. 
“Fall” Counteracted in Future Ages.—Those who 
“fell from that primeval unity and harmony” are “by the in­
effable skill of His wisdom” to be transformed and restored.80 
Those “removed” from the “primal state of blessedness” are 
not removed “irrecoverably.” They “may recover themselves 
and be restored to their condition of happiness.” In the “fu­
ture world,” and in the “ages to come, when there shall be the 
new heaven and new earth, ... it may be restored to that unity 
promised by the Lord Jesus.” “All those beings” who “fell 
away” may be “restored” under the “instruction of the an­
gels.” 81
Such is the essence of Origenism.
PROJECTOR OF UNIVERSAL-RESTORATION THEORY 1011
28 Ibid., Secs. 1, 2, p. 260.
30 Ibid., book 2, chap. 1, secs. 1, 2, p. 268.
31 Ibid., book 1, chap. 6, secs. 2, 3, p. 261.
CHAPTER 
SIXTY-ONE
Origen’s Multiple Departures 
From the Faith
To some it may seem useless and wearisome to again 
traverse Origen’s tangent positions, this time in documented 
form. But it is imperative that we realize the startling innova­
tions that Origen projected, and the strange positions taken, 
for these struck at the very heart of the Christian faith as per­
tains to man’s origin, nature, and destiny. Nevertheless, these 
vagaries were adopted by an ardent minority forming the 
third school in the theological trilemma. But these deviations 
discount the trustworthiness of his universalist conclusions, 
still widely held today. Note, then, fourteen points in se­
quence.
I. Adopted Heathen Transmigration Fallacy
1. 
Discards God’s Solution to Sin Problem.—Accord­
ing to translator Frederick Crombie, four fundamental errors 
forced Origen to spiritualize away Biblical truth. These er­
rors were: (1) The pre-existence of all human souls, and
their imprisonment in material bodies as punishment for sins 
previously committed; (2) the pre-existence of even the “hu­
man soul of Christ,” (3) the transformation of our material 
bodies into ‘‘absolutely ethereal ones at the resurrection,” 
and (4) the ultimate salvation of “all men, and even devils,” 
“restored through the mediation of Christ.” 1 Clinging to such
1 Frederick Crombie, quoted in “Introductory Note to the Works of Origen,” in ANF, 
1012
ORIGEN’S MULTIPLE DEPARTURES FROM THE FAITH 1013
basic fallacies in his concept of the plan and provisions of re­
demption, Origen could not do other than discard the Advent 
hope as the goal of the ages. That was the basis.
2. 
Taught Successive Transmigrations of the Soul.— 
Note Crombie’s first point. Origen definitely taught a succes­
sion of transmigrations of the human soul through a sequence 
of existences prior to and following the present life, with con­
demnation and bodily imprisonment imposed to atone for the 
sins of a previous existence—and with one’s status in the next 
world determined by his conduct in this life. This was vital 
to his theory of the immortality of the soul and its restoration. 
Although Origen disavowed the type of transmigration, or 
metempsychosis, held by certain heretics, he nevertheless per­
sonally taught actual transmigration. Thus:
“The soul, which is immaterial and invisible in its nature, exists in no 
material place, without having a body suited to the nature of that place. 
Accordingly, it at one time puts off one body which was necessary before, 
but which is no longer adequate in its changed state, and it exchanges it 
for a second; and at another time it assumes [still] another in addition to 
the former, which is needed as a better covering, suited to the purer ethereal 
regions of heaven.” 2
He even went so far as to assert: “Angels may become 
men or demons, and again from the latter they may rise to be 
men or angels.” * That is the second point.
Origen reasoned, by way of “hypothesis,” that if the same 
soul could be “twice [incarnated] in the body,” then “why 
should it not be thrice, and repeatedly in it.” 4 Then he ob­
serves, “Punishments” for the sins of this life are “rendered” 
by the “method of transmigration.” And finally follows this 
astonishing assertion:
“But if this be granted as a consequence, perhaps there will never 
be a time when a soul shall not undergo transmigration; for always because 
of its former sins will it dwell in the body.” 5
vol. 4, p. 233. Dr. Crombie, the translator and annotator, was professor of Biblical criticism, 
St. Mary’s College, St. Andrews.
2 Origen, Against Celsus, book 7, chap. 32, p. 623.
3 Origen, “Fragment,” from “Epistle to Avitus,” translated by Jerome and appended 
to book 1 of De Principiis, p. 267.
1 Origen, Commentary on Matthew, book 13, sec. 1, in ANF, vol. 9, p. 474.
5 Ibid.
1014
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Then he explains that only the “absolutely sinless” need 
“no transmigration.” And later in the same chapter he con­
cludes, “There will be two general forms of punishment, the 
one by way of transmigration, and the other outside of a body 
of this kind.”* That is boldly clear.
Origen’s strange vagaries even included the following:
“It would surely be absurd to say that He [Christ] tasted death for 
human sins and not for any other beings besides man which had fallen 
into sin, as for example the stars. For not even the stars are clean in the 
eyes of God.” 7
And again, “For the soul of the sun is placed in a body.” 8 
Such are the lengths to which he went.
3. 
Biblical Terms Explained Away by Allegorizing.— 
Next, note Crombie’s fourth point. Origen simply added to 
Plato’s teaching to make restoration universal by eliminat­
ing Plato’s few “incurables,” showing that they were not really 
incurable. So pagan philosophy furnished the original restora- 
tionist idea to Origen. But now, as a Christian teacher, he must 
adapt and enforce it in the language of Scripture. Plato had 
taught that souls in the purgative fires did not perish, for they 
were immortal. And to avoid the obvious intent of the scrip­
tural expressions of “die,” “perish,” “destroy,” et cetera, Origen 
explained them away by drafting upon a secondary meaning 
used in the language of poetry, exaggeration, hyperbole, and 
so forth.® Thus “death” was made to mean life; “life” to mean 
happiness; and to be “destroyed,” to be made miserable. So 
he reasoned.
Origen experienced no difficulty in this, for he maintained 
that Scripture has a “spiritual,” as well as a literal, meaning, 
which fact “escapes the notice of most.” 10 That is the magic
6 Ibid., pp. 474, 475.
7 Origen, Commentary on the Gospel of John, book 1, sec 4, in ANF, vol. 9, p. 319.
8 Ibid., sec. 17, p. 306.
•Origen, De Principiis, book 1, chap. 3, sec. 3, p. 252; Preface to De Principiis, par. 8,
p. 241.
10 Origen, Preface to De Principiis, par. 8, in ANF, vol. 4, p. 241; De Principiis, book 
2, chap. 10, sec. 6, p. 295.
key. By this device he could assign any meaning he chose to 
Scripture—but, as Mosheim puts it, “always at the expense of 
truth.” 11 So the scriptural warnings to the sinner that he should 
die in person were neutralized by Origen’s directing their ac­
tion against the sinner’s sin. But in doing so Origen perverted 
the intent of Scripture as verily as did Tertullian.
The object of hell-fire, Origen held, is to destroy wicked­
ness. Iniquity becomes the fuel of Hell. “The fury of God’s 
vengeance,” he taught, is for the “purgation of souls.” It is 
“applied by fire” with the “object of healing.” 12 Till this evil 
is burned out and eradicated Hell burns on. This process which 
destroys evil is that of “purgation” of the evildoer who, in the 
process, grows into the likeness of God, which likeness had been 
defaced. When the process is completed he takes his place in 
glory.
II. Allegorizing Substituted for Literalism
But we repeat, the foundation of it all was the concept of 
the inalienable immortality of all souls—and this the pagan Pla­
tonic philosophy had provided. The next essential, according 
to Origen, was liberty to alter the obvious intent, or applica­
tion, of Scripture to support his view, which he also exercised. 
Thus he rendered the Bible worthless as an authoritative 
source of truth by applying its strictures against the sinner 
merely to his sin.
1. Literalism
 of Creation N
arrative Swept Aside.—Ac­
cording to Origen the purpose of the Holy Spirit is to “pre­
serve the coherence of the spiritual meaning” of Scripture. 
The literal words, he declares, must be understood in their 
“spiritual meaning,” elsewhere in the chapter called the “mys­
tical meaning,” or “inner meaning.” As they stand, the “or­
dinary meaning” is “always concealing the hidden meaning”
ORIGEN’S MULTIPLE DEPARTURES FROM THE FAITH 1015
11 Quoted in Constable, Duration and Nature of Future Punishment, p. 224.
12 Origen, De Principiis, book 2, chap. 10, sec. 6, in ANF, vol. 4, p. 296.
1016
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
within the historical narrative. Thus, he asserts, many of the 
“events which lie on the surface can neither be true nor use­
ful.” Consequently, we must seek for the truth that is “con­
cealed,” but which is “worthy” and “inspired.” Otherwise they 
are of little use if taken as written.18
“Stumbling-blocks,” Origen maintained, have been intro­
duced, and “certain impossibilities and incongruities” inter­
spersed as obstacles to any “ordinary meaning.” By this means 
the truth seeker is led into the “narrow path” of a “loftier and 
more sublime road” of understanding. Passing from such hazy 
generalities to specifics, Origen urges, for instance, that the his­
torical narrative of Creation week be searched for its “inner 
meaning.”
“Who is found so ignorant as to suppose that God, as if He had been 
a husbandman, planted trees in paradise, in Eden towards the east, and 
a tree of life in it, i.e., a visible and palpable tree of wood, so that any 
one eating of it with bodily teeth should obtain life, and, eating again of 
another tree, should come to the knowledge of good and evil? No one, 
I think, can doubt that the statement that God walked in the afternoon 
in paradise, and that Adam lay hid under a tree, is related figuratively in 
Scripture, that some mystical meaning may be indicated by it.” 14
So in the literal record “there are inserted and interwoven 
things which cannot be admitted historically, but which may 
be accepted in a spiritual signification.” 15 Thus the literalism 
of Creation week, with its vital declarations on the origin and 
nature of man, sin, and the fall, death, and the destiny of man, 
are totally swept aside. Such a position has a vital bearing on 
our quest.
2. 
Denies L
iteral T
ruth of Biblical Records.—It is es­
sential that we understand the basis upon which the whole 
structure of Origen’s allegorical system is built, and which 
was responsible for turning a large segment of the church away 
from her historic positions. Its seriousness is indicated by the 
historian Milner, who declared that “no man, not altogether
13 Ibid., book 4, chap. 1, secs. 10, 14, 15, 23, pp. 358 , 359, 364, 365 , 368, 373.
11 Ibid., sec. 16, p. 365. (Italics supplied.)
15 Ibid.
ORIGEN’S MULTIPLE DEPARTURES FROM THE FAITH 1017
unsound and hypocritical, ever injured the church of Christ 
more than Origen,” by introducing his “complicated scheme 
of fanciful interpretation” which for many centuries “obscured 
the light of Scripture.” 19
And Killen adds that Origen made the Sacred Writings say 
anything or nothing, according to his caprice, often maintain­
ing conflicting views.17 In so doing Origen constantly refers to 
the hidden, covered, concealed, and spiritual meanings that 
“need the key of knowledge” to unlock and uncover them.18
Origen not only denied the Old Testament declarations 
concerning Creation week and the fall of man, already noted, 
but challenged the trustworthiness of the New Testament rec­
ords, as well. As we have seen, he boldly declared that various 
historical narratives are “wrapped up,” “concealed,” and cov­
ered as with a veil,18 in order to stimulate closer investigation 
and thus to bring out their “mystical” meaning.
For example, the heading of section 2 in his Commentary 
on John, book ten, states: “Literally Read, the Narratives Can­
not Be Harmonized: They Must Be Interpreted Spiritually.” 20 
Section 4 is headed, “Scripture Contains Many Contradictions, 
and Many Statements Which Are Not Literally True, but 
Must Be Read Spiritually and Mystically.” 21 Again, in section 
5 he says, “Paul Also Makes Contradictory Statements About 
Himself.” 22 And still again, in section 17, “Matthew’s Story of 
the Entry Into Jerusalem. Difficulties Involved in It for Those 
Who Take It Literally.” 23
III. Spiritualizes Second Advent, End of World, 
and Millennium
1. 
Second Advent Mysticized Into “Daily” Coming.— 
Turning now to specific basic doctrines, we find that the Bible-
18 Joseph Milner, The History of the Church of Christ, cent. 3, chaps. 15, 5, vol. 1, 
pp. 221, 156.
17 W. D, Killen, The Ancient Church, pp. 345, 346.
18 Origen, De Principiis, book 4, chap. 1, secs. 10, 14, 23, in ANF, vol. 4, pp. 358, 363, 
373; see book 1, chap. 3, sec. 3, p. 252.
19 Ibid., book 4, chap. 1, sec. 14, p. 363.
20 Origen, Commentary on John, book 10, sec. 2, in ANF, vol. 9, p. 382.
21 Ibid., sec. 4, p. 383. 
22 Ibid., sec. 5, p. 384. 
23 Ibid., sec. 17, p. 395.
1018
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
promised second advent of Christ in power and glory, visi­
ble to every eye as our Lord returns in the clouds of heaven, is 
spiritualized away by Origen, as Christ is made to come “daily” 
in “prophetic clouds” to “every believer.” He likens to children 
those who naively hold to a literal or “corporeal” understand­
ing of such passages. Though prolix, note it:
“With much power, however, there comes daily, to the soul of every 
believer, the second advent of the Word in the prophetic clouds, that is, 
in the writings of the prophets and apostles, which reveal Him and in all 
their words disclose the light of truth, and declare Him as coming forth 
in their significations [which are] divine and above human nature. Thus, 
moreover, to those who recognize the revealer of doctrines in the prophets 
and apostles, we say that much glory also appears, which is seen in the 
second advent of the Word.” 24
Thus the hope of the Early Church, the supreme event 
of the ages, is mysticized and allegorized away, as being only 
for the “simple.”
2. 
“End of W
orld” Localized and Individualized.—Not 
only does Origen mysticize and localize the Second Advent, by 
making it Christ’s entry into the soul, but he combines with it 
the “end of the world,” or “end of the age,” making it the end 
of the world’s dominance over the soul. Thus he completely 
sets aside the historic apostolic concept of the cataclysmic end 
of the cosmic world. This mystic “end,” according to Origen, 
is for the “mature” Christian who “comes to perfection.” Thus 
another of the Early Church teachings is submerged under the 
relentless tide of allegorization. Here are his wordy words:
“The second advent of Christ, however, in mature men, concerning 
whom a dispenser of His word says: ‘However we speak wisdom among the 
perfect.’ Moreover these mature ones . . . praise the beauty and comeliness 
of the Word; and to this second advent is joined the end of the world in 
the man who comes to perfection and says, ‘Far be it from me that I should 
glory except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom the world 
is crucified to me and I to the world.’ For if the world is crucified to the 
righteous, it has become the end of the age for those to whom the world 
is crucified. Necessarily, therefore, let those who have the faith to come 
separately to Christ, if they wish to learn the sign of the advent of Christ
2< Translated from Series Commentariorum Origenis in Mattheum (A Series of Com­
mentaries on Matthew), chap. 50, in Migne, PG, vol. 13, col. 1678.
ORIGEN’S MULTIPLE DEPARTURES FROM THE FAITH 1019
and the end of the world, show themselves worthy to see His second advent 
and the second end of the world which we have taught to you.” 25
3. Substitutes “Gradual Advance” for Cataclysmic 
End.—As just noted, while Origen speaks of the Second Ad­
vent, he neither connects it with the resurrection nor recognizes 
it as marking the cataclysmic end of human history nor even 
as inaugurating the reign of Christ. Rather, he avers, the ulti­
mate subjection of all things to Christ as king is brought about 
by a “gradual advance” through successive worlds and long 
ages of purification. In this way, he says, will God become 
“all in all.” Thus:
“At the consummation and restoration of all things, those who make a 
gradual advance, and who ascend (in the scale of improvement), will 
arrive in due measure and order at that land, and at that training which 
is contained in it, where they may be prepared for those better institutions 
to which no addition can be made. For, after His agents and servants, the 
Lord Christ, who is King of all, will Himself assume the kingdom; i.e., after 
instruction in the holy virtues, He will Himself instruct those who are 
capable of receiving Him in respect of His being wisdom, reigning in them 
until He has subjected them to the Father, who has subdued all things to 
Himself, i.e., that when they shall have been made capable of receiving 
God, God may be to them all in all.” 28
Just before this he had stated that God will be “all in all” 
when .“death shall no longer anywhere exist, nor sting of death, 
nor any evil at all.” Then “verily God will be ‘all in all.’ ”27
4. Denied Millennium Because Incompatible With His 
Scheme.—Origen opposed the millennial concept because it 
was incompatible with his scheme of things. Prior to his day, 
belief in the second, personal, premillennial coming of Christ 
had been the general view, together with the millennial reign 
of the saints with Christ, after their literal resurrection from 
the dead at the Advent. But Origen never spoke of the millen­
nium except to condemn it,28 and millennialism began to wane 
from his day onward.29
28 Ibid., chap. 32, col. 1642.
28 Origen, De Princittiis, book 3, chap. 6, sec. 8, in ANF, vol. 4, p. 348.
27 Ibid., sec. 3, p. 345.
28 Ibid., book 2, chap. 11, sec. 2,.p. 297.
28 Farrar, History of Interpretation, p. 196; Hagenbach, A History of Christian Doctrine, 
vol. 1, pp. 305, 306.
1020
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
5. 
Prophecies Deprived of A
ll Force.—Origen dismisses 
the Bible prophecies by declaring them to be “filled with enig­
mas and dark sayings,”30 and offers the explanation, for exam­
ple, that the gates of the New Jerusalem (of Ezekiel 48 and 
Revelation 21) are the “different modes” by which “souls enter 
the better world.” 31
IV. Holds Every Immortal Soul to Be Restored
1. 
Soul Incapable of D
eath or D
estruction.—Origen 
went farther than any earlier Father concerning the origin of 
the soul. Jerome charged Origen and his followers with claim­
ing the souls of men, and the angelic natures, to be part of the 
divine nature and substance of God Himself.32 Origen held ex­
alted notions of the dignity and nature of the soul, believing 
it had existed from eternity, was wholly exempt from perish­
ing, and incapable of death or destruction—because possessed 
of an immortality of which nothing could deprive it. Indeed, 
this was his primary postulate. And with this he placed a sec­
ond—the ultimate abolition of all evil. He looked forward 
fondly to the time when all things should be restored to their 
pristine purity.33
But this was not to be brought about by the disappearance 
of the wicked out of the realms of the living, leaving only the 
godly and true, nor by the removal of a single unit from God’s 
creation. With him life was from eternity to eternity, and once 
living, “always to live.” He definitely declared that “those 
things which were made for existence cannot cease to be.” So, 
to the divine soul of man, death and destruction could not 
come, for the soul was stronger than death and mightier than 
destruction. It was “for the purpose of permanent existence.” 34 
Hell must consequently be changed into a universal, purifying
80 Origen, De Principiis, book 4, chap. 1, sec. 10 (from the Greek), in ANF, vol. 4,
p. 358.
31 Origen, Against Celsvs, book 6, chap. 23, in ANF, vol. 4, p. 583.
32 Origen, De Principiis, book 4, chap. 1 sec. 35, in ANF, vol. 4, p. 381.
33 Ibid., book 3, chap. 1, sec. 13, p. 314; cf. book 3, chap. 6, sec. 5, p. 346.
31 Ibid., chap. 6, sec. 5, p. 346.
ORIGEN’S MULTIPLE DEPARTURES FROM THE FAITH 1021
Purgatory, by which evil would be destroyed and the evildoer 
purged. Sin would be blotted out, but the sinner would be 
preserved.35
2. Every Rational Being to Be Restored.—Origen main­
tained that the final consummation will come when all crea­
tures are restored:
“The end of the world, then, and the final consummation, will take 
place when every one shall be subjected to punishment for his sins; a time 
which God alone knows, when He will bestow on each one what he deserves. 
We think, indeed, that the goodness of God, through His Christ, may re­
call all His creatures to one end, even His enemies being conquered and 
subdued.” 38
That all of God’s enemies will be subdued is repeated 
again and again. Here is but one citation:
“Seeing, then, that such is the end, when all enemies will be subdued 
to Christ, when death—the last enemy—shall be destroyed, and when the 
kingdom shall be delivered up by Christ.” 37
Origen soberly assures us that those who have left the “pri­
mal state of blessedness have not been removed irrecoverably.” 
They “may recover themselves, and be restored to their condi­
tion of happiness.” And he adds that it is apparent that “the 
human race,” in the “future world, or in ages to come, . . . may 
be restored to that unity promised by the Lord Jesus.” And 
this includes those who have even sunk to a depth of wicked­
ness. But such will be restored, advancing to a “better 
condition.” And this includes “every rational nature.” Thus 
everything is “tending to that goal happiness” when all have 
subjected themselves to God and He is “all in all.” 38
3. Immortal Sinners “Conducted” to Salvation Slowly. 
—Origen, taking the twofold position of (1) the indefeasible 
immortality of all souls and (2) the ultimate salvation of all 
souls, thought that immortal sinners will be saved but slowly. 
The process is spread over a vast period, for there is no hurry. 
The soul of the sinner “is immortal.” And, “being immortal
35 Ibid., book 1, chap. 6, secs. 1-3, pp. 260, 261.
39 Ibid., sec. 1, p. 260.
37 Ibid., sec. 2, p. 260. 
38 Ibid., secs. 2-4, pp. 261, 262.
1022
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
and everlasting,” it is not “excluded from salvation” ulti­
mately, "which is postponed to a more convenient time.”39 He 
likened the situation to a case of poisoning that, according to 
his understanding, necessitates a slow cure:
“It is not without reason, then, that he who is abandoned, is abandoned 
to the divine judgment, and that God is long-suffering with certain sinners; 
but because it will be for their advantage, with respect to the immortality 
of the soul and the unending world, that they be not quickly brought into 
a state of salvation, but be conducted to it more slowly, after having ex­
perienced many evils. For as physicians, who are able to cure a man quickly, 
when they suspect that a hidden poison exists in the body, do the reverse 
of healing, making this more certain through their very desire to heal, deem­
ing it better for a considerable time to retain the patient under inflamma­
tion and sickness, in order that he may recover his health more surely, than 
to appear to produce a rapid recovery, and afterwards to cause a relapse 
and (thus) that hasty cure last only for a time.” 40
4. 
Weird Conclusions to Which Origenism Leads.—Fol­
low this concept through to its logical conclusions. According 
to the principles and postulates of Origen, when the chaff is 
burned up with unquenchable fire, the fire will not actually 
consume the chaff, the chaff being somehow transformed by 
means of the mysterious secret fire into wheat again. And as 
to the tares, which are separated from the wheat and bound 
into bundles to be burned, Origen would have us believe that 
instead of being burned, they too are somehow plucked from 
the fire and transformed into wheat forevermore.
And similarly with the fruitless severed branches that were 
cast into the fire, and the worthless fish that were cast away. 
But Origen would have this casting away not an actual rejec­
tion but a preparation for a blessed ingathering and preserva­
tion forever. Then there was the house on the sand, whose fall 
would certainly seem to be its end. But, according to Origen, 
after all the overwhelming it is to be raised again from its 
ruins and stand for eternity.
And the enemy of Christ, who is to be ground to powder 
by the falling upon him of the great Foundation Stone and
39 Ibid., book 3, chap. 1, sec. 13, p. 313.
40 Ibid. (from the Greek), pp. 313, 314.
ORIGEN’S MULTIPLE DEPARTURES FROM THE FAITH 1023
irretrievably ruined, is to be recovered and brought to build 
for eternity upon that which had crushed him to dust. In that 
way Judas, of whom it is written, “It had been good for that 
man if he had not been born,” will be restored to an eternity of 
happiness.
As to the “perish” aspect (“Except ye repent, ye shall all 
likewise perish,” Luke 13:3), this is to be understood just of 
losing one’s well-being. And of the declaration, “Fear him 
which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell” (Matt. 
10:28), Origen asserts that after the destroying comes a restor­
ing to boundless and blessed duration. And as to the warning 
about losing the soul, according to Origen the soul is never 
really lost, but at worst only processed for endless purity and 
happiness.
What then, on this basis, is the difference between the one 
who gains and the one who loses his soul? For, according to Or­
igenism, the gainer never becomes the loser, and the loser in 
time becomes the everlasting gainer. It is only the differ­
entiations that become lost.
But perhaps the strangest argument concerns the second 
death, which Origen implies is really a second and eternal life. 
That is on his assumption that death means ceasing to live in 
one’s present state and coming to live in the opposite state. 
Thus, if the first death is dying to God in order to live in sin, 
then the second death would be dying to sin in order to live 
unto God. Thus, death is simply exchanging one life for another 
life. Death would therefore simply be separation from the life 
in which one has lived up until death, so that it may become 
life again—if that be clear! Such were the devious reasonings 
of Origenism.
V. Recapitulation: Twin Fallacies of Tertullian and Origen
1. 
U
tter Eradication of Evil Promised.—God has prom­
ised the complete termination of moral evil. As the Inspired 
Word has revealed the origin of evil, so has it likewise de-
clared that it will have an end—and that forever. It did not 
exist from all the eternity of the past, and it will not persist 
throughout all the eternity of the future. Evil is a thing of time, 
not an inevitable part of eternity. Evil will be blotted out, and 
not continue on in indefeasible defiance without end. All of 
God’s attributes of mercy, holiness, justice, and power are 
pledged to its extirpation. The necessity of His own nature and 
character demands it. And He who was able to create is able 
also to destroy.
Hell is not to be the eternal abode and spawning place of 
endless evil—intensifying, imprecating, darkening, and inerad- 
icating—throughout all futurity. The Hell that God has pre­
pared is for the utter and eternal eradication of all sin and 
sinners. Tertullian’s fantastic secret fire was a pagan importa­
tion. The fire of God’s kindling openly and completely con­
sumes and ultimately obliterates. The evil of the universe will 
be compassed by it, and be blotted out forever. Tertullian’s 
Hell was a monstrosity, an imaginative concoction, a blot upon 
the character of God. Evil and misery are to be vanquished 
forevermore. That is the second death—and Tertullian forgot 
that the greatest punishment for the greatest crimes is to be cut 
off by death.
But there is Heaven, as well as Hell. Heaven is for sinners 
who have been redeemed and become saints. Hell is for the in­
corrigibly wicked and according to their deserving will be their 
just suffering. But when that designated time is over they will 
cease to be. All will then be wrapped in the slumber of eternal 
death. Rebellious life will die out, and with it the consuming 
fire in the charred and burned-out furnace of Hell. Unbroken 
silence will reign throughout its confines. Those who have not 
found life, so freely offered, will have found death. And the re­
sults will remain unaltered forever. There will be no unending 
dualistic clash of good and evil, no eternal jarring note, no 
unextinguishable sin. Righteousness alone will fill the uni­
verse. Evil not only will have died out but, according to the 
determinate promise of God, will never rise up again.
1024 
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
ORIGEN’S MULTIPLE DEPARTURES FROM THE FAITH 1025
2. 
Fallacious Threats and Delusive Promises.—Origen’s 
Restorationism was a revolt against Tertullian’s Eternal Tor­
ment. Tertullian, in his misconception of Hell and human 
destiny, saw in every volcano a chimney of Gehenna, with the 
lost suffering in Eternal Torment. This brought a violent re­
action to Origen. But Origen’s Hell was equally fallacious, un­
warranted, misleading, and un-Biblical. The fires of destruc­
tion will at last go out because those incorrigibles committed 
thereto have been burned up.
It does not cease because its victims are purified, and 
thus released for Heaven. Unrepentant sinners, human and 
demonic, will be obliterated, not restored. Hell is not a circui­
tous back door to Heaven, but the direct exit to oblivion. Its 
fateful work accomplished, it too will pass away forever, and a 
clean universe ensue.
So both Tertullian’s and Origen’s fire and Hell are alike 
false, fantastic, and fatal to true Christian faith, though in op­
posite ways. One threatened what God has never decreed; the 
other promised what God has never authorized. One is as false 
as the other. Origen boldly taught the spiritual purgation of 
all sinners by the cleansing fires of personal remorse. Thus he 
left Christ and His saving grace largely out of the transaction 
of restoration. It was largely a process of self-purification. 
And all this, Origen held, would consume innumerable ages, 
and thus strike again at the historic Biblical belief in the proph­
esied Second Advent and the judgment.
God’s lake of fire will be real and effective and final. It will 
accomplish its designated purpose—the saints all safe, the sin­
ners all obliterated. The universe will be clean at the close of 
sin’s tragic, futile experiment. The chaff, the tares, the severed 
branches, will all be burned up, destroyed, reduced to ashes, 
come to nought, be as though they had not been. The wheat 
will be gathered into God’s heavenly garner for all eternity. 
That is the finale of the plan of redemption. Grace and ret­
ribution, mercy and justice, will have had their righteous sway. 
And the redeemed of the universe will proclaim, “Just and
33
Later Supporters of Tertullian’s Eternal-Tormentism—Minucius Felix, Cyprian 
of Carthage, Ambrose of Milan, John Chrysostom, and Jerome.
true are thy ways, thou King of saints” (Rev. 15:3). That is 
the precise opposite of both Tertullianism and Origenism.
VI. Subsequent Churchmen Are Divided Between the 
Conflicting Schools
The reader will inevitably wonder as to what positions 
were taken by other prominent churchmen in the third and 
fourth centuries and the early part of the fifth, as regards the 
fate of the wicked. Where did they stand in the great three­
fold division that was becoming increasingly crystallized—this 
theological trilemma that had developed in the church. We 
will not attempt to present a detailed study of the utterances 
of these various men, for the simple reason that they were 
largely the reflectors of one or the other of the conflicting 
views of Tertullian, holding to Eternal-Tormentism, or of 
Origen with his contrary concept of Universal Restorationism.
A mere listing of respective views must suffice for the 
two categories. This is primarily because of space limitations. 
But it is also, as stated, because these churchmen did not make 
any particularly new contributions to the question at issue. 
They simply favored one or the other position. There is there­
fore no actual omission of pertinent evidence. It is largely a 
question of alignment, in varying degrees, with one or the 
other school. So the two groups are here given simply for 
reference. (They are tabulated in sequence and category in 
the Tabular Chart F, on page 758.)
1026
Later Favorers of Origen’s Universal Restorationism—Gregory Thaumaturgus, 
Theognostus, Eusebius of Caesarea, Diodorus of Tarsus, and Theodore of
Mopsuestia.
1. Churchmen Who Supported Tertullian’s Eternal- 
Tormentism.—The concept of Eternal Torment, as developed 
by Tertullian and consummated by Augustine, was supported 
by Minucius Felix, Hippolytus, Cyprian of Carthage, Ambrose 
of Milan, John Chrysostom, and Jerome of Antioch (with 
some reservations). These were generally in the West. As 
Emanuel Petavel puts it aptly, Conditional Immortality was 
“drowned in the rising tide of Platonism” (Problem of Im­
mortality, pp. 242, 496). With this line-up Canon Henry 
Constable is in essential agreement (Duration and Nature of 
Future Punishment, p. 229), as also J. H. Pettingell (The 
Life Everlasting, p. 32).
As suggested, these churchmen did not write elaborate 
treatises thereon. Rather, they but echoed the sentiments of 
Tertullian. We have not therefore given them individual cov­
erage, because they developed no special evidence, and made 
no particular contribution to the position reflected. But their 
assenting sentiments need to be placed on record in this gen­
eral way.
2. Ecclesiastics Who Favored Origen’s Universal Res­
torationism.—Origenism, or Universal Restorationism, like­
wise won numerous partisans, especially in the East. These 
included Gregory Thaumaturgus, bishop of Neocaesarea, 
Pierius and Theognostus (Origen’s successors in the school at 
Alexandria), Pamphilus of Caesarea, Eusebius the historian,
1027
1028
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Titus of Bostra, Basil of Caesarea, Gregory of Nyssa (to a 
degree), Diodorus of Tarsus, and Theodore of Mopsuestia. 
Essentially the same list is attested by Petavel in his The Prob­
lem of Immortality (pp. 281, 496), and Pettingell, The Life 
Everlasting (p. 32).
3. 
Conditionalism Gradually Forced Into Eclipse.— 
The great theological trilemma to which we have referred 
had now become an actuality, as men took sides. Meanwhile, 
the doctrine of Conditionalism, which had had brilliant pro­
ponents, was being crowded into the background and being 
progressively overwhelmed. Evidently the lesser clergy sim­
ilarly ranged themselves with the one group or the other in 
this same general way. By the end of the fourth century the 
general departure from Conditionalism was far advanced. 
Its virtual eclipse was not far away, along with the final sub­
mergence of Universal Restorationism.
The Eternal-Tormentism of Tertullian and Augustine 
became severely predominant, and did not relax its strangle 
hold until pre-Reformation times, when Conditionalism began 
its slow resurgence.
It is to be remembered that by the fourth and fifth cen­
turies the pressures were so great, as exerted by the Eternal- 
Torment School, that the last champions of Conditionalism 
began to falter. Their later writings show a compromising swing 
toward Eternal-Tormentism that is tragic. So it was that the 
last champions of Conditionalism wavered and capitulated. 
From a growing uncertainty they finally espoused what they 
had formerly resisted and challenged. After them came the 
virtual blackout of Conditionalism for several centuries. It 
was driven underground until shortly before Protestant Ref­
ormation days, when it could no longer be repressed.
CHAPTER 
SIXTY-TWO
Lactantius—Emitting Light Amid 
Encroaching Darkness
1. Revolution in Roman Life and Thought.—We have 
already seen how the transition from paganism’s final attempt 
to crush Christianity, under Diocletian, to Constantine’s es­
pousal of the Christian faith, introduced within a single gen­
eration the most remarkable revolution in thought, laws, and 
manner of life recorded of any empire in history. Though 
still a pagan at heart, Constantine accepted the “logic of events” 
and came to terms with Christianity. Under his edicts of tolera­
tion, world conditions suddenly changed. Christianity was no 
longer proscribed and persecuted, and its adherents emerged 
from their hide-outs in catacombs and caves. The church’s 
adversaries were restrained, and tranquillity reigned for a time.
2. Staying the Tide of Drift and Error.—The world’s 
favor now became the church’s new peril—her new trial of 
faith. Multitudes soon sought entrance into her communion 
because it had become advantageous and was the popular 
thing to do. Worldliness swept in as a result. In reaction, vari­
ous Christian leaders turned to asceticism as a means of stay­
ing the ebbing tide of spiritual life. This appealed to many 
of the pious, and the hermitage and the monastery were ex­
plored as a possible deterrent. Meanwhile, new doctrinal errors 
commingled with the old. And Lactantius, to whom we now 
turn, who had first witnessed the anguish of persecution, and 
then the elevation of Christianity to imperial patronage, now 
undertook to stay the tide of drift and error, and to instruct 
the emperor. This is important to note.
1029
Lactantius Speaks Out Amid Apos­
tasy’s 
Encroaching 
Darkness 
and 
Paganism’s Final Stand.
Lactantius Firmianus 
(c. 250-330), conspicuous Latin 
Father, was called the Christian Cicero because of his elegance 
of expression and the purity and finish of his style—the “milky 
softness of his style,” as it has been phrased. He was one of 
the eminent lights of the fourth century. Jerome called him 
the “most learned man of his time.” Born of pagan parentage, 
and converted to Christianity in maturity, Lactantius’ life 
really spanned three epochs—(1) the uneasy truce of the 
church, (2) the crowning persecution of paganism, and (3) 
the preferment of Christianity in the Constantinian period. 
His life likewise paralleled that of Eusebius, who wrote in 
Greek, while Lactantius’ productions were in Latin.
I. Historical Setting of Interest in Man’s Nature and Destiny
1. 
Scholarship Recognized by Two Emperors.—Lactan­
tius had studied rhetoric under the celebrated Arnobius, 
avowed Conditionalist rhetorician of Sicca, in Northern Af­
rica. And like his teacher, Lactantius similarly came to believe 
in Conditional Immortality, though not always consistently. 
His fame soon surpassed that of his teacher and reached the
1030
LIGHT AMID ENCROACHING DARKNESS 
1031
ear of Diocletian, who had established his court in Nicomedia, 
and was embellishing the city with noted teachers and places 
of learning.
Because of his reputation, Diocletian asked him to come 
to Nicomedia to teach rhetoric, where he remained about ten 
years. But upon his acceptance of Christianity, Lactantius was 
deprived of his post. Later, Constantine called him to his 
court and entrusted to him the education of his eldest son 
Crispus—which contact doubtless had an influence upon 
Constantine’s profession of Christianity.
Under Diocletian, Christianity had been fiercely assailed 
by fire and sword, as well as harassed by philosophers resorting 
to ridicule and distortion. Porphyry the sophist and Hierocles 
held up Christianity to scorn, jeering at Scripture as incon­
sistent and puerile. Scurrilous reflections were likewise made 
upon Christ. Because of all this Lactantius felt compelled to 
defend Christianity, and thrust his pen into the conflict. And 
it was this very defense of Christianity that led him to become 
a convert during the time of the Diocletian persecution. To 
his everlasting credit Lactantius boldly confessed his faith dur­
ing the height of this last and most terrible of the pagan 
tribulations.
2. 
First Attempt at Systematic Christian Theology. 
—He had been a master of pagan rhetoric and philosophy. 
Now he turned Christian philosopher and became a conspic­
uous advocate of the lofty moral truths of Christianity. Despite 
the pomp and splendor surrounding him, he lived a life of 
great simplicity—really of austerity. Doctrine, it should be 
remembered, was not yet rigid, and views on sundry doctrines 
varied without censure. This specifically included the nature 
and destiny of man. This explains the conflicting views of 
noted scholars at this time.
Lactantius’ most noted work, 
The Divine Institutes 
(Divinae Institutiones), was composed before the close of 
Diocletian’s persecution. It was a comprehensive apology, 
designed to commend the Christian truth to men of letters.
1032
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
He felt that the presentations of his predecessors had not been 
adequate, and was burdened over reaching the educated classes. 
To this end he bent his powers of language and persuasion. 
In elegant Latin he pointed out the futility and falsehood of 
pagan superstitions and the vanity of heathen philosophy and 
its contentions.
In a way, he was the first to attempt a systematic Christian 
theology. And he dedicated his Institutes to Emperor Con­
stantine, as the first “Christian Prince.” Subsequently he 
himself prepared an Epitome of this fuller treatment to be 
noted later—for this abridgment embodies a pitfall that we 
must avoid.
3. 
Comprehensive 
Character 
of 
Lactantius’ 
“Insti­
tutes.”—Lactantius’ other treatises included The Anger of God 
—directed against the tenets of the Epicureans and Stoics, who 
had maintained that the deeds of men could produce no emo­
tions of pleasure or anger in the Deity. Still another was The 
Workmanship of God, or the Formation of Man, on the won­
derful construction of the human form—evidencing the wis­
dom and goodness of God, with the latter part dealing some­
what with the origin, nature, and destiny of the soul.
His famous Institutes comprise seven separate treatises:
(1) false worship—only one true God; (2) idolatry—the origin 
of error; dealing with Creation, the development of idolatry, 
the deification of man, and demonism; (3) false philosophy— 
differing pagan philosophies versus God’s revelation; (4) true 
philosophy—on the person of Christ, His incarnation, Mes­
sianic suffering and death, and mediation between God and 
man; (5) justice; (6) true worship—the two ways, of obedience 
and disobedience, leading respectively to immortality and to 
destruction, or to Heaven and to Hell; (7) the chief end of man. 
Book 7 deals with immortality, the return of Christ, the reign 
of the saints for the thousand years, and the two resurrections. 
In other words, it was his scheme of eschatology. He particularly 
stressed the “last days.”
LIGHT AMID ENCROACHING DARKNESS 
1033
4. Course of Empire Portrayed in Prophecy.—Lactan­
tius had a broad grasp of Bible prophecy, as portrayed in 
Daniel and the Apocalypse. He held that in the over-all 
prophetic outline, Rome—the then-existent fourth world 
power dominant in his day—was to be divided into ten smaller 
kingdoms. Then a powerful northern enemy would destroy 
three of these kingdoms, and this development would be fol­
lowed by the emergence of Antichrist’s rule. And Lactantius 
tied this Antichrist with the ruinous reign of the “beast” of 
Revelation 13. Great wickedness, he understood, was to char­
acterize the last times of earth.1
5. Eschatological Concept Unveils Man’s Destiny.— 
In order to grasp Lactantius’ view of the nature and destiny 
of man, one must first understand his eschatological concept 
of the last things. Lactantius bore clear testimony concerning 
the two advents, as vitally involved in the plan of salvation. 
He sketched the origin of sin, the creation of man, and man’s 
probation and fall in Eden—the latter necessitating the incar­
nation and death of Christ.3
His testimony was sharp and clear. He held steadfastly 
to the Second Advent at the end of the world, and to the 
attendant literal resurrection of the saints. The sands in time’s 
hourglass would run out. Then would come the millennial 
reign of the saints, with the second resurrection at the mil­
lennium’s close, to be followed by the destruction of the 
wicked and the renewal of the earth. This outline we will 
note in some detail.
6. Dubious Passages and Known Emendations.—In con­
trast to Theophilus, Novatian, and certain other Conditional- 
ists, Lactantius believed that man was created immortal—not 
simply a candidate for immortality—but through the Fall 
became mortal. This viewpoint naturally molded his terminol-
1 Lactantius, The Divine Institutes, book 7, chaps. 14-19, in ANF, vol. 7, pp. 211-215. 
For Lactantius’ detailed exposition of prophecy, see L. E. Froom, Prophetic Faith of Our 
Fathers, vol. 1, pp. 354-361.
2 Lactantius, The Epitome of the Divine Institutes, chaps. 27, 43, 44, in ANF, vol. 7,
pp. 231, 232, 239.
1034
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
ogy, and gave rise to a misunderstanding of some of his 
phrasings.
There are frankly occasional expressions that are difficult 
to reconcile with Lactantius’ preponderant view so constantly 
reiterated. If we are to trust the translation of such sporadic 
expressions they would indicate that Lactantius was not always 
consistent. But there is also the factor of some known corrup­
tion of the text. Certain sections are recognized by scholars 
as bearing the marks of another hand.
Just what bearing this had on certain renditions we can­
not of course know. But it accentuates certain problems as to 
consistency. As the editor of the treatise—A. Cleveland Coxe, 
“Introductory Notice” (ANF, vol. 7, p. 4)—recognizes, certain 
“loose expressions are often inconsistent one with another.” 
This we must recognize as we examine the presentation.
II. Immortality—Lost Through Sin; Restored Through Christ
Because of the key position held by Lactantius, we will 
cover his teaching rather systematically.
1. 
God Is Eternal; Man’s Immortality Conditional.— 
References to the nature and destiny of man begin with book 
two, but climax in books six and seven. Chapter nine of book 
two, sets forth this principle: “God, therefore, is the only being 
who was not made; and therefore He can destroy other things, 
but He Himself cannot be destroyed.” s
That, of course, is in contrast to man. But the Epicureans, 
Lactantius interjects, do “not admit that the world was made 
by God.” * Then is introduced an odd expression—a hang-over 
of pagan concepts:
"For we, being a heavenly and immortal race, make use of fire, which 
is given to us as a proof of immortality, since fire is of heaven; . . . the 
principle of life.” 8
3 The Divine Institutes, book 2, chap. 9, in ANF, vol. 7, p. 55.
‘ Ibid., p. 56.
5 Ibid., chap. 10, p. 58.
LIGHT AMID ENCROACHING DARKNESS 
1035
Chapter thirteen differentiates between the “first” and “sec­
ond” deaths, and discusses the fall of “our first parents.” 
Man, says Lactantius—
"consists of soul and body, that is, as it were, of heaven and earth: since 
the soul by which we live, has its origin, as it were, out of heaven from 
God, the body out of the earth, of the dust of which we have said that 
it [man] was formed.” 8
Lactantius agrees in part with Trismegistus that—
“if the soul, which has its origin from God, gains the mastery, it is im­
mortal, and lives in perpetual light; if, on the other hand, the body shall 
overpower the soul, and subject it to its dominion, it is in everlasting 
darkness and death. And the force of this is not that it altogether anni­
hilates [“extinguishes,” note 6] the souls of the unrighteous, but subjects 
them to everlasting punishment.”7
The curious closing expression is developed elsewhere.
2. Nature of “First” and “Second” Deaths.—Referring 
to the “second” death, Lactantius explains that “we term that 
punishment the second death [for the wicked], which is itself 
perpetual, as also is immortality” (for the righteous). As to 
the “first” death he states, “Death is the dissolution of the 
nature of living beings,” or “the separation of body and soul.” 
Lactantius then defines the "second” death as “the condem­
nation of souls for deserts to eternal punishments,” which 
term he later explains. The soul, he adds, “ought to rise to 
the immortality which is in heaven.” 8
3. Adam Expelled From Eden and Immortality.—From 
this Lactantius leads back to primeval man, placed in “para­
dise” to “devote himself entirely to the service of God his 
Father.” God gave man “fixed commands, by the observance 
of which he might continue immortal: or if he transgressed 
them, be punished with death”—if he tasted not of the for­
bidden tree. But the “accuser” applied his “deceits and artifices 
to beguile [“overthrow,” note 10] the man, that he might 
deprive him of immortality.”
6 Ibid., chap. 13, p. 61. Empedocles, and other poets and philosophers named, had 
contended that men are composed of fire, air, water, ana earth, as noted in Part III.
7 Ibid. 
3 Ibid., pp. 61, 62.
1036
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Then, man having transgressed, “God drove out the man 
from the garden, having passed sentence upon the sinner.” Thus 
man was excluded from Paradise until the execution of the 
“last judgment,” when death will be removed, and the right­
eous be brought back to Paradise.9
4. Immortality Is “Reward” for Righteousness.—Book 
three deals at the outset with the “False Wisdom of Philoso­
phers.” Lactantius here points out the weaknesses and fallacies 
of the conflicting schools. In chapter twelve, discussing “the ob­
ject for which we are born,” and the enemies of the soul, Lac­
tantius says that the “rewardI” for righteousness is the “continua­
tion of its existence,” or “immortality,” which can “neither be 
corrupted nor destroyed.” 10
Then, in chapter thirteen (“The Immortality of the Soul”), 
Lactantius states: “On which subject there is great disputa­
tion among [pagan] philosophers; nor have they who held 
true opinions respecting the soul been able to explain or 
prove anything.” 11 And the reason?—“Being destitute of divine 
knowledge [from inspired Scripture], they neither brought for­
ward true arguments,” nor “evidence by which they might 
convince.” “ And he adds, both here and elsewhere, that this 
will be more fully dealt with in book seven—and thus consid­
ered later.
5. Confusion and 
Ignorance Among 
Philosophers.— 
Recognizing Plato (in chapter seventeen) as “king” among 
philosophers, Lactantius says of the contrary witness of another 
(evidently Epicurus, who left on record, “Death does not
exist”); “How cleverly he has deceived us!”13 And the Pythago­
reans and Stoics say, “The soul survives after death,” but “mi­
grates from one body to another,” and that it is not possible for 
the soul to “survive the body” unless it has “existed previously 
to the body.” 14 But, he adds, even Plato, championing “the im-
9 Ibid., p. 62. (Italics supplied.)
10 Ibid., book 3, chap. 12, pp. 79, 80.
11 Ibid., chap. 13, p. 81.
12 Ibid.
13 Ibid., chap. 17, in ANF, vol. 7, p. 87.
14 Ibid., chap. 18, p. 88.
LIGHT AMID ENCROACHING DARKNESS 
1037
mortality of the soul,” did not know ‘‘by whom, and how, and 
to whom . . . and at what time, immortality is given.” “
6. 
Fallacious Concepts 
of 
Cicero.—Cicero and other 
Roman writers ‘‘know nothing of the [revealed] truth,” never­
theless they reason: ‘‘If there is nothing after death, death is 
not an evil. . . . But if the soul survives, death is even an 
advantage; because immortality follows.” Thus they affirm 
that death brings in ‘‘a better state.” On this Lactantius 
observes, ‘‘But each conclusion is false,” for rewards and 
punishments assuredly follow. The wicked will not escape 
punishment. Such false reasoning, he adds, is ‘‘based on the 
assumption that every man at his birth is presented with 
immortality.” 16
And Lactantius castigates the notion that it makes no 
difference whether man is good or evil. The true concept, he 
assures us, comes through ‘‘possession of the truth.”17 After 
death men are either translated to immortality or transferred 
to ‘‘everlasting [aidnion] punishment.” And Lactantius pro­
ceeds to criticize Plato’s and Socrates’ joint views.
III. Christ the Source of Our Immortality
1. 
Christ Came to ‘‘Restore” Righteous to Life.—In 
book 4 (‘‘Of True Wisdom and Religion”) Lactantius presents 
the Christian faith in sharp contrast with futile pagan views, 
and presents the story of salvation through Christ (chapters six 
to ten). Then, in chapter eleven, he comes to the cause and neces­
sity of the Incarnation—that “there might be no nation at all 
under heaven to which the hope of immortality should be 
denied.” 18
In chapter twelve Lactantius deals with the “Life, Death, 
and Resurrection” of Christ—how He was “born of man,” 
and how He “should twice come to the earth,” in two con-
16 Ibid., p. 89.
16 Ibid., chap. 19, pp. 89, 90.
«Ibid., p. 90.
18 Ibid., book 4, chap. 11, p. 110.
1038
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
trasting advents—the first time “clothed with flesh,” having 
“assumed the form of a man and the condition of mortality,” 
like other men. And all this was that He might suffer death 
and rise again, and return to His Father above. Then “He 
shall come again with majesty and glory to judge every soul, 
and to restore the righteous to life”—and to introduce the 
“golden age,” with “righteousness and peace.”19 And all this 
is based on the word of the prophets as the Biblical basis for 
his position.
2. 
Took Our Mortality to Restore Immortality.— 
Chapter twenty-four tells how this “teacher sent from heaven,” 
with His “divine nature” and possessing “immortality,” took 
to Himself “a mortal body,” for “mortal eyes” could not endure 
the glory of heavenly majesty. It was necessary that He “closely 
resemble man,” to provide overcoming power, for “if” He 
were “immortal,” and not subject to death, He could “by no 
means propose an example to man.” So He was God, but 
“clothed with a mortal body.” But He must be subject to 
death and suffering.20 Thus, though “clothed with mortal flesh,” 
He was not born “of a mortal on both sides,” but was “heav­
enly even in the form of man.”
He took a place “in the middle between God and man,” 
and became the “mediator” (note 6), “that He might be able 
to lead back men to God—that is, to immortality ” Man must 
“earn [“obtain,” note 1] immortality.” It is not his inherently. 
And Christ “bestows on those who conquer [sin, and the flesh], 
the crown and reward of immortality.” 21
God “determined to set man free,” and sent “His ambas­
sador [Jesus] to the earth” that He might “open the way of 
righteousness,” and that “man might attain to eternal life.” 
And all this that He might hold out “the hope of safety,” 
“laying down His life and of taking it again.” 22 And once
19 Ibid., chap. 12, p. 111. (Italics supplied.)
20 Ibid., chap. 24, pp. 125, 126.
21 Ibid., chap. 25, pp. 126, 127. (Italics supplied.)
22 Ibid., 
chap. 26, pp. 128, 129.
LIGHT AMID ENCROACHING DARKNESS 
1039
again, in book five Lactantius refers to the “lofty reward of 
immortality.” 23 His emphasis is unmistakable.
3. Immortality Is Offered to All.—In book six (“Of 
True Worship”) 
Lactantius 
directly addressing 
Emperor 
Constantine, adverts to the well-known “two ways”—“the one 
which leads to heaven, the other which sinks to hell,” or of “life” 
and “death.” This is because “immortality is promised to the 
righteous, and everlasting punishment is threatened to the 
unrighteous.” 24 These are the inevitable “rewards” and “pun­
ishments.” And in it all God “denies immortality to ho human 
being” who chooses aright. This Lactantius refers to as the 
“reward of immortality.” He who “follows truth and righteous­
ness” will be rewarded with “perpetual light” while those 
who choose evil “must be borne to the setting of the sun, and 
to darkness.” 25
4. Contrasting Ends of the Two Ways.—But Lactantius 
warns of passing “the point from which there is now no 
return,” and of falling “headlong into a deep abyss.” Such 
as “follow after death,” having turned away from God, “truly 
will be cast down to hell, and be confined to everlasting 
[aionion] punishment.” But the “heavenly way,” leading up­
ward, extends “hope beyond the present,” while the road of 
the “wicked and the unrighteous” is “downward and on the 
decline.” 28
These are the ways “God has assigned to human life”— 
“temporal evils followed by eternal goods,” or “temporal goods 
followed by eternal evils.” But the “enemy,” among other 
deterrents, “dashes philosophy before their eyes, that he may 
blind them with the appearance of light, lest any one should 
grasp and hold fast the truth.” 27 Such were Lactantius’ clear 
concepts.
In chapter seven (“The Way of Error and of Truth”) 
Lactantius warns against the “way of destruction and death,”
23 Ibid., book 5, chap. 19, p. 155.
24 Ibid., book 6, chap. 3, p. 164.
28 Ibid., p. 165.
26 Ibid., chap. 4, p. 165.
27 Ibid., p. 166.
1040
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
with its devious windings, that “plunges them into death.” 
And he urges the way of “truth, and wisdom, and virtue and 
justice.” 28 The way of life, he counsels, is to be sedulously 
followed as a mariner follows his course over the deep, observ­
ing the sun and the heavenly lights. So we are to follow the 
“everlasting and unchangeable” law of God and the “great 
Master and Ruler of all, God.” 29
IV. Immortality Not Inherent, but a Gift
1. Provision for Attaining Immortality.—Book seven 
(“Of a Happy Life”) deals (in chapter two) with “The Error of 
the Philosophers,” and in chapter three with a “Censure of the 
Stoics and Epicureans.” It affirms, “That is more correct which 
they derived from Plato.” Lactantius then summarizes Plato’s 
argument as affirming that the “work of God” would “remain 
for ever.” And he poses the question, “If it was made for the 
sake of men, and so made as to be eternal, why then are not 
they on whose account it was made eternal?” 30 He adds that 
God did not make the world “for His own sake, since He can 
exist without the world.”31
Coming to the positive side, and the “mystery of man” 
and how the world was clearly made “for the sake of man,” 
Lactantius asks, “Why did He make him [man] subject to 
death and decay?” Lactantius asserts that God, “the Maker of 
all things,” placed men “in the midst between good and evil,” 
that they might not “attain to immortality by a delicate and 
easy course of life, but might arrive at that unspeakable re­
ward of eternal life with the utmost difficulty and great 
labours.” 32 That is the heart of his argument—immortality 
an attainment, a reward.
2. So Placed as to Attain Immortality.—Thus God, 
“formed man from the earth itself, which He prepared for him
28 Ibid., chap. 7, p. 170.
29 Ibid., chap. 8, p. 171.
30 Ibid., boot 7, chap. 3, p. 197.
31 Ibid., chap. 4, p. 198.
32 Ibid., chap. 5, pp. 199, 200.
LIGHT AMID ENCROACHING DARKNESS 
1041
from the beginning as a habitation; that is, He clothed and 
covered his [man’s] spirit with an earthly body.” Man was 
“formed of a fragile substance, and could not exist for ever.” 
Lactantius asks, “Why, then, did He make him [man] frail 
and mortal, when He had built the world for his sake?”
He answers, “That He might set forth before man virtue,
. . . by which he might be able to gain the reward of immor­
tality.” Man, he says, consists of “two parts, body and soul.” 
Then he adds, “We received the former at our birth; we 
attain the latter by striving, that immortality might not exist 
to man without any difficulty.” 33 Such was his reasoning.
3. Immortality Not a Consequence of Nature.—Lac­
tantius continues his closely reasoned argument by saying, “He 
[God] has given us this present life, that we may either lose 
that true and eternal life by our vices, or win it by virtue.” 
Otherwise this “bodily life” will be “destroyed.” But “that 
which has an end does not contain the chief good.” 34 And 
now Lactantius comes to the heart of the issue:
"For other animals incline towards the ground, because they are 
earthly, and are incapable of immortality, which is from heaven; but 
man is upright and looks towards heaven, because immortality is proposed 
to him; which, however, does not come, unless it is given to man by God. 
For otherwise there would be no difference between the just and the 
unjust, since every man who is born would become immortal. Immortality, 
then, is not the consequence [“sequela,” footnote] of nature, but the 
reward and recompense of virtue.” 35
Words could scarcely be more explicit—man is not uni­
versally, innately immortal, but is a candidate for immortality, 
and may be made immortal. That is the heart of Lactantius’ 
argument.
4. God Alone Can Confer Immortality.—From this 
Lactantius reaches this conclusion:
“This argument teaches that man is born mortal; but that he after-
33 Ibid., p. 200.
34 Ibid.
35 Ibid., p. 201. (Italics supplied.)
1042
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
wards becomes immortal, when he begins to live in conformity with the 
will of God, that is, to follow righteousness.” 88
And he concludes, “Therefore this temporal light ought 
to be subject to that eternal life, as the body is to the soul.” 
And he adds, “He who prefers to live well for eternity, will 
live badly [“in discomfort,” note 9] for a time ... as long as 
he is on earth.” Contrariwise, “he who shall prefer to live 
well for a time” will be condemned of God to “eternal [aionion] 
punishment.” 37 Then he concludes:
"God seeks to be worshipped, and to be honoured by man as a 
Father, that he may have virtue and wisdom, which alone produce 
immortality. For because no other but Himself is able to confer that 
immortality, since He alone possesses it, He will grant to the piety of the 
man, with which he has honoured God, this reward, to be blessed to all 
eternity, and to be for ever in the presence of God and in the society 
of God.”38
5. 
Immortality 
Is 
Received 
as 
Rew
ard.—Lactantius 
then sums up his whole argument to this point in this closely 
reasoned, comprehensive paragraph, thrice declaring unequiv­
ocally that we “receive” immortality, and are “rewarded” with 
immortality:
"Now let us mark the whole argument by a brief definition. The 
world has been created for this purpose, that we may be born; we are 
born for this end, that we may acknowledge the Maker of the world and 
of ourselves—God; we acknowledge Him for this end, that we may 
worship Him; we worship Him for this end, that we may receive immor­
tality as the reward of our labours, since the worship of God consists 
of the greatest labours; for this end we are rewarded with immortality, 
that being made like to the angels, we may serve the Supreme Father 
and Lord for ever, and may be to all eternity a kingdom to- God. This 
is the sum of all things, this the secret of God, this the mystery of the 
world, from which they are estranged, who . . . have devoted them­
selves to the pursuit of earthly and frail goods.”39
Such is the source and the basis of man’s immortality. It 
is for the righteous only, Lactantius avers.
33 Ibid.
37 Ibi.d-
38 Ibid. (Italics supplied.) (Three paragraphs follow here which Bishop Coxe, the editor,
says [p. 201, notej are of “doubtful” authorship. They are accordingly not considered, as 
they have no material bearing.)
38 Ibid., chap. 6, p. 203.
Lactantius Stresses the 
Prophesied 
Last 
Days 
of 
Earth, the Resurrection of 
the Righteous, and Utter 
Destruction of the Wicked.
V. Conditionalism Placed in Eschatological Setting
1. 
False Philosophical Views on Immortality.—Then, 
starting with chapter eight, Lactantius begins a recital of the 
paralleling, but false, teaching of the philosophers that aggres­
sively persists on the immortality question. First, he says, “The 
one chief good, therefore, is immortality, for the reception of 
which we were originally formed and born.” Then he takes 
up specifically the specious “arguments of Plato,” who reas­
oned that “whatever has perception by itself, and always moves, 
is immortal,” but “that which has no beginning of motion is 
not about to have an end,” because it “cannot be deserted by 
itself.” 40
*° Ibid., chap. 8, p. 205.
CLYDE PROVONSHA, ARTIST 
©1951 BY THE SOUTHERN PUBLISHING ASSN.
1043
1044
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
But, Lactantius counters, “This argument would give 
eternal existence even to dumb animals,” which he denies. 
Plato adds that the human soul has the additional qualities 
of reflection, perception, memory, foresight, and knowledge. 
So the philosopher considered that the body is subject to “dis­
solution,” while the soul, when freed from the body prison, 
“flies to the heaven, and to its own nature.” This, Lactantius 
says, is a “brief summary of the tenets of Plato.” 41 And to this 
Pythagoras and Pherecydes agreed.
Lactantius next cites Dicaearchus, Democritus, and Epi­
curus, as arguing against such an opinion, with Tullius as 
wholly uncertain.42 Trismegistus is then mentioned, with his 
variant view that “the soul does not perish, nor undergo dis­
solution, but that it remains for ever.” Moreover, the philos­
opher maintains, “the gift of virtue to man alone is a great 
proof that souls are immortal.” Lactantius observes, “But 
when death has been undergone, what further good can be 
hoped for except immortality.” 43
2. 
Philosophical Confusion Regarding Immortality.— 
Touching in chapter ten on Cicero’s Disputations—that the 
chief goal of man happens after death, and that for his good, 
death “does not extinguish man, but admits him to the re­
ward of virtue,” while the evil will “suffer eternal punishment” 
—Lactantius says the Sacred Writings call this the “second 
death.” So, as “two lives are proposed to man,” so also are 
“two deaths.” 44
Continuing the recital of the philosophical contention 
concerning “soul and body,” in relation to the “last times” 
(chapter eleven), Lactantius rehearses their contention that 
when “death itself shall be ended,” their souls will “rise again to 
everlasting life,” and receive the “fruits of immortality,” and 
“death must be eternal” with “perpetual punishments” and 
‘‘infinite torments.” This is his full statement of their position:
‘i ibid.
« ibid.
43 Ibid., chap. 9. p. 206.
44 Ibid., chap. 10, p. 207.
LIGHT AMID ENCROACHING DARKNESS 
1045
“Therefore, when the times which God has appointed for death 
shall be completed, death itself shall be ended. And because temporal 
death follows temporal life, it follows that souls rise again to everlasting 
life, because temporal death has received an end. Again, as the life of 
the soul is everlasting, in which it receives the divine and unspeakable 
fruits of its immortality; so also its death must be eternal, in which it 
suffers perpetual punishments and infinite torments for its faults.”45
“Now,” Lactantius says, “let us refute the arguments” that 
the body is “mortal” and that the soul is born with the body 
and “must necessarily die with the body,” referring especially 
to Lucretius.48 And he adds that “the soul cannot entirely 
perish, since it received its origin from the Spirit of God, 
which is eternal.” 47 The statement is 
confused 
and 
confusing,
but it is part of the record.
3. 
Righteousness Alone “Procures” 
Eternal Life.— 
After playing up the conflicting opinions of the philosophers, 
Lactantius continues in chapter thirteen by stating that “man 
was created for the worship of God, and for receiving immor­
tality from Him48 He next cites Hermes as placing man in
a partly mortal and partly immortal position, then alludes to
several other philosophers—Polites, Apollo of Miletus, as well 
as the Sibyllines—and to Aristoxenus, who “denied that there 
is any soul at all,” maintaining it is like the “harmony,” or 
music, of the lyre, produced by “the tightening of the strings.” 4B
Then, at the outset of chapter fourteen (“Of the First and 
Last Times of the World”), Lactantius discusses “how and 
when it [immortality] is given to man,” and turns to meeting 
the “errors” and “folly” of those who “imagine that some 
mortals have become gods by the decrees and dogmas of 
mortals.” 50 He then sets forth his own position;
“It is righteousness alone which procures for man eternal life, and 
that it is God alone who bestows the reward of eternal life. For they 
who are said to have been immortalized by their merits, inasmuch as 
they possessed neither righteousness nor any true virtue, did not obtain 
for themselves immortality, but death by their sins and lusts; nor did
45 Ibid., chap. 11, p. 207.
« Ibid., chap. 12, p. 208.
« Ibid., p. 209.
w Ibid., chap. 13, p. 210.
49 Ibid.
60 Ibid., chap. 14, p. 211.
1046
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
they deserve the reward of heaven, but the punishment of hell, which 
impends over them, together with all their worshippers. And I show 
that the time of this judgment draws near, that the due reward may 
be given to the righteous, and the deserved punishment may be 
inflicted on the wicked.”51
4. Beginning and End of the World.—Declaring that 
Plato and other philosophers are ignorant of the primal “origin 
of all things,” Lactantius states that only through Holy Scrip­
ture can we know the truth concerning the “beginning and 
the end of the world, respecting which we will now speak.” 
The philosophers fallaciously “enumerate thousands of ages 
from the beginning of the world,” whereas “the six thousandth 
year is not yet completed, and . . . when this number is com­
pleted the consummation must take place,” and human affairs 
be “remodelled.” This was the literal Bible basis of Lactan­
tius’ faith. And, he affirms, “God completed the world and 
the admirable work of nature in the space of six days [by fiat 
creation], as is contained in the secrets of Holy Scripture.” 52
5. Formation 
of 
Man 
and Results 
of 
Fall.—Man, 
Lactantius continues, was made on the sixth day of Creation 
week. And he adds that as the result of the Fall he became 
a “mortal and imperfect man,” “formed from the earth, that 
he might live a thousand years in this world.” Nevertheless, 
in “this earthly age” is to be formed a “perfect man,” that 
“being quickened by God” may “bear rule in this same world 
through a thousand [millennial] years.” And the prophets 
“announce the end and overthrow of all things after a short 
time,” in the “last old age of the wearied and wasting world.” 63
And he repeats, in chapter fifteen, that in the “last con­
summation of the times,” as “the end of the world approaches, 
the condition of human affairs must undergo a change, and 
through the prevalence of wickedness become worse.” 54 Faith 
will wane, righteousness decrease, justice be confounded, and 
laws be destroyed. Peace will be superseded by tumult and 
war, and the rulership of the West be threatened by the East.
«ibid.
32 ibid.
53 Ibid., p. 212.
64 Ibid., chap. 15, p. 212.
LIGHT AMID ENCROACHING DARKNESS 
1047
And the judgments of God will fall, for the “works of mortals 
are mortal.” “ Even the Sibyls, he adds, recognized that “Rome 
is doomed to perish,” under the judgments of God.
VI. Immortality’s Place in the Prophetic Outline
1. Rome’s Division, Antichrist, and Coming Climax.— 
In chapter sixteen (“Of the Devastation of the World”) Lac­
tantius plunges into Bible prophecy, and tells how Rome, 
which followed the world kingdoms of Persia and Grecia, 
will pass, being divided into ten smaller kingdoms. Then, he 
declares, will a “powerful enemy”—Antichrist—arise that will 
harass with “intolerable rule,” persecuting, and substituting 
his own laws, and profound disturbances will follow. Celestial 
signs will also be seen in the sun and moon, and the “gliding 
of the falling stars.” “
And then a false prophet will arise that will demand 
worship, and create unsurpassed “distress and tribulations.” 
And Antichrist will “desolate” the world for “forty-two 
months,” and seek to impose his mark. Then the saints will 
flee into the “solitudes.” And finally the God of Heaven will 
deliver them and “destroy all the wicked.” 57
2. Second Advent and the Resurrection.—Chapter nine­
teen portrays the second advent of Christ in power and glory, 
as He descends as Deliverer, Judge, and Avenger. The wicked 
and Antichrist will be destroyed.58 Thus Lactantius unfolds 
his remarkable eschatology. The “dead shall rise again,” on 
whom God will “pass judgment.” The saints, however, will 
be delivered and will reign with Christ during the thousand 
years.59 The good are “given to a life of blessedness,” while the 
evil are “condemned to punishment.” 60
55 Ibid., p. 213.
M Ibid., chap. 16, p. 213.
57 Ibid., chap. 17, pp. 214, 215; cf. chap. 19, p. 215.
98 Ibid., chap. 19, p. 215.
“ Ibid., chap. 22, p. 218.
60 Ibid., chap. 20, p. 216.
1048
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
3. 
Paralleling but Distorted Concepts of Poets.—All 
through this vivid recital Lactantius interweaves many of the 
similar and familiar statements of the poets, which were 
“near to the truth.” 61 And in their strange commingling of truth 
and error Lactantius recites in chapter twenty-two, their “partly 
corrupted” 82 teachings concerning the wicked undergoing “tor­
tures and everlasting fire,”—referring to the alleged “divine 
fire” of pagan lore, that “replaces” or renews as it “consumes.” 93 
Thus he alludes to these “figments of the poets.” And with 
these distorted concepts of truth there was a misshapen view 
of coming events, for they did not know how, or when, the 
last things would occur.
Let no one imagine, Lactantius says, “that souls are 
immediately judged after death.” Rather, they are detained 
until “the great Judge shall make an investigation of their 
deserts.” Then the pious will “receive the reward of immor­
tality,” and sinners be “destined to certain punishment.”84
It is to be especially noted that the philosophers and 
poets cited, and particularly Plato, all fancied the soul to be 
immortal. Samples of confusing and conflicting citations are 
introduced from Pythagoras, Chrysippus, and Cicero. Then 
Lactantius says impressively, “Let us return from human to 
divine things.” 85 He had already declared:
“God will come, that, having cleansed the earth from all defilement, 
He may restore the souls of the righteous to their renewed bodies, and 
raise them to everlasting blessedness.”46
He had also said: “We affirm the doctrine of the resurrec­
tion, and teach that souls will return to another life.” And “the 
resurrection cannot take place while unrighteousness still pre­
vails.” This he places in substitution for the uncertainties and 
confusions of the teaching of those who “most foolishly believed 
the poets.” 87
61 Ibid., chap. 21, p. 216.
82 Ibid., chap. 22, p. 217.
83 Ibid., chap. 21, p. 217. 
«* Ibid.
86 Ibid., chap. 23, p. 218. 
88 Ibid., chap. 22, p. 218.
87 Ibid.
LIGHT AMID ENCROACHING DARKNESS 
1049
4. Satan Bound, City Planted, Wicked Destroyed.—In 
chapter twenty-four he states that the Son of God “shall come 
to judge the quick and the dead.” “When He shall have 
destroyed unrighteousness, and executed His great judgment, 
and shall have recalled to life the righteous,” He “will be 
engaged among men a thousand years.” Then the “prince of 
devils” is bound during the thousand years. The “sacred city 
shall be planted in the middle of the earth.”08 And now, he 
affirms—on the basis of the sayings of the “prophets”—comes 
the loosing of the devil, and the siege of the surrounded city 
by the wicked. Then God shall “utterly destroy them,” and 
the wicked will “utterly perish.”
This “second” resurrection, of the “unrighteous,” is fol­
lowed by “everlasting punishments.” Lactantius then affirms: 
“This is the doctrine of the holy prophets which we Christians 
follow.” 06 Such, he affirms without recorded contradiction, is 
the avowed teaching of the church in the fourth century. He 
was the outstanding Conditionalist spokesman of his time.
And now, having finished his treatise, and addressing the 
emperor, he states that “all factions have now been hushed,” 70 
the Christians are allowed freedom, and “truth now comes 
forth from obscurity, and is brought into light.” 71 That was 
the purpose of his treatise. It was the classic defense of his 
day, not too long before the tide of recession began to turn, 
with its heavy repression of Conditionalism.
5. Lactantius’ Conditionalism Presented to Emperor.—
Such is the remarkable witness, for the time, that Lactantius
addressed to the Roman emperor, Constantine, and to all
pagan citizens. Paralleling the familiar, partial truths enun­
ciated by their own philosophers and poets, which were com­
monly understood and accepted—but which often veered
away from Biblical truth, and its prophetic outline concern­
ing the last things—and the final destiny of man and the
Ibid., chap. 24, p. 219.
80 Ibid., chap. 26, pp. 220, 221.
70 Ibid., p. 221.
77 Ibid.
1050
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
world, Lactantius stands forth as a Conditionalist spokesman 
—albeit inconstant at times—maintaining that immortality 
is a gift from God received by the righteous only at the Sec­
ond Advent and concurrent resurrection of the saints.
And this, be it noted again, was written in the great 
fourth-century transition hour of the church, not only as 
the breakup of Rome impended but as the tide of Innate 
Immortal-Soulism was steadily rising in parts of the empire.
VII. Pitfalls Lurk in Abbreviated Epitome
1. Contains Certain “Dubious Passages” That Mislead. 
—According to the translator “The authorship of this abridge­
ment [the Epitome] has been questioned in modern times.” 72 
Fletcher adds that “the greater part of the work was wanting 
in the earlier editions,” and the entire Epitome was only 
discovered in the beginning of the nineteenth century in a 
manuscript at Turin.78 There are admittedly certain “dubious 
passages.” 74 Bishop Coxe, the American editor, in commenting 
on such “dubious passages” in the Institutes, states that the 
most important one is “wanting in twenty-eight Mss., but is 
found in nineteen.” 75
2. Lactantius 
Recognizes 
Hazard 
of 
Abridgment.— 
In the Preface at the very outset of the Epitome Lactantius 
states that it had been “a long time” since he first wrote his 
original full Divine Institutes. And he frankly states in his 
opening chapter that a “compressed” epitome “becomes less 
clear by its very brevity.” Nevertheless, he will attempt to 
“contract that which is diffuse and to shorten that which is 
long.” 76 The editor, Coxe, in a footnote is constrained to refer 
to the reduced Epitome as “a specimen of the abridgements 
made by authors and editors, owing to the great expense of books
72 William Fletcher, “Introductory Notice to Lactantius,” in ANF, vol. 7, p. 6.
73 Ibid., note 3.
74 The Divine Institutes, book 7, chap. 27, in ANF, vol. 7, p. 223.
76 On the Workmanship of God, “General note, by the American editor,” in ANF, vol.
7, p. 300.
78 The Epitome of Divine Grace, Preface, in ANF, vol. 7, p. 224.
LIGHT AMID ENCROACHING DARKNESS 
1051
in manuscript. They have been sources of great injury to 
literature.” 77
The precise phrasings of the Epitome should not, there­
fore, be given too serious consideration.
3. Preponderant View Is Conditionalist.—In the light 
of the foregoing, too much credence cannot be placed on 
certain expressions in the Epitome that are at variance with 
the preponderant and repeated emphasis in the text of the 
full Institutions. But it is to be borne in mind that even in 
the Epitome Lactantius again and again speaks of the “reward 
of immortality.” Note a few and the chapter sequence:
“The heavenly reward of immortality from which they fell” (chap­
ter 28).
“Crown the victorious with the reward of immortality” (29).
“That we may obtain that eternal reward” (55).
“Might gain the reward of immortality” (41).
“The befitting reward of immortality” (67).
“That they may receive the reward of immortality” (69).
Of similar intent are the expressions—
“They attain to immortality” (68).
“They receive immortality, that they may serve God forever” (69).
“Man may receive from God immortality” (69).
This constant emphasis is not to be offset by the other 
occasional conflicting expressions of the Epitome, the trust­
worthiness of which has been impugned. The gist of the case 
appears in chapter fifty-five.
4. Presented With “Garment of Immortality.”—An­
swering the questions as to “by whom,” “to whom,” “in what 
manner,” and “at what time” immortality is to be “given,” 
Lactantius says it is at “the end of the world.”78 The “heaven 
shall be opened in a tempest, and Christ shall descend with 
great power,” in “fiery brightness” and with “a countless host 
of angels.” Then He “will raise the righteous dead to eternal 
life.” 79 Now comes his climactic statement:
1052
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
“After these things God will renew the world, and transform the 
righteous into the form of angels, that, being presented with the garment 
of immortality, they may serve God forever.”80
Such is the main Epitome witness of Lactantius.
VIII. Significance of Lactantius’ Conditionalist Witness
Thus we find the celebrated Lactantius of Nicomedia, 
in Asia Minor, addressing the Roman emperor Constantine 
as late as the fourth century, still maintaining the Conditional 
Immortality School of conviction, predominant throughout 
the bulk of the second century.
More than a century had now passed since Athenagoras, 
and Tertullian and his school had projected the concept of 
universal Innate Immortal-Soulism, holding vehemently to 
the Eternal Torment of the immortal-wicked thesis. (On this 
latter point Lactantius was confused.) Furthermore, a century 
had elapsed since Origen and his school, while maintaining 
the same basic universal Innate Immortal-Soulism postulate, 
had introduced his countertheory of Universal Restorationism.
So these three schools of thought on the origin, nature, 
and destiny of man were still existent and militantly vocal, 
side by side in the fourth century as here shown, and as visually 
portrayed on Tabular Chart F, on page 759. The significance of 
this fact should not be lost. Then, a century later, the power­
ful Augustine, through his prestige and influence, imposed 
the Innate-Immortality dogma on the dominant church gen­
erally, and Conditionalism was soon crowded into eclipse.
This virtual blackout remained as a blinding smog for 
centuries, until the early dawn of the Protestant Reformation. 
Only intermittent voices or occasional groups continued to wit­
ness to Conditionalism. The darkness of Platonic Immortal- 
Soulism well-nigh overwhelmed the flickering light of apostolic 
Conditionalism, long in general obscurity. That is the trail 
we will follow across the centuries in volume two.
80 Ibid., p. 255.
CHAPTER 
SIXTY-THREE
Athanasius—Then Conditionalism 
Into Eclipse
As we come to the last spokesmen for the Conditionalist 
and Immortal-Soulist schools—Athanasius and Augustine, re­
spectively—that we shall trace in volume one, let us take a 
retrospective view of the path we have traversed here in his­
torical Part IV, covering the first five centuries of the Chris­
tian Era. These last chapters comprise a tragic tale of shifting 
realignment among the three schools of thought on the nature 
and destiny of man, each well crystallized by the fourth cen­
tury. They reveal an inexorable shift in power, and a fore­
boding pattern for the future. In due course, two of these 
three schools on man’s nature and destiny become submerged 
by the ascendant school stressing the dogma of Eternal Tor­
ment for the damned. Darkness descended as the light of 
Conditionalism was increasingly suppressed.
We have space only for the barest outline of this saga of 
tragic suppression. We must restrict ourselves merely to men­
tioning a few representative names, noting little more than 
their churchly positions and locations, as they take their posi­
tion in this fateful change-over. With an eye on Tabular 
Chart F we can easily follow the developments, now moving 
on with accelerating momentum. It is actually a portrayal of 
the repression of opposition arid the emerging supremacy of 
error. Note first the two basic lines of departure from the 
apostolic platform—that is, of the Conditionalist School. They 
reveal a tragic development.
1053
1054
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
I. Shifting Emphasis of the Three Schools Concerning the Soul
1. Historic Alignments in Ante-Nicene Period.—Though 
we have touched upon them before, following the time of 
Tertullian (d. c. 240)—and the steady growth of the second 
school in the theological trilemma that we have been tracing 
—we find that they gained the support of Hippolytus, bishop of 
Portus Romanus (d. c. 236) and friend of Origen, and Cyprian, 
bishop of Carthage (d. c. 258) and admirer and successor of 
Tertullian, as they trod in Tertullian’s fiery footsteps. That 
is, they held to the universal Innate Immortality of all souls, 
together with the dreadful corollary of the Eternal Torment 
of the wicked. (And both Hippolytus and Cyprian lived prior 
to the notable Council of Nicea in 325.)
In the third school—that of the rival Universal Restora­
tionism—are found Gregory Thaumaturgus of Neocaesarea 
(d. c. 270), Pamphilus of Caesarea (d. 309), along with Theog- 
nostus (d. c. 282) and Pierius, Origen’s successors in the school 
at Alexandria. These men close the line of Ante-Nicene Fathers 
of this school. And these earlier witnesses, it is to be remem­
bered, were predominantly Greek.
Meanwhile, Conditionalist Novatian of Nicomedia (d. c. 
258), and Arnobius of Sicca (d. c. 330), similarly close the ante- 
Nicene line of the Conditionalist or first school of witnesses. 
These men have already been presented quite fully.
2. Post-Nicene Shifting 
of Greatest Import.—Then 
came the epochal general Council of Nicea in 325, with its 
momentous decisions concerning the Godhead. And about 
this time appeared the bold Conditionalist witness of Lactan­
tius of Nicomedia, noted in the preceding chapter. Following 
him comes the distinct alteration in emphasis. By now the 
church is predominantly Latin, and Conditionalism is rapidly 
passing into eclipse. The learned Athanasius of Alexandria 
(d. 373), about to be covered, gives but feeble voice to the 
redemptive positions stressed in Conditionalism. And his is
the last prominent voice before the transition. This gives a 
bit of setting, and reveals the changing times.
Meanwhile, some seven ecclesiastics still support the 
Restorationist School in its last hopeless stand. But they were 
diminishing reverberations, as it were, merely reiterating what 
had been said again and again. At the same time, the rising 
tide of the Eternal-Torment school of Immortal-Soulism at­
tracted four stanch adherents to the Tertullian position, 
climaxing with the redoubtable Augustine of Hippo in the 
fifth century. Such is the over-all picture. It is fraught with 
deep significance. The battle for domination was now on 
in dead earnest. Eternal-Tormentism was out to impose its 
view on all.
After Universal Restorationist Basil, bishop of Caesarea 
(d. 379), Diodorus, bishop of Tarsus (d. c. 390), blind Didymus 
(d. 398), of the Catechetical School of Alexandria, Gregory, 
bishop of Nyssa (d. c. 395), and Theodore, bishop of Mop- 
suestia (d. 428), had each spoken, the Restorationist line practi­
cally ceased—and remained silent for centuries, following 
suppression by condemnation of the second Council of Con­
stantinople in 553.
3. 
Ultimate Ascendancy of Eternal-Torment School. 
—As already noted, in the now powerful and expanding Eter­
nal-Torment school of post-Nicene times must be included 
Ambrose, bishop of Milan (d. 397), Chrysostom, bishop of 
Constantinople (d. 407), Jerome of Bethlehem (d. 420), of 
Vulgate translation fame, with the renowned Augustine, bishop 
of Hippo (d. 430), coming at the climactic end of the line. 
His powerful voice constituted the ultimate. He furnished the 
imprimatur.
These all opposed the Restorationist school of Origen as 
well as the Conditionalist, and thus advanced the never-ending- 
torment postulate of Tertullian. And now with the appearance 
of Augustine the ascendant position became established, and 
was henceforth dominant and oppressive. In this way Eternal- 
Tormentism came to be the inexorable dogma of the Catholic
AFTER ATHANASIUS CONDITIONALISM ECLIPSED 
1055
Athanasius 
of 
Alexandria 
Gives 
but Feeble Voice to the Positions 
of Conditionalism.
Church as it took its position as the controlling medieval 
ecclesiastical power, suppressing all opposing views.
So it was that Conditionalism and Restorationism were 
both, by the sixth century, virtually crushed and driven under­
ground. The Eternal-Torment school of Tertullian-Augustine 
was at last practically unchallenged. And it continued in the 
ascendancy for centuries—consolidating its power and brook­
ing no opposition. But before we turn to Athanasius, and the 
momentous hour of transition striking at that time, we must 
first note an impending movement of a different character that 
had arisen, that has a definite bearing on the stature and 
testimony of Athanasius.
II. The Athanasius-Arius Controversy and the Nicene Creed
We here digress long enough to set forth the issues involved 
in the unhappy irruption of Arianism, which brought the Chris­
tian Church to another crisis of a different nature, this time in 
the fourth century. Arianism, it should be added, reappears 
periodically across the centuries, and the issues involved have 
a definite bearing on our quest. Hence this divergence.
The doctrine of the pre-existent Logos was the subject
1056
AFTER ATHANASIUS CONDITIONALISM ECLIPSED 
1057
of prolonged controversy in the crucial fourth century. Pres­
sures from Gnosticism with its emanation theory, and from 
Ebionism with its total rejection of Christ’s deity, forced the 
church to make a definitive expression of view on the issues 
at stake. Some sought to escape the difficulty by absolute iden­
tification of Father and Son. The problem was to distinguish 
between Father and Son without denying either the humanity 
or the absolute deity of the latter.
Various devices were offered—as by Tertullian, and by 
Dionysius of Rome, and the concept of subordination and 
Sabellianism.1 But in the early part of the fourth century de­
cision had to be made as to whether the church should regard 
the Son as but a creature, not God by nature and hence not 
eternal, and therefore not in the highest sense divine; or, that 
He is uncreated, eternal, truly God, and of the same essence 
with the Father—the famous Nicene term being homoousios 
(“of one substance”)—yet with a personality distinct from that 
of the Father. That was the crux of it all.
1. Absolute Deity of Christ at Stake.—The absolute­
ness of the Christian religion, as well as the integrity of the 
person of Christ, was at stake. Christianity could not remain 
content with a concept that involved the subordination of its 
Head. If Christianity is the absolute religion, Christ must be 
regarded as absolutely divine. It was therefore necessary that 
the Athanasian formula should, at Nicea, become a funda­
mental part of the declared Christianity of subsequent centuries.
It should be noted that it was Western Christians who saw 
the need of asserting the absolute deity of Christ, whereas East­
ern Christians spent much of their time and energy on spec­
ulative hairsplitting. The Arian controversy was widespread 
and prolonged, and raged for nearly a century. It engaged the 
energies of nearly all prominent Christian spokesmen of the
^Projected by 
Sabellius (third-century churchman), who affirmed that there is but 
one divine essence, which became operative in three temporarily successive manifestations. It 
was a trinity of successive revelations. Hence he maintained that the Godhead reveals only 
one member at a time-^the Father in the Old Testament, the Son in the period of the Incarna­
tion, and the Holy Spirit following in inspiration. Each, after fulfilling His mission, returned, 
he alleged, into the abstract monad.
34
1058
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
time, and was the occasion of much violence, of expression 
and otherwise. It rent asunder whole sections of Christendom, 
and penetrated other related areas of doctrine as well. And 
it bore upon the nature of man.
2. The Arian View Summed Up.—Arius (c. 256-336), a 
Libyan by birth, was a presbyter of the Alexandrian church, 
where the allegorical interpretation prevailed. But, curiously 
enough, in opposition to the allegorical concept Arius inter­
preted the Bible grammatically and historically. He demanded 
a clear and rational statement. He rejected Origen’s “eternal 
generation” theory. But a large number who held with Origen 
rejected the Arian theory of subordination of the Person of 
Christ. Arius held that Jesus, the Son of God, was not co­
eternal with the Father, and must be held external to the 
divine essence, and only a creature. The issue was basic. The 
Arian view may be summed up as follows:
(1) The Son was created out of nothing; hence He is 
different in essence from the Father. He is the Logos, the 
Wisdom, the Son of God, and of grace; but He is not so of 
Himself.
(2) The characteristic formula was, “There was when 
the Son was not”; that is, He is a finite being, a creature, a 
derived being, not eternally pre-existent.
(3) In the historical Christ the human element is merely 
the material aspect, while the soul is the Logos. The historical 
Christ therefore had no human soul, and was finite and 
imperfect.
(4) But, although the incarnate Logos is finite, He was 
made the instrument in creation, and is to be worshiped and 
exalted above all other creatures, as the Creator and Governor 
of the universe, and the Redeemer of man.
3. The Athanasian View Epitomized.—The champions 
of the Athanasian view were driven to state their concept of 
the relations of the Godhead in answer to the assertions of 
the Arians. They were compelled to repudiate the subordinate
AFTER ATHANASIUS CONDITIONALISM ECLIPSED 
1059
position given by Arius to the Son, and to affirm the absolute 
and eternal deity of the historical Christ. The Athanasian 
view of Christ embraced the following:
(1) As God is unchangeable, there never was a time when 
the Son was not with the Father. The distinction between Father 
and Son is therefore an eternal distinction.
(2) The Son is identical in substance (or being) with the 
Father. His deity is identical with the deity of the Father. 
Athanasius consequently rejected the Platonic exaltation of 
God above all relations to the universe, held by Arius and 
Origen. Creation was the work of the Son, but not because 
it was beneath the dignity of the Father. Athanasius held that 
in denying the absolute deity of Christ, the possibility of the 
union of God with man was denied. If Christ is not truly and 
freely God, there is no true redemption for man.
(3) Athanasius emphasized the personality of the Son 
just as much as His identity of essence with the Father. The 
Son is not a mere attribute or mode of manifestation of the 
Father, but an independent personal subsistence. His was not 
a derived life. Yet Athanasius would not allow anything that 
involved a partition of the divine essence. This had been 
illustrated by the relation of light and its reflection, in this 
way subordinating the Son to the Father. Athanasius stressed 
the sameness of essence and the distinction of personality of 
Father and Son. That discloses the soundness and the stature 
of Athanasius on the question of the Godhead.
4. 
The Semi-Arian or Eusebian Concept.—On the other 
hand the Semi-Arian, or Eusebian, party sought to mediate 
between the other two. Such rejected the Arian view that the 
Son was created out of nothing, hence was different in essence 
from the Father, and denied that there was a time “when the 
Son was not.” They likewise rejected the idea that the Son 
is a creature, or was “born” in the sense that other beings 
are born.
They, on the other hand, declared that the Son was 
begotten of the Father before all time, God of God, entire of
1060
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
entire, perfect of the perfect, image of the Deity, the essence, 
the will, the power, and the glory of the Father. But they 
denied the Athanasian sameness of essence, holding only to 
likeness as to essence.
5. 
Tide of Battle Ends in Athanasian Victory.—The 
issue came to a head at the Nicene Council of 325. As noted, 
the main object of this council was to settle the far-flung 
Arian controversy that threatened the unity of Christianity. 
There were now three parties in the controversy. At the 
opening of the council the Arians proposed a creed, signed 
by eighteen names. This was indignantly rejected, and as a 
consequence all but three abandoned the Arian cause.
Eusebius then proposed an ancient Palestinian formula. 
The Arians were willing to subscribe to it, but the Athanasians 
wanted to change the creed to which the Arians must subscribe. 
They insisted on the term “identical in substance.” The Nicene 
Creed in its present form was then proposed. The emperor, 
awed by the personality of Athanasius, cast in his lot with the 
Athanasian party, and finally the Semi-Arians reluctantly sub­
scribed. Arius and the two Egyptian bishops who refused to 
sign it were banished.
However, in time Arius was restored to office. And in 
335 an Arian Synod, convoked at Tyre, now condemned the 
Athanasian party, and Athanasius was banished to Treves. 
But when the empire was divided after the death of Constan­
tine in 337, Constantius in the East was an Arian, while 
Constantine II in the West was an adherent of the Nicene 
Creed, and restored Athanasius.
Thus the tide of battle over the creeds, involving the 
Godhead, swung back and forth—the Western Church being 
predominantly Nicean, and the Eastern predominantly Arian. 
Finally the Athanasian party prevailed, and Athanasianism 
became victorious. With this sketch of the man and the issues, 
we are now ready to consider Athanasius, and then his writings, 
in greater detail.
AFTER ATHANASIUS CONDITIONALISM ECLIPSED 
1061
III. Athanasius—Powerful Defender of Deity of Christ
Athanasius 
(c. 297-373), bishop of Alexandria and most 
prominent theologian of the fourth century, is commonly 
called the “defender of orthodoxy,” because of his conspic­
uous championship of the eternal deity of Christ in the bat­
tle over the Godhead, as against the prolonged attacks of 
Arianism.
1. The Center of the Theological World.—Athana­
sius’ childhood spanned the terrible Diocletian persecution, 
303-313. He was highly trained in the famous schools of 
Alexandria, and was well acquainted with the Platonic phi­
losophy, and the various other systems, along with the tenets 
of Judaism. He was a young deacon under Bishop Alexander 
when the Arian controversy arose about 320. And he was 
presbyter of the Alexandria Church at the time of the first 
general Council of Nicea (325), where he became the chief 
defender of the Trinitarian doctrine, as against the heresy 
of Arianism.
In 328 the dying Bishop Alexander recommended that 
Athanasius be his successor. Accordingly, Athanasius was made 
not only bishop of Alexandria in 328 but metropolitan of 
all Egypt and Libya, and Pentapolis as well—the highest 
ecclesiastical dignity in the East. To him more than any 
other individual is due the triumph of Trinitarianism.2 His 
life has been described as “an epic of heroism, fortitude, and 
faith.” Forty-six years a bishop, he was the center of the 
theological world as Constantine was of the political realm— 
both bearing the title “the Great,” in their respective spheres. 
That was his stature.
2. Four Times Banished in Stormy Career.—For years 
prior to Nicea there had been theological controversy in Egypt 
over the contentions of Arianism. And now Athanasius’ posi-
2 The so-called “Athanasian Creed’’ was not, however, the work of Athanasius but 
was a later creation.
@ 1963 BY THE REVIEW AND HERALD
HARRY ANDERSON, ARTIST
Athanasius Presented the Eternal Christ as Creator, Redeemer, Source of 
Immortality, and Upholder of the Moral Law.
tion on the coeternity and coequality of the Father and the 
Son had brought the issue to a head at Nicea. The over­
whelming majority voted against Arius, who was deposed and 
banished. But politics mingled with theology at Nicea, each 
side seeking to win imperial favor.
Later, reaction against the decisions of Nicea restored 
Arius. But Athanasius, who had incurred Arian hatred, was 
four times banished from his church by Arian emperors and 
once by Julian the Apostate—spending more than twenty years 
in exile. Five times in his stormy career he returned to his 
church, spending his last years still defending “orthodoxy” 
and opposing “heresy.” He was thus the outstanding obstacle 
to the triumph of Arianism in the East. He also upheld the
1062
AFTER ATHANASIUS CONDITIONALISM ECLIPSED 
1063
deity of the Holy Spirit. He conspicuously maintained that, 
at the Incarnation, God Himself entered into humanity. Such 
was his eminence.
3. 
Championed Certain Aspects of Conditionalism.— 
But he also championed certain aspects of Conditionalism, 
contending that “securing immortality” is the aim of the soul 
—and that position was taken in the very city where the 
allegorizing Philo of the Jews (c. 20 b.c.-c. a.d. 50) had lived, 
and where the Neoplatonic Origen 
(d. c. 254) had held 
forth as powerful head of the Catechetical School a century 
and a quarter prior. But Athanasius’ voice faltered somewhat 
at this point, and he fluctuated in his witness. Nevertheless, 
he held firmly to the second coming of Christ to raise the dead 
and establish His kingdom. These points will be noted shortly.
In his De Incarnatione Verbi Dei (“On the Incarnation of 
the Word”) Athanasius expounds how God the Word (Logos) 
by His union with human manhood restores to fallen man 
the image of God, in which he had been created. And by His 
death and resurrection He met and overcame death and the 
consequences of sin. It is a powerful presentation as we shall 
now see.
IV “'j'he Incarnation” in Relation to Man’s Sin 
and Redemption
1. 
Classic Portrayal of Restoration of Man’s Life.— 
Let us now range through Athanasius’ The Incarnation, writ­
ten while he was still in his twenties—an exploit similar to 
that of Calvin and his Institutes. Here in The Incarnation we 
find depicted the relation of the Infinite Son of God to the 
lost sons of man. Here is revealed Athanasius’ clear concept 
of the hopeless condition of man, lost through sin but paral­
leled by the wondrous provisions of redemption. And this is 
all portrayed in the setting of the sublime deity of Christ and 
His incarnation for the purpose of dying in our stead and 
rising for our restoration. Finally, Athanasius’ comprehension
1064
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
of the prophetic phase—the inspired predictions of Christ’s 
earthly life and the timing of His death, together with His 
second advent to consummate the redemption—is similarly 
presented with appealing clarity.
Athanasius’ grasp of man’s need and of the provision of 
a Saviour is most impressive. The treatise is a classic portrayal 
of the restoration of man. It is really the most ancient 
work on Christian dogmatics available, and is actually a Chris­
tian philosophy of the Godhead. While he was not always an 
out-and-out Conditionalist, Athanasius nevertheless presents, 
in this setting, certain distinctive Conditionalist teachings and 
their underlying principles. That is why it is of concern to 
us in compassing this grave transition hour, when Conditional- 
ism was steadily passing from the picture.
2. 
Direct Quotations Not Employed With Athanasius. 
—Athanasius is not cited here because he made any new or 
special contribution to Conditionalism, but to show that a 
scholar of his eminence still held at that critical time— 
despite the growing pressures and the strong swing away 
from Conditionalism—to certain general underlying principles. 
Athanasius was virtually the last man of prominence so to do 
before the portentous blackout that lasted for centuries. How­
ever, his learned writings, in the characteristic manner of the 
time, are so prolix and involved as to require large para­
graphs of direct quotation, were such to be used. But that 
would prove tedious and boring to the modern reader, and 
might be laid aside. That would defeat the very purpose of 
such citations.
We have therefore given accurate summarizations of 
Athanasius’ lengthy arguments and expressions of belief. In 
doing so, recourse has been had to the official analytical sum­
mations of each section appearing at the beginning of each 
section, prepared by Bishop Archibald Robertson, then of the 
University of Durham and later of Oxford. These faithfully 
set forth Athanasius’ presentation in condensed form. Hence 
no direct quotes are used. But the thought has been trustworth­
ily preserved. That is all that is essential for our purpose here.
Athanasius is not clear, forceful, or full on the nature of 
man, as were some that came before him. He is contradictory 
and confused in spots on this question. His principal burden 
is to preserve the great truth and reality of the complete 
deity of Christ, and related eternal verities. This he did most 
remarkably. And in so doing he upheld the fundamental prin­
ciples of the redemption of lost man.
The translation is from the standard Schaff and Wace 
rendering in the Post-Nicene Fathers, volume four. Now let 
us fill in the picture with rapid strokes.
3. Man 
Not 
Created 
W
ith 
Perverse 
Tendencies.— 
Athanasius’ Introduction (in sections 1 to 3) begins with the 
doctrine of creation by the Word, and man’s allotted place, 
followed by the abuse of his high privileges and resultant 
loss. It portrays how the Father has saved the world by Him 
through whom He first made it.3 The creation was out of 
nothing. And, be it particularly noted, with man created 
above the rest, but incapable of independent perseverance.4
As it was by the Word that man was called from non­
existence into being, so by the one fault which forfeited that 
life he incurred corruption.3 Having thus incurred ruin, 
man of himself must sink back into destruction.® Only the 
original Bestower of life, Athanasius held, could now rescue 
him and restore life.
4. Creator Must Both Renew and Restore.—Athana­
sius presses the point that, having incurred corruption, none 
could renew but He who had created man. The Son alone 
could re-create, suffer for all, and represent all to the Father.7 
So the Word visited this earth ,and took a body of our nature, 
and that of a virgin.8 He took a mortal body, capable of death, 
uniting it with His deity, that He might stay the corruption
3 Athanasius, On the Incarnation of the Word, sec. 1, in NPNF, 2d series, vol. 4, p. 36.
* Ibid., sec. 3, p. 37.
5 Ibid., secs. 4, 5, p. 38.
8 Ibid., sec. 6, p. 39.
AFTER ATHANASIUS CONDITIONALISM ECLIPSED 
1065
1066
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
of the race. Becoming one with us He clothed us with im­
mortality 9 as a result. Created in the “image” of God, man 
had fallen away from God.10 So God restored in us the grace 
of His image.
5. Became 
Man to 
Restore Life to Us.—Athanasius 
tells how a portrait once effaced must be restored from the 
original. Thus the Son of the Father came to seek, save, and 
regenerate. And, Athanasius asserts, the Word alone could do 
so.u So He condescends to take a “body.”12 And by His 
becoming Man, the Saviour put away death from us, renew­
ing us again.13 Bishop Robertson well summarizes section 
twenty thus concerning Christ:
"None, then, could bestow incorruption, but He Who had made, 
none restore the likeness of God, save His Own Image, none quicken, 
but the Life, none teach, but the Word. And He, to pay our debt of death, 
must also die for us, and rise again as our first-fruits from the grave. 
Mortal therefore His [Christ’s] body must be; corruptible, His Body 
could not be."14
So death was brought to nought by the death of Christ.15
6. Purpose of Public Death and Three Days in Tomb. 
—Continuing, the Son came to receive the death due to others. 
He paid the debt, dying in our stead, so as to rise again as the 
first fruits. That is why Christian martyrs have contempt for 
death. Moreover, His death must be certain in order to guar­
antee the truth of His resurrection.18 That necessitated a 
public death.17 He died on the cross to bear the “curse” for 
us, quoting Deuteronomy 21:23. But He held out His hands to 
us, thus clearing the way to Heaven and opening for us the ever­
lasting doors.18
The cross, once the instrument of shame, now became the 
trophy of victory. He rose not till the “Third Day,” so the 
reality of His death could not be denied. And not later, so to
AFTER ATHANASIUS CONDITIONALISM ECLIPSED 
1067
guard the identity of His body, or not to keep His disciples too 
long in “suspense,” or to wait till the witnesses were dispersed.1* 
The reality of the Resurrection is proved by the facts.20 Christ’s 
triumph over the grave changed the relevancy of death and 
life. It involved a momentous train of consequences.
7. Prophecies Establish Facts of Incarnation.—Atha­
nasius then turns to the prophecies, recorded in Holy Writ, 
showing how the Jews, in their inveterate obstinacy, were con­
founded by their own Scriptures—by the prophecies of Christ’s 
coming as God and Man.21 Athanasius first notes the prophecies 
of His passion and death in all its circumstances.22 Next were the 
prophecies of the “Cross,” and how they are all fulfilled in 
Christ alone.23 Then came prophecies of Christ’s sovereignty, 
flight into Egypt, et cetera.24 And in Psalm 22 appears the maj­
esty of His birth and death.26 Therein is disclosed His unim­
peachable power and Godhead. Moreover, they were not to 
“look for another,” for Daniel in the prophecy of the seventy 
weeks, foretells the exact time of His death.28
8. Answers Scoffing of Greeks Regarding Incarnation. 
—Answering the frivolous cynicism and scoffing of the Greeks, 
Athanasius says that Christ’s union with the body is based upon 
His relation to Creation as a whole. Since man alone departed 
from the order of His creation, it was man’s nature that the 
Word united to Himself, thus repairing the breach between 
the creature and the Creator at the very point where the rup­
ture had occurred. He used a “human body,” since it was to man 
that He wished to reveal Himself.27 He came to save, and man 
alone of all earthly creatures had sinned.28
He could not save man by a “mere fiat,” as when He 
produced man out of nothing. A bare command would not 
suffice.2* He came and lived and worked among them as man.30 
Further, creation out of nothing is different from reparation
1068
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
of what already exists. Man had a definite need, calling for 
a definite remedy. Death was ingrained in man’s nature, and 
the Word must meet and conquer death in His usurped ter­
ritory.31 He met the specific disorder with a specific remedy, 
overcoming death with life. This point is so vital that we 
quote a paragraph from Athanasius’ own text:
"For this cause the Saviour reasonably put on Him a body, in 
order that the body, becoming wound closely to the Life, should no 
longer, as mortal, abide in death, but, as having put on immortality, 
should thenceforth rise again and remain immortal. For, once it had 
put on corruption, it could not have risen again unless it had put on 
life. And death likewise could not, from its very nature, appear, save 
in the body. Therefore He put on a body, that He might find death in 
the body, and blot it out. For how could the Lord have been proved 
at all to be the Life, had He not quickened what was mortal?”32
9. 
So Live as to Eat of Tree of Life.—Finally, Atha­
nasius urges all to search the Scriptures and fill in this “out­
line.” He closes with a portrayal of the Second Advent, direct 
from Heaven, in power and glory. And he tells us that we 
will learn about His second glorious and truly divine appear­
ing to us, in His own glory—no longer in humble guise, but 
in His own magnificence.33 He will then execute judgment 
on the wrongdoer. Athanasius closes, in section 57, with an 
admonition to so live that you may have the right to eat of this 
tree of knowledge and life, and so come to eternal joys.34
Quoting again from the text, Athanasius urges that the 
reader—
"may escape the peril of the sinners and their fire at the day of judgment, 
and receive what is laid up for the saints in the kingdom of heaven.” 45
That is Athanasius’ view of the vicarious, atoning death 
of Christ on the cross, in its relation to the redemption of 
man and his resurrection and future life. It reveals a mag­
nificent grasp of the over-all issues and a continuity of treat­
ment that was unsurpassed in his day. On the actual nature
31 Ibid., sec. 44, p. 60.
32 Ibid., pp. 60, 61.
33 Ibid., sec. 56, p. 66.
34 Ibid., sec. 57, p. 67.
36 Ibid.
AFTER ATHANASIUS CONDITIONALISM ECLIPSED 
1069
and destiny of man Athanasius was at times self-contradictory.3® 
It was a transition hour. He sometimes reproduces some of 
the very thoughts and phrases of Plato that were openly em­
ployed by Athanagoras and Tertullian. But he did not follow 
with them to their conclusions. He passed over the final destruc­
tion. And the semi-Conditionalism he voiced was, erelong, 
drowned out in the swirling tide of Platonism, which in time 
swept over Christendom. But his was a retarding voice that 
was heard, and was respected in his day.
“ Athanasius was an avowed Immortal-Soulist when he was twenty-one, at the time he 
wrote his first book, Contra Gentes (“Against the Heathen”), about a.d. 318, and thus seven 
years before the Council of Nicea in 325. (Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, Pro­
legomena, j>. LXXXVI; Introduction, p. 1.) At that time Athanasius expressly declared the 
soul to be immortal (sec. 33,_ p. 21), with power to continue life outside of the body after 
death (ibid.). But even in this treatise Athanasius says, in his closing paragraph, “Immortality 
and the kingdom of heaven is the fruit of faith and devotion towards Him [God], if only the 
soul be adorned according to His laws”—and refers to the “prize” of “life everlasting” (sec. 
47, p. 30).
CHAPTER 
SIXTY-FOUR
Augustine—Immortal'Soulism’s 
Hour of Supremacy
I. Projects Fallacious Philosophy of History
We close this group survey of post-Nicene personalities 
with a relatively brief comment on Augustine, one of the 
admittedly great intellects of the centuries. His life marks the 
transition hour between the developing theology of the Post- 
Nicene Church witnesses and the long period of the Middle 
Ages when dogma had become fixed, with no freedom of mind 
allowed outside the rigid confines of the Catholic ecclesiastical 
system. And this included pre-eminently the nature and destiny 
of man.
1. 
“Infallible” System of Doctrine Based on Author­
ity.—It is well, before continuing, to note that the Roman 
mind was by nature of a legal turn, with God conceived of 
as a stern lawgiver and judge, holding man to obedience 
through pain of punishment. Augustine really held that man 
comes to Christ under the influence of fear. Man must there­
fore have a mediator. And this, he held, was the function of 
the church. Therefore salvation operates within the custody 
of the church.
The thought of a church with an infallible system of doc­
trine, based upon authority, intrigued him. Thus it was that 
Augustine the philosopher became Augustine the theologian, 
with this concept as foundational. His view of the church is 
formulated in his famous treatise, the City of God, which is
1070
Under Augustine of Hippo the Eternal-Torment Postulate Developed by 
Tertullian Was Fastened Upon Catholic Christendom.
the most elaborate, and enticing, philosophy of history ever 
attempted. To him all history is a conflict between the earthly 
“city,” or community, belonging to the children of the world, 
and the “City of God,” the church—an imposing drama end­
ing in the final victory of the church.
2. 
Basic Fallacies of Augustinian Concepts.—Augus­
tine, in this crucial century, was now the most powerful and 
influential exponent of universal Innate Immortality, and the 
indestructibility of the human soul. His was an extension and
1071
1072
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
augmentation of Tertullianism. But his fundamental view was 
based on a contradiction—that “death” means endless life. He 
confused “eternal loss” of life with an “eternal life of loss,” 
as aptly phrased. Remove that contention and the Augustinian 
structure falls. Nevertheless, the influence of Augustine was 
strong enough to secure the prevalence for centuries of the 
doctrine of the universal, indefeasible immortality of all men, 
and the consequent eternal life of the sinner in endless, 
agonizing misery.
However, the most serious error of Augustine’s theory was 
that evil for a time and evil for eternity are essentially one and 
the same. He thereby flouted the scriptural distinction between 
time and eternity. God permits the triumph of evil for a 
determined duration, then He will cause it to cease forever. 
Evil is but transitory and temporary, in contrast with Augus­
tine’s enduring and eternal continuation theory, which stemmed 
back to Persian dualism. Time is a relatively brief period 
between the two eternities of the past and the future—with the 
triumph of good as the final end and goal. And in that future 
age that will have no end there will be no reprobates. In 
contrast, Origen had restored them all to Heaven; while Au­
gustine held the wicked perpetually in Hell. But the influence 
of Augustine prevailed over that of Origen. That molded the 
course of history.
3. 
Already Committed 
to Immortal-Soulism Before 
Conversion.—It was the powerful advocacy by Augustine of 
the doctrine of the indefeasible immortality of the soul and 
its “logical consequent,” the doctrine of Eternal Torment in 
hell-fire, that won general acceptance in the Medieval Church, 
becoming the dominant view for a thousand years. But it 
should be noted that in this Augustine simply brought with 
him into Christianity the speculations of Greek philosophy 
that he had adopted in his pre-Christian days.
It is also well to remember that, before his conversion to 
Christianity, Augustine had written a book giving sixteen
IMMORTAL-SOULISM’S HOUR OF SUPREMACY 
1073
reasons for the immortality of the soul. So he was already 
committed to this pagan postulate before he became a Chris­
tian. Christian Neoplatonism simply formed the bridge. In 
Augustine, Immortal-Soulism reached the high-water mark of 
post-Nicene times. Now observe his personal life.
II. Augustine Sets Immortal-Soulist Pattern for Thousand Years
Fiery Augustine 
(Aurelius Augustinus) 
(a.d. 354-430), 
most illustrious of the Latin Fathers, doctor of the church and 
bishop of Hippo, was born in Numidia, North Africa. His 
mother was a Christian, but his father a pagan. After a thor­
ough education at Madaura and Carthage, including philos­
ophy, Augustine became a teacher of rhetoric in Rome, and 
then Milan. From adherence to Neoplatonism he was con­
verted to Christianity under Ambrose of Milan. He then 
broke with the world of his profession, spending three years 
in intensive study. Four years after he was made a presbyter 
he was chosen bishop of Hippo, continuing as such for thirty- 
five years, and was the founder of the Augustinian order. His 
influence on theology was immense, particularly up to the 
thirteenth century. (On Augustine’s timing see Chart F, p. 759.)
Augustine’s life was cast in a transition hour—the sacking 
of Rome by the Goths, occurring in the midst of his episcopate. 
Rome’s fall, after eleven centuries of triumphant progress, led 
many to believe the end of the world to be at hand. Roman 
civilization was being swept away under the flood of barbarian 
advance. And churchly thought was crystallizing and harden­
ing. Augustine died in the midst of the Vandal invasion and 
the siege of Hippo.
1. 
Projects New 
Philosophy 
of 
History.—As noted, 
Augustine created a new philosophy of history through his 
monumental theodicy, De Civitate Dei (“The City of God”), por­
traying the triumph and restoration of the “City of God” over 
the city of the world, which latter he held was doomed to
Such Schoolmen of the Middle Ages as Peter Lombard, Thomas Aquinas, and 
Duns Scotus Help Finish the Etemal-Torment and Purgatory Fabrications.
destruction. Thirteen years were consumed in the writing. As 
stated, this set forth a new concept of history—two antagonistic 
governments, the realm of God and that of the devil. Through 
this portrayal he attempted to explain, through a revolutionary 
principle of interpretation, the history of God and the church 
in the world.
Augustine was a combination of pronounced opposites. 
His clear position on sin and grace came nearest of all the 
Fathers to the position of Evangelical Protestantism, later pro­
foundly influencing Luther. At first an advocate of religious 
liberty and of purely spiritual means of opposing error, Au­
gustine later turned to the fatal principle of forcible coercion 
and civil persecution, misusing the directive, “Compel them 
to come in,” to suppress the Donatists.
2. 
Everything That Conflicts Interpreted Spiritually. 
—Repelled by the literal interpretation of Scripture, Au­
gustine caught up the Philonic and rabbinical rule that every­
thing that appears inconsistent with church “orthodoxy” must 
be interpreted spiritually or mystically. And his acceptance 
of the Tichonian rules of interpretation led to a system that 
totally blurred the original sense. Under Augustine the alle­
gorical meaning degenerated into an alternative device for 
supporting ecclesiasticism, and the Bible was emptied of sig­
nificance. It must, he held, always be interpreted with reference
1074
IMMORTAL-SOULISM’S HOUR OF SUPREMACY
1075
to church “orthodoxy.” Thus it was that Augustinianism came 
largely to mold the eschatological opinions of Christendom for 
a thousand years.
3. Revolutionary Principles of Interpretation.—His 
theory of the spiritual, allegorical “first resurrection” lies at 
the foundation of the Augustinian structure—the resurrection 
of dead souls from the death of sin to the life of righteousness. 
As to the millennium, he held the thousand years to be a fig­
urative numeral, expressive of the whole period till the end 
—a round number for an indeterminate time. But the crux 
of Augustine’s argument is that he begins the millennium from 
Christ’s first advent, and spans the period between the first 
and second advents. They were already living, he held, in the 
midst of it. And the “stone” (Christ) that smites the image of 
the nations was becoming a churchly “mountain,” forcibly 
filling the whole earth and bringing all peoples into submis­
sion to Christ.1 It was a militant concept. It changed the whole 
course of theological thought.
So in the fifth century the influence of Augustine was 
powerful enough to secure the dominance for centuries—par­
ticularly in the West—of the doctrine of the natural immor­
tality of the soul, and the consequent eternal life of the sin­
ner in endless misery. Augustine once asked, “What simple 
and illiterate man or obscure woman that does not believe 
the immortality of the soul and a future life?” a By now it 
was well-nigh universal. But common consent is unsound if 
in conflict with the Word.
The pattern was fixed. The dogma of Immortal-Soulism 
was firmly fastened upon Christianity. “Orthodoxy” prevailed 
—and prevailed with a vengeance. For hundreds of years only 
sporadic voices of dissent were heard. But a change would 
come, as we shall see later, in volume two.
1 For the complete evidence on Augustinian interpretation, see L. E. Froom, Prophetic 
Faith, vol. Ì, pp. 473-491.
2 See Augustine, Epistle 137, chap. 3.
Under Justinian in a.d. 529 the Pagan 
Teachings of World-Soul, Emanation, 
Restorationism, Dualism, and Mysti­
cism Were Forbidden.
III. The Fatal Fallacy of Majority “Orthodoxy”
We have just noted how the “orthodoxy” of Augustine 
triumphed, becoming ensconced in a controlling position for 
centuries. But it is also to be remembered that the invoking 
of the authority and prestige of “orthodoxy” is merely appeal­
ing to human authority, and the dubious weight of majority 
view. Such a precarious basis of faith is obviously unsound.
History tragically attests that majorities are frequently 
wrong. Seventeenth-century Anglican William Chillingworth 
uttered a truism when he said, “The Bible and the Bible only 
is the religion of Protestants,” and is the sole foundation of all 
true “orthodoxy.” That was Luther’s platform, and Tyndale’s. 
It was the affirmation of the Protestant princes at the Protest 
of Spires—and has been of all subsequent sound evangelical 
Protestants. That is the position maintained throughout this 
present work.
1. 
Biblical Truth Is Recognized 
in Time.—Human- 
majority authority is but shifting sand, as the “orthodoxy” of 
one generation often comes to be recognized as the “heresy” 
of a succeeding age—or vice versa. The wholesome dissentients
1076
IMMORTAL-SOULISM’S HOUR OF SUPREMACY
1077
of the centuries—the Waldenses, Wycliffites, Hussites, Lu­
therans, Reformed, Baptists, Pietists, Wesleyans—were each, in 
their day of initial witness, condemned by their contemporaries 
as heretical, or at least as heterodox. But each had a sound Bibli­
cal principle to champion, which in time came to be widely 
recognized as actually “orthodox.”
These champions of Conditional ism that we are tracing 
across the centuries considered themselves as similarly standing 
in the line of such dissentients, with a profound conviction that 
the views they held on the nature and destiny of man, though 
criticized and condemned by many of their contemporaries as 
“heretical” or “heterodox,” would ultimately come to be rec­
ognized as acceptable—or at least as one of the alternative 
acceptable views, both of which would be regarded as Chris­
tian, without incurring the opprobrious epithets of “heretical” 
or “heterodox.”
2. 
Orthodoxy Determined 
by Written Word.—True 
orthodoxy is right thinking about Christian truth. And no 
thinking can be truly right that is not in accordance with the 
Written Word. Moreover, “orthodoxy” has usually been rela­
tive, and therefore defective—determined by men’s partial 
knowledge of the truth. The Pharisees in Christ’s day claimed 
to be pre-eminently “orthodox,” and in their smug compla­
cency condemned the Saviour of the world—the Personification 
of Truth. The Greek Catholic Church incorporates the term 
“Orthodox” into her name. And the Roman Catholic Church 
imperiously insists that she alone is orthodox. Obviously, not 
all such assumptions can be right.
In Protestantism, Lutheran scholars claimed adherence to 
pure doctrine, and in the name of orthodoxy made war upon 
the vital piety of seventeenth-century Spener and the Pietists. 
And in the name of orthodoxy Reformed scholastics divided 
the church into hostile camps. Orthodoxism assumes to pre-empt 
the truth, and is unwilling to learn or concede. All too often 
it is haughty and arrogant, assuming the divine prerogatives
1078
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
of infallibility and inerrancy—and all too commonly hating 
all truth with which it is unfamiliar.
Nevertheless, the “orthodoxy” of Augustine’s Immortal- 
Soulism and Eternal Torment was destined to prevail for a 
thousand years. Error was entrenched and riding high. All 
opposers were under the ban and were largely driven under­
ground—to the caves, the secluded valleys, the mountain fast­
nesses, to distant lands. They were compelled to use gue rilla 
tactics to keep the Conditionalist truth alive. But inspiring 
epics were to follow, in Reformation and Post-Reformation 
times, in the unremitting conflict over life, death, and destiny.
3. 
Truth Crushed to Earth Springs Forth Again.— 
After the lengthening shades of night had fallen, and deepest 
midnight with its oppressive silences had come, the early glow 
of a new day pierces the darkness. Brighter and brighter it 
becomes, until the full orb of noontide reveals far more than 
a mere restoration of the interrupted testimony of Condition­
alist witnesses. Mounting in number and of imposing prom­
inence, a growing group of stalwart champions brings the 
testimony of Conditionalism to the forefront as never before, 
first in the Old World and then in the New—and out to the 
ends of the earth. And they advance in their understanding 
of the truth.
Truth on the nature and destiny of man, crushed to earth, 
was bound to rise again. And rise it did. Despite the crushing 
dominance of the Tertullian-Augustinian School throughout 
the medieval centuries, men of sound training and powerful 
conviction began to speak forth again. The testimony of the 
Conditionalist School was once more heard in ever-growing 
voice—though at first under sharp ridicule and duress. Strong 
men sometimes went to prison for their faith—and, in instances, 
even to death. But that too would pass.
Truth could not forever be repressed, and its advocates 
bore their witness in ever-increasing numbers and ever- 
widening circles. The virile seeds of Conditionalism, planted 
during the ante-Nicene days of Justin Martyr and Irenaeus
IMMORTAL-SOULISM’S HOUR OF SUPREMACY
1079
and the post-Nicene times of Arnobius and Lactantius, sprang 
forth and yielded their destined harvest. With this brief pre­
view of things to come, we close this volume. The story of the 
subsequent centuries is the theme and scope of volume two.
Appendixes
APPENDIX A
Relation Between Late Jewish Literature and Early Christian Fathers
(I am indebted to Dr. Earle Hilgert, professor of New Testament, of Andrews Univer­
sity, for suggesting this important connecting link; or bridge, between the later inter-Testament 
writings of the Jews and the earliest patristic Christian writings of the second century a.d. It is 
based upon the most recent findings, and sheds valuable light on these relationships. It was 
specifhcally prepared by Dr. Hilgert for insertion here.—L. E. F.)
Since the discovery of the Dead Sea scrolls, new light has been shed on 
the relation of certain patristic writings of the second century a.d. to the 
writings of late Judaism appearing shortly before the Christian Era. Pre­
liminary work in this direction was done as early at 1930 by Dr. Oscar 
Cullmann,1 then of Strasbourg, who saw in the “Preaching of Peter” (the 
earliest stratum of material in the Pseudo-Clementine literature), a Jewish- 
Christian document, the roots of which could be traced to a kind of Jewish 
Gnosticism. H. J. Schoeps,2 writing in 1948, concluded that the Ebionites (a 
Jewish-Christian group in the second century a.d. who recognized Jesus 
as prophet or Messiah but not as Son of God) had grown out of the Essenes.
In 1952 and 1953, after the publication of the first of the Dead Sea 
scrolls, the Dominican scholar Jean-Paul Audet3 demonstrated a number 
of important parallels between the Manual of Discipline from Qumran, on 
the one hand, and the early Christian Epistle of Barnabas, the Didache, 
the Doctrina XIII. Apostolorum* and the Shepherd of Hermas on the 
other. Audet concluded that all of these early Christian writers ultimately 
derived important features of their thought and expression from the 
Manual of Discipline. Also in 1953, M. de Jonge published a study of the 
Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs.5
This work, hitherto generally considered to be a pre-Christian Jewish 
document with Christian interpolation, was re-evaluated by De Jonge as 
Jewish-Christian, and dated in the second century. Subsequently a num­
ber of scholars have agreed with this conclusion,8 particularly inasmuch
1 Le problème littéraire et historique du roman pseudo-clémentin. Étude sur le rapport 
entre le gnosticisme et le judéo-christianisme, Paris, 1930.
2 Theologie und Geschichte des Judenchristentums, Tübingen, 1949.
3 “Affinités littéraires et doctrinales du ‘Manuel de Discipline.’ ” Revue Biblique, 59 
(1952), 219-238; 60 (1953], 41-82.
4 Published by J. Schlecht, Freiburg i. B.. 1900.
6 The Testaments of the XII Patriarchs. Assen, 1953.
8 J. T. Millik in Revue Biblique, 62 (1955), p_. 298; J. Daniélou, Théologie du Judéo- 
Christianisme, Tournai, 1958, p. 24. However, dissenting views have been expressed by K. G.
Kuhn, “Die beiden Messias Aarons und Israels,” New Testament Studies 1 (1955), pp. 171ff.; 
and A. S. van der Woude, Die messianischen Vorstellungen der Gemeinde von Qumrân, Assen,
1957, p. 215. De Jonge has since modified his view, holding that while the Testaments may be 
originally Jewish, they “underwent at any rate a thoroughgoing Christian redaction” (“Christian
1081
1082
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
as a Testament of Levi in Aramaic and a Testament of Naphtali in Hebrew 
have been discovered at Qumran—documents that appear to be the basis 
for the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs as they now stand. Thus 
another connection between the Dead Sea scrolls and the Christian litera­
ture of the second century seems to have been discovered.
In 1954 Leonhard Goppelt published a study of the relations between 
Judaism and early Christianity,7 in which he pointed out that Christianity, 
until the middle of the second century, remained essentially Jewish in its 
structure. This does not necessarily mean “Jewish” in the sense of the 
extreme legalism with which Paul contended, but Jewish in the larger 
sense that the Christian Church of this period continued to express itself 
in Jewish thought forms.8 Goppelt notes, for instance, that both 1 and 2 
Clement, and Hermas, sense no real break with Judaism; their view of 
Christianity is not that it has come out of Judaism; rather, they see the 
church as made up of the righteous both before and after Christ, so that 
Christianity is a continuance of Judaism.9
In the same year Cullmann brought his previous study up to date in 
the light of the Dead Sea discoveries by proposing that die Qumran sect 
must have been absorbed into the type of Jewish Christianity represented 
in the Pseudo-Clementine literature.10
Most recently the French Jesuit scholar Jean Danidou has pub­
lished a full-scale theology of Jewish Christianity.11 Here he recognizes a 
number of works as Jewish-Christian which were thought in the past to be 
late Jewish: 2 ("Slavonic”) Enoch, the Testaments of the Twelve Patri­
archs, and the Ascension of Isaiah. He notes that each of these is closely 
related to an authentically Jewish work—2 Enoch to 1 ("Ethiopic”) Enoch 
(parts of which have been found at Qumran), the Testaments to Jubilees 
(also found at Qumran), and the Ascension to the stories of the martyr­
doms of the prophets.12 Dani^lou also identifies virtually all of the Christian 
writers before a.d. 150 as Jewish-Christian: 1 Clement, Barnabas, Didache, 
Ignatius, Hermas, as well as the Pseudo-Clementine literature and a number 
of apocryphal gospels.
All of this evidence suggests a new evaluation of the importance 
of Jewish-Christianity in early Christian history. The Church Fathers of the 
first half of the second century stood in close relationship to, and often 
under the influence of, late Jewish literature and thought patterns. The 
lines of rapport between them and the Dead Sea scrolls appear to be 
especially marked.
In view of these apparent relationships, the fact that essentially
Influence in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs,” Novum Testamentum 4 (1960), p. 197; 
see also his “The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs and the New Testament,” in K.. Aland 
et al., eds., Studia Evangelica, Berlin, 1958).
7 Christentum und Judentum im ersten und zweiten Jahrundert, Gütersloh, 1954.
8 Just how broad “Judaism” of this period could become has been amply demonstrated 
by E. R. Goodenough, Jewish Symbols, 6 vols., New York, 1953 ff.
» Ibid., p. 238.
10 “Die neuentdeckten Qumrantexte und das Judenchristentum der Pseudoklementinen,” 
Neutestamentliche Studien für Rudolf Bultmann, Berlin, 1954, pp. 35f.
11 Danielou, ob. cit.
“ Ibid., p. 21.
APPENDIXES
1083
the same view in regard to the nonimmortality of the soul occurs in a 
number of late Jewish works, including the Dead Sea scrolls, and in the 
Apostolic Fathers, would seem to have added significance. It would, of 
course, be too much to claim that this view was characteristic of all 
Jewish-Christian thought, as we have seen, for instance, that the Pseudo- 
Clementines and “Slavonic” Enoch look upon the question otherwise. 
Jewish-Christianity appears to have been no more unanimous in this regard 
than was Judaism. But the general trend of Jewish-Christian thought seems 
to have been toward the view that the soul was merely mortal. This fact 
may indicate one more link between the Apostolic Fathers and late Juda­
ism, and more particularly with the Dead Sea scrolls.
Earle Hilgert
APPENDIX B
Contention of Irenaeus’ Two Apparent Contradictions Collapses
Some tenaciously claim that Irenaeus, in two instances in his five-book 
Treatise, teaches the inherent immortality of the soul. But we believe that 
this contention is not valid, and reject the claim for the following reasons: 
First, doubt can justly be thrown upon the accuracy of some of the 
translated phrases (from Greek to Latin, then from Latin to English), the 
Latin translation being made at a period when the Augustinian thesis was 
dominant in the church. Bishop A. C. Coxe, reviser of the English transla­
tion, who furnished the Introduction and Notes for the standard Roberts 
and Donaldson ANF translation, quotes the translators as saying that the 
exact meaning of the text, both Latin and Greek, is often “most uncertain”; 
and that one of the “difficulties throughout, has been to fix the reading 
we should adopt.” Irenaeus’ style is often “involved and prolix.”1 And 
the translators even state that some of Irenaeus’ discussions may “seem 
almost unintelligible to the English reader,” and “scarcely more compre­
hensible to those who have pondered long on the original.”
It is consequently obvious that too much reliance cannot be placed 
on the technical wording of these two particular passages that appear to 
be in conflict with the rest. Dependence must be placed rather on the 
complete, cumulative testimony of Irenaeus on the subject—the total 
evidence. Only that can be determinative.
Second, it is illogical and unscholarly to insist that two isolated ex­
pressions, at least so translated, apparently affirming unconditional immor­
tality, should nullify two score of positive statements, consisting of several 
distinct and complete lines of evidence, cumulatively establishing Condi­
1 A. Cleveland Coxe, Introductory Note to Irenaeus, Against Heresies, in ANF, vol. 1,
pp. 311, 312.
1084
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
tional Immortality as his preponderant position. From the massed evi­
dence we have just examined, it is obvious that Irenaeus emphatically did 
not believe that man has a never-dying soul, despite the reluctance of some 
to concede the facts. Dean Farrar rightly says, concerning Irenaeus’ testi­
mony, "The sense of twelve, or any number of vague passages is to be ex­
plained by one definite passage; not it by them.” 2
Third, inasmuch as Irenaeus, with great fullness, frequency, and 
varied forms of expression, taught that man is not innately and indefeas- 
ibly immortal according to divine purpose, would it not be amazing if in 
the five parts of the one single treatise Bishop Irenaeus should, with the 
same pen, maintain that the wicked were doomed to everlasting suffering 
—when he had already repeatedly declared that such were cut off from any 
chance of everlasting existence? Yet this is what some claim for him. But we 
affirm that, against these two most dubious expressions, there is a multi­
plicity of determinative evidence to the contrary.
Fourth, the dating of his treatise makes the contention most unlikely 
that Irenaeus in Gaul would have declared the soul to be immortal. As 
noted, his treatise was evidently written soon after a.d. 180, and not later 
than 188. But such a declaration on Immortal-Soulism, at that time, loould 
have made him the pioneer herald of a revolutionary concept of the 
soul that had not yet been publicly set forth. It was not until Athenagoras 
of Athens (190), Clement of Alexandria (220), Minucius Felix of Africa 
(220), and especially Tertullian of Carthage (240), that this concept was 
brought into being in Christian ranks.
1. 
First Case Collapses Under Scrutiny.—Note the two passages in 
the ANF translation. Both are in book five. The first is directed against 
the Gnostic contention that the Demiurge had not the power to bestow 
immortality. And in the context Irenaeus remarks that things which are by 
nature immortal need no kindly help in order to live forever. The first 
perplexing passage is in chapter four, which opens widi reference to—
“those persons [Gnostics] who feign the existence of another Father beyond the 
Creator [the Demiurge], and who term him the good God, do deceive themselves; 
for they introduce him as a feeble, worthless, and negligent being, not to say 
malign and full of envy, inasmuch as they aiFirm that our bodies are not 
quickened by him. For when they say of things which it is manifest to all do 
remain immortal, such as the spirit and the soul, and such other things, that 
they are quickened by the Father, but that another thing [viz., the body] which 
is quickened in no different manner than by God granting [life] to it, is 
abandoned by life,—[they must either confess] that this proves their Father to 
be weak and powerless, or else envious and malignant.” 3
But the determinative “they say” clearly puts the contention on the 
lips of the Gnostics, and off the shoulders of Irenaeus. He denied their 
false and slanderous position regarding the Creator, and their allegation as 
to His impotence and malignity. In a score of places Irenaeus declares 
that Christ is omnipotent, Utat He is Creator and Redeemer, and the
2 Farrar, Mercy and Judgment, p. 238.
3 Irenaeus, Against Heresies, book 5, chap. 4, sec. 1, in ANF, vol. 1, p. 530. (Brackets 
in original; italics supplied.)
APPENDIXES
1085
Bestower of immortality on the righteous only at the resurrection. Thus 
case number one collapses.
After this introduction Irenaeus comments further:
“For since the [true] Creator [Christ] does even here quicken [make alive] 
our mortal bodies, and promises them resurrection by the prophets, as I have 
pointed out; who [in that case] is shown to be more powerful, stronger, or truly 
good? Whether is it the Creator who vivifies the whole man, or is it their Father, 
falsely so called? Fie [the Gnostic Demiurge] feigns to be the quickener of those 
things which are immortal by nature, to which things life is always present by 
their very nature; but he does not benevolently quicken those things which re­
quired his assistance, that they might live, but leaves them carelessly to fall 
under the power of death. Whether is it the case, then, that their Father does 
not bestow life upon them when he has the power of so doing, or is it that he 
does not possess the power?’’ 4
Irenaeus is simply continuing to expose the falsity of their contention 
on the impotent Demiurge. To impute their false position to Irenaeus, 
who is denying and opposing it, is a grave injustice, for Irenaeus did not 
so believe. Irenaeus is here arguing against a false Gnostic distinction 
between persons in the Godhead—a powerless Demiurge-Creator and the 
“Good Father”—and their arbitrary and false argument against those 
fleshly and animal souls who have no possible hope of salvation and im­
mortality. But God made all souls for eternal life. It is unrepentant sin­
ners who deprive themselves of that great boon. This contention is borne 
out by the remainder of the chapter.
2. 
Second Case Merely States Gnostic Position.—The other case, 
in chapter seven, speaks of the resurrection. The passage shows that he 
calls the soul “immortal,” not absolutely but in comparison or contrast with 
the body, which dies and is dissolved. But not so with the soul, or spirit. 
Irenaeus apparently regarded death as a process of dissolution for the 
material body, whereas the soul merely comes to an end. Now note the 
introductory phrasing:
“In the same manner, therefore, as Christ did rise in the substance of flesh, 
and pointed out to His disciples the mark of the nails and the opening in His 
side (now these are the tokens of that flesh which rose from the dead), so ‘shall 
He also,’ it is said, ‘raise us up by His own power.’ And again to the Romans he 
says, ‘But if the Spirit of Him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, 
He that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies.’ ” B
Then comes the crucial passage, distinguishing between body and soul, 
and the “breath of life":
“What, then, are mortal bodies? Can they be souls? Nay, for souls are in­
corporeal w'hen put in comparison with mortal bodies; for God ‘breathed into 
the face of man the breath of life, and man became a living soul.’ Now the 
nor to the spirit, for the spirit is simple and not composite, so that it cannot 
maintain that the very breath of life is mortal. Therefore David says, ‘My soul 
also shall live to Him,’ just as if its substance were immortal.”a
Here again Irenaeus is arguing concerning Gnostic contentions,
4 Ibid. (Brackets in original; italics supplied.)
6 Ibid., chap. 7, sec. 1. p. 532.
6 Ibid., pp. 532, 533. (italics supplied.)
1086
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
"just as if” they were so. But that is a far cry from assenting to their thesis 
of the Innate Immortality of the “spiritual.”
This distinction he develops in this further comment:
"Neither, on the other hand, can they say that the spirit is the mortal body. 
What therefore is there left to which we may apply the term ‘mortal body,’ 
unless it be the thing that was moulded, that is, the flesh, of which it is also said 
that God will vivify it? For this it is which dies and is decomposed, but not the 
soul or the spirit. For to die is to lose vital power, and to become henceforth 
breathless, inanimate, and devoid of motion, and to melt away into those 
[component parts] from which also it derived the commencement of [its] sub­
stance. But this event happens neither to the soul, for it is the breath of life; 
nor to the spirit, for the spirit is simple and not composite, so that it cannot 
be decomposed, and is itself the life of those who receive it. We musit therefore 
conclude that it is in reference to the flesh that death is mentioned; which [flesh], 
after the soul’s departure, becomes breathless and inanimate, and is decomposed 
gradually into the earth from which it was taken. This, then, is what is mortal.”7
Irenaeus is therefore here further arguing against the Gnostics who, 
he has stated, derived their principles from Plato and other pagan sources 
as regards the soul. Such held that souls could be immortalized only if 
uncreated, for if they had a beginning they must die, or cease with the body. 
Irenaeus has consistently maintained that absolute immortality is possessed 
only by God. To all other beings both their commencement and their 
continuance depends entirely on God. That is, the will of God must 
originate and determine all things.
So Irenaeus consistently protests the Gnostic theory of a natural and 
necessary immortality of all “spiritual” souls, independently of the divine 
will, yet accepting as God’s purpose the maintenance of all responsive souls 
in endless being. Yet some have strangely and fallaciously claimed that 
Irenaeus is, in these passages, arguing in favor of Plato’s universal Innate- 
Immortality thesis. But such is manifestly untrue. He consistently claimed 
immortality to be the peculiar birthright only of the righteous redeemed.
3. 
Irenaeus Unquestionably Taught Conditionalism.—It is there­
fore clearly and emphatically evident that, according to Irenaeus, the lover 
of the world will lose his soul; that such will God destroy, both body and 
soul; that unquenchable fire will burn up the chaff; that the wicked go into 
the everlasting (aionion) fire, and undergo everlasting punishment, whom 
Irenaeus had by almost every form of speech declared to be utterly bereft 
of immortality and continuance. He taught that everlasting punishment 
means everlasting destruction and cessation of being, and that fire is the 
instrument of that destruction—for to be deprived of the benefit of exist­
ence is a punishment; and to be forever deprived of it is to suffer an eternal 
punishment. So, in opposition to the Gnostics and other kindred heretics, 
Irenaeus declared that such is the bleak prospect for eternity for those 
who live and die without God.
7 Ibid., p. 533. (Brackets in original.)
Bibliography
BOOKS
Alger, William Rounseville. The Destiny of the Soul. A Critical History of the 
Doctrine of a Future Life. 10th ed., with six new chapters, and a Com­
plete Bibliography of the Subject. Comprising 4,977 books relating to the 
nature, origin, and destiny of the soul. The titles classified and arranged 
chronologically, with notes, and indexes of authors and subjects. By 
Ezra Abbott, Professor of New Testament Criticism and Interpretation in 
the Divinity School of Harvard University. Boston: Roberts Brothers, 
1880. See pp. 549, 606, 826.
Anderson, F. H. Introduction. Plato’s Phaedo. Translated by F. J. Church. The 
Library of Liberal Arts, no. 30. New York: The Liberal Arts Press, 1954. 
See p. 575.
The Ante-Nicene Fathers. Translations of the Writings of the Fathers Down to 
A. D. 325. American reprint of the Edinburgh edition of Alexander Roberts 
and James Donaldson, revised and annotated, with supplements, by A. 
Cleveland Coxe. New York: Charles Scribners Sons, 1899-1926. 10 vols. 
See pp. 763-766, 768-773, 776, 779-783, 785-790, 792-801, 809, 811-815, 818- 
832, 836-850, 859, 860, 863-865, 870, 875, 878-880, 886, 888-901, 905-909, 912, 
920-926, 933-944, 948, 952-958, 960, 962, 964-968, 981-995, 997, 1000, 1007, 
1009-1016, 1019-1022, 1033-1040, 1043-1052, Appendix B.
The Apocrypha. Greek and English Septuagint Version, pp. 56, 58, in The Sep- 
tuagint Version of the Old Testament and Apocrypha With an English 
Translation and With Various Readings and Critical Notes. London: 
Samuel Bagster and Sons Limited, 1794. See pp. 387, 650.
The Apostolic Fathers, in ANF, vol. 1, pp. 1-155. See pp. 765, 768, 769, 795, 848.
The Apostolic Fathers. Translated by Francis X. Glimm, Joseph M.-F. Marique, 
and Gerald G. Walsh. New York: Cima Publishing Co., Inc., 1947. See 
pp. 764, 770, 771, 778, 782, 795.
The Apostolic Fathers. Translated by Kirsopp Lake. London: William Heine- 
mann, 1919-30. 2 vols. The Loeb Classical Library. See pp. 739, 765.
The Apostolic Fathers. Translated by J. B. Lightfoot. Edited and completed 
by J. R. Harmer. London: Macmillan and Co., Limited, 1926. See pp. 
770, 779, 848.
Aristotle. De Anitna, The Works of Aristotle, vol. 1. Translated by J. A. Smith. 
Great Books of the Western World, 1952, vol. 8. See p. 603.
Arndt, William F., and William F. Gingrich. A Greek English Lexicon on the 
New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Chicago: The Uni­
versity of Chicago Press, 1957. See p. 796.
Arnobius. Against the Heathen, in ANF, vol. 6, pp. 413-540. See pp. 920-927.
Athenagoras. A Plea for Christians, in ANF, vol. 2. pp. 123-148. See pp. 933-936, 
940, 944.
-----------. The Resurrection of the Dead, in ANF, vol. 2, pp. 149-162. See pp.
937-943, 945.
Athanasius. Select Writings and Letters of Athanasius, edited by Archibald Rut­
ledge from the translation of Cardinal Newman, in NPNF, 2d series, vol.
4. See pp. 1065-1068, 1075.
Augustine. Works, translated by various scholars, in NPNF, 1st series, vols. 1-8. 
See p. 1075.
Ballou, Hosea, 2d. Ancient History of Universalism. Boston, 1829, See p. 826.
1087
1088
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Barnabas, Epistle of. See The Apostolic Fathers. See pp. 779-783.
Beecher, Edward. History of Opinions of the Scriptural Doctrine of Retribution. 
New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1878. See pp. 773, 783, 824, 826, 
828, 830, 833, 901.
Berry George R., ed. Interlinear Literal Translation of the Greek New Testa­
ment. Chicago: Follett Publishing Co., 1951. See p. 280.
Bible, New Testament, Greek. 1951. Interlinear Translation of the Greek New 
Testament. Edited by George R. Berry. Chicago: Follett Publishing Co., 
1951. See p. 280.
The New English Bible, New Testament. New York: Oxford University Press, 
1961. See p. 424.
Bruce, Frederick] Ffyrie]. Second Thoughts on the Dead Sea Scrolls. Grand Rap­
ids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1961. See pp. 
741, 743.
Buhle, Grants. Canon and Text of the Old Testament. Edinburgh: T. 8c T. 
Clark, 1892.
Bullinger, Ethelbert. A Critical Lexicon 
and Concordance to the 
English and
Greek New Testament, Together With an Index of Greek Words, and
Several Appendices. 8th ed. London: The Lamp Press Ltd., 1957. See pp. 
147, 161, 162, 192, 475.
Bunsen, Christian Charles Josias. Hippolytus and His Age. London: Longman, 
Brown, Green, and Longmans, 1852. 4 vols. See p. 796.
Burrows, Millar. The Dead Sea Scrolls, with translations by the author. New 
York: Viking Press, 1955. See p. 741.
------------. More Light on the Dead Sea Scrolls; New Scrolls and New Interpreta­
tions, With Translations of Important Recent Discoveries. New York: 
Viking Press, 1958. See pp. 658, 741.
Campbell, Lewis. Religion of Greek Literature; a Sketch in Outline. London;
New York: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1898. See pp. 535, 562.
Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent. See Trent, Council of.
Carrington, Philip. The Early Christian Church. Cambridge: University Press, 
1957. 2 vols. See p. 849.
Cave, William. Life of Polycarp. Oxford: Vincent, 1840. See p. 795.
Centennial Book of Modern Spiritualism in America. Chicago, Illinois: The Na­
tional Spiritualist Association of United States of America, 1948.
Charles, R. H. The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament in 
English With Introductions and Critical Explanatory Notes to the Sev­
eral Books. Edited in conjunction wTith many scholars. Oxford: The 
Clarendon Press, 1913. 2 vols. See pp. 365, 654, 660-669, 671-677, 681-692, 
695-701.
------------. A Critical History of the Doctrine of a Future Life in Israel, in Juda­
ism, and in Christianity, or, Hebrew, Jewish, and Christian Eschatology 
From Pre-Proplietic Times Till the Close of the New Testament Canon. 
Being the first Jowett lectures delivered in 1898-99. 2d ed. rev. and enlarged. 
London: Adam and Charles Black, 1913. See pp. 535-538, 541, 542, 549, 550, 
552, 564, 573, 719, 726, 731, 733, 735, 739.
------------. Religious Development Between The Old and The New Testament.
London: Oxford University Press, 1956.
Chesterfield Spiritualist Camp. Chesterfield, Indiana, 1959, 1961.
Christentum und Judentum im ersten und zeveiten Jahrundert, Gütersloh, 1954. 
See Appendix A.
Church, F. J., translator. Plato’s Phaedo. The Library of Liberal Arts, no. 30. 
New York: The Liberal Arts Press, 1954. See pp. 569, 575-584, 597, 1001.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1089
Cicero, Marcus Tullius. Disputationes Tusculanae. Edited and translated by 
J. E. King. London and New York; 1927, in Loeb Classical Library. Cam­
bridge: Harvard University Press. See p. 620.
Clarke, Adam. The Holy Bible, Containing the Old and New Testaments . . . 
With a Commentary and Critical Notes. New edition, with the author’s 
final corrections. New York: Abingdon-Cokesbury Press, [n.d.]. 6 vols.
See pp. 94, 377, 378.
The Clementine Homilies. See The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 8, pp. 213-346.
See pp. 912-915.
Clement of Alexandria. Works, translated by William Wilson, in ANF, vol. 2, 
pp. 163-605. See pp. 864, 982-995.
Clement of Rome. See The Apostolic Fathers, See pp. 763-766.
The Companion Bible Being the Authorized Version of 1611 With the Structures 
and Notes, Critical, Explanatory and Suggestive and With 198 Appen­
dixes. London: The Lamp Press, Ltd., [n.d.]. See pp. 85, 149, 162, 192, 226.
Constable, Henry. Duration and Nature of Future Punishment. London: Ed­
ward Hobbs, Farringdon Street, E.C., and R. J. Hammond, Edgware Road,
W., 1886. See pp. 765, 801-803, 822, 823, 827, 885, 957, 961, 1003, 1015.
— Hades, or the Intermediate State of Man. Boston: Advent Christian 
Publication Society, 1893.
Cornford, Francis MacDonald, translator. Plato’s Cosmology. The Library of 
Liberal Arts, no. 101. New York: The Liberal Arts Press, 1957. See p. 598.
Coxe, A. Cleveland. See Ante-Nicene Fathers. See pp. 809, 848-850, 875, 886, 909, 
948, 949, 952, 981, 997, 1042, Appendix B.
Cremer, Herman. Biblico-Theological Lexicon of the New Testament Greek. 
Translated from the German of the 2d ed., with additional matter and 
corrections by the author, by Wm. Urwick. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark; 
Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1955. See p. 443.
Crombie, Frederick, quoted in “Introductory Note to the Works of Origen,” in 
ANF, vol. 4. See pp. 1012, 1013.
Cross, Frank Moore, Jr. The Ancient Library of Qumrân and Modern Biblical 
Studies. Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1958. See 
pp. 658, 741, 743, 745.
Cross, F. L. The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church. London: Oxford 
University Press, 1958. See pp. 667, 709, 712, 714, 848, 870, 912, 915, 978, 
979, 994, 1007.
Cyprian. Life and Works, translated by Ernest Wallis, in ANF, vol. 5, pp. 261- 
596. See p. 909.
Daniélou, J. Théologie du Judéo-Christianisme. Tournai, 1955. See Appendix A.
Davis, Andrew Jackson. Beyond the Valley; a sequel to The Magic Staff: an Auto­
biography of Andrew Jackson Davis. Boston: Colby & Rich, Publishers, 
1885.
.Va> Davis, John D. A Dictionary of the Bible, 4th cd., rev. Grand Rapids, Michigan: 
Baker Book House, 1954.
he Dead Sea Scriptures. Translated by Theodor H. Gaster, with Introduction — 
and Notes. Garden City, New Y’ork: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1956.
See pp. 741, 743-753.
Denniston, J. M. The Perishing Soul; or The Scriptural Doctrine of the Destruc­
tion of Sinners. With a View of Aiicient Jewish Opinion and Christian Be­
lief During the First and Second Centuries. 2d ed. London: Longmans, 
Green, and Co., 1874. See pp. 488, 771, 820, 824.
35
y '>4
1090
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Draper, John William. History of the Intellectual Development of Europe. New 
York: Harper & Brothers, Publishers, 1876. 2 vols. See pp. 534, 540-542, 
546, 550-555, 600, 601, 611, 614, 707-710, 712, 715.
Drummond, James. Philo Judaeus; or The Jewish-Alexandrian Philosophy in 
Its Development and Completion. London: Williams and Morgate, 1888. 
2 vols. See pp. 719, 739. 
v 
Edersheim, Alfred. Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah. Grand Rapids, Michigan: 
W. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1957 . 2 vols.
The Encyclical Epistle of the Church at Smyrna Concerning the Martyrdom of 
the Holy Polycarp, in ANF., vol. 1. See p. 795.
The Encyclopaedia Britannica [11th ed.]. New York: The Encyclopaedia Bri­
tannica Company, 1910. 29 vols. See p. 929.
Enfield, William. The History of Philosophy From the Earliest Periods: Drawn 
up from Brucker’s Historia Critica Philosophiae. London: Printed for 
Thomas Tegg, 1839. See p. 551.
The Englishman’s Hebrew and Chaldee Concordance of the Old Testament. 
London: Longman, Green, Brown, and Longmans, 1843. 2 vols. See pp. 
150, 153.
Eusebius. Works, translated by Arthur Cushman McGiffert and Ernest Cushing 
Richardson, in NPNF, 2d series, vol. 1. See pp. 715, 762, 778, 785, 792, 795, 
808, 848, 910, 997, 1075.
Fahling, Adam. Harmony of the Gospels. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan 
Publishing House, 1941.
Fairbairn, Andrew M. Studies in the Philosophy of Religion and History. New 
York: Lovell, Adam, Wesson & Company, [1876]. See pp. 535, 536, 539-542, 
545, 547, 549, 551.
Fairbanks, Arthur. A Handbook of Greek Religion. New York: American Book 
Co., 1910. See p. 537.
Farrar, Frederic W. Eternal Hope. Five Sermons Preached in Westminster Abbey, 
November and December, 1877. London: Macmillan and Co., 1879. See 
pp. 443, 995.
------------. History of Interpretation. Eight Lectures Preached Before the 
Uni­
versity of Oxford in the Year MDCCCLXXXV. London: Macmillan and 
Co., 1886. See p. 1019.
------------. Mercy and Judgment. Last Words on Christian Eschatology, With Ref­
erence to Dr. Pusey’s “What Is of Faith?” 2d ed. London: Macmillan 
and Co., 1882. See pp. 439, 670, 678-680, 683, 692, 819, 901, 920, 972, Ap­
pendix B.
Ferm, Vergilius, ed. An Encyclopedia of Religion. New York: The Philosophical 
Library, 1945. See pp. 857, 886.
Fox, Adam. Plato and the Christians. New York: The Philosophical Library, 1957.
Fox, William Sherwood. Greek and Roman [Mythology]. Boston: Marshall Jones 
Company, 1916. The Mythology of All Races, vol. 1. See p. 
685.
Freer, Frederick A. To Live or Not to Live? A Popular Discussion of the Condi­
tions of Human Immortality. London: “The Faith” Press, Ltd., 1906. See 
p. 844.
Froom, LeRoy Edwin. The Conditionalist Faith of Our Fathers. Washington, 
D.C.: Review and Herald, 1965. 2 vols. See p. 167.
^
 
. The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers. Washington, D.C.: Review and
Herald, 1950 . 4 vols. See pp. 103, 125, 128, 143, 218, 219, 393, 635, 
779,
785, 811, 878, 974, 1033, 1052, 1075.
Fuchs, H. “Enoch, Book of,” The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia, vol. 4, p. 132. 
See p. 681.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1091
Gaster, Theodor H. The Dead Sea Scriptures. New York: 
Doubleday 
& Com­
pany, Inc., 1956. See pp. 741, 743-753.
Giesler, Joh[ann] C[arl] L[udwig]. A Textbook of Church History. Translated 
from the German by Samuel Davidson and John Winstanley Hull. Re­
vised and edited by Henry B. Smith. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1857- 
58. 3 vols. See p. 826.
Ginsberg, Christian David. Introduction to the Massoretico-Critical Edition of 
the Hebrew Bible. London: Trinitarian Bible Society, 1897.
Glimm, Francis X., translator. See The Apostolic Fathers. See pp. 764, 770, 771, 
778, 782, 795.
Goodenough, Erwin R. Introduction to Philo Judaeus. 
2d ed., rev. New 
York:
Barnes 8c Noble, 1963. See p. 719.
------------. Jewish Symbols in the Graeco-Roman Period. New York: Pantheon
Books, 1953-63. 11 vols. See p. 719, Appendix A.
Goodspeed, Edgar Johnson. A History of Early Christian Literature. Chicago: 
University of Chicago Press, 1942. See p. 912.
------------. The Apostolic Fathers. An American translation. New York: Harper &
Brothers, 1950.
Grant, R. M. Gnosticism and Early Christianity. New York: University Colum­
bia Press, 1959. See p. 855.
Grube, G. M. A. Plato’s Thought. Boston: Beacon Press, 1958. See pp. 537, 563, 
572-574, 589, 595, 596.
Hagen bach, K. R. Compendium of the History of Doctrines. Translated from the 
German by Carl W. Buch. 3 ed. Edinburgh: T. 8c T. Clark, 1858. 2 vols. 
See pp. 826, 975, 1019.
Hastings, James, ed. Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics. New York: Charles 
Scribner’s Sons, 1928. 13 vols. See p. 685.
Headlam, A. C. See Journal of Theological Studies. See p. 912.
Hefele, Charles Joseph. A History of the Councils of the Church, From the Orig­
inal Documents. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1895. 5 vols. See pp. 635, 998.
Helmbold, W. C., translator. Plato’s Gorgias. The Library of Liberal Arts, no. 20. 
New York: The Liberal Arts Press, 1955. See pp. 569, 583, 585.
------------ and W. G. Robinowitz, translators. Plato’s Phaedrus. The Library of
Liberal Arts, no. 40. New York: The Liberal Arts Press, 1956. See pp. 569, 
585-591.
Henry, Matthew. A Commentary on the Old and New Testaments. Louisville, 
Kentucky: Baptist Book Concern, [n.d.]. 3 vols. See p. 94.
Hippolytus. Works, translated by J. H. MacMahon and S. D. F. Salmond, in ANF, 
vol. 5. pp. 1-241. See pp. 864, 865.
The Holy Bible According to the Masoretic Text. A New Translation. Philadel­
phia: Jewish Publication Society of America. See p. 635.
“The Homily on the Passion by Mileto and Bishop of Sardis,” in Studies and 
Documents XII, by Kirsopp and Silva Lake, 1940. Edited by Campbell 
Bonner. See pp. 850-852.
Hort, F. J. A. Notes Introductory to the Story of the Clementine Literature. Lon­
don: Macmillan 8c Co., Ltd., 1902. See p. 912.
Hudson, C. F. Debt and Grace as Related to the Doctrine of a Future Life. Bos­
ton: John P. Jewett and Company, 1857. See pp. 798, 800, 820-826, 833, 
868, 920, 951.
Ignatius, Epistle of, to the Ephesians. See The Apostolic Fathers. See pp. 768- 
770.
1092
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Ignatius, Epistle of, to the Magnesians. See The Apostolic Fathers. See pp. 771, 
772.
Ignatius, Epistle of, to Poly carp. See The Apostolic Fathers. See pp. 772, 773, 793.
Ignatius, Epistle of, to the Trallians. See The Apostolic Fathers. See pp. 771, 772.
Ignatius, Epistle of, to the Romans. See The Apostolic Fathers. See p. 772.
Irenaeus. Works, translated by Alexander Roberts and W. H. Rambaut, in ANF, 
vol. 1, pp. 307-578. See pp. 334, 792, 859, 863, 865, 878-880, 888-901, Appen­
dix B.
The Jewish Encyclopedia. New York: Funk and Wagnalls Company, 1901-06. 12 
vols. See p. 681.
Josephus, Flavius. The Works of Flavius Josephus. Translated by William Whis- 
ton. Auburn & Buffalo, New York: John E. Beardsley, [n.d.]. 1 vol. See 
pp. 251, 252, 258, 365, 744.
Jowett, Benjamin, translator. The Dialogues of Plato, vol. 2. New York: Ran­
dom House, 1937. See pp. 566, 568, 571, 572, 574, 575, 585, 587.
------------. Plato’s Meno. The Library of Liberal Arts, no. 12. New York: The
Liberal Arts Press, 1951. See pp. 563, 569.
-----------■. Plato’s Theactetus. The Library of Liberal Arts, no. 13. New York:
The Liberal Arts Press, 1949. See pp. 594-596.
------------. Plato’s Timaeus. The Library of Liberal Arts, no. 14. New York: The
Liberal Arts Press, 1949. See pp. 564, 569, 592-598. 
,
Justin Martyr. Works. Translated by M. Dods and G. Reith, in ANF, vol. 1, 
pp. 157-306. See pp. 334, 811-815, 818-832.
Kennedy, H[arry] Afngus] Alexander], Philo’s Contribution to Religion. Lon-
s 
don: Hodder and Stoughton, 1919. See pp. 719, 740.
Kenyon, Sir Frederick. The Story of the Bible. London: John Murray, 1936. ^
Killen, W. I). The Ancient Church: Its Histoty, Doctrine, Worship, and Consti­
tution, Traced for the First Three Hundred Years. Rev. ed., with a pref­
ace by John Hall. New York: Anson D. F. Randolph & Company, 1883. 
See p. 1017.
Kitto, John. Cyclopedia of Biblical Literature. London: A. & C. Black, [n.d.]. 
See p. 826.
Koehler, Ludwig, and Baumgartner, Walter, eds. Lexicon in Veteris Testarnenti 
Libros. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1951. See p. 146.
Lactantius, Firmianus. Works, translated by William Fletcher, in ANF, vol. 7, 
pp. 1-322. See pp. 1033-1040, 1043-1052.
Laidlaw, John. The Bible Doctrine of Alan. The seventh series of the Cunning­
ham Lectures. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1879. See pp. 805, 806.
Lange, John Peter. A Commentary of the Holy Scriptures: critical, doctrinal, and 
homiletical, with special reference to ministers and students. New York: 
Charles Scribner & Co., 1868. 24 vols. See p. 94.
Lake, Kirsopp. The Apostolic Fathers. The Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: 
Harvard University Press, 1945-46. See pp. 739, 765.
Latham, Ronald, editor and translator. Lucretius on the Nature of the Universe. 
The Penguin Classics. Middlesex: Penguin Books Ltd., 1951. See pp. 613, 
623-625.
Levinthal, Israel Herbert. Judaism. An Analysis and an Interpretation. New York 
and London: Funk & Wagnalls Company, 1953. See pp. 653, 654, 719.
Lexicon in Veteris Testarnenti Libros. Ed. Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baum­
gartner. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1951. See p. 146.
Lightfoot, J. B., translator. See The Apostolic Fathers. See pp. 770, 779, 848.
------------. Works. London, 1864. See pp. 239, 249.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1093
Littmann, E[nno]. “Enoch, Books of.” The Jewish Encyclopedia, vol. 5, pp. 179- 
182. See p. 681.
The Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. See pp. 565, 
569, 570, 584, 620, 621, 737, 765, 1018, 1019.
Lucretius on the Nature of the Universe. Translated by E. V. Rieu. Penguin 
Classics. Middlesex: Penguin Books Ltd., 1951. See pp. 613, 623-625.
McCracken, George E. Arnobius of Sicca—the Case Against the Pagans, in the 
new Catholic Ancient Writers series. Westminster, Maryland: Newman 
Press. See pp. 918, 920.
MacCullock, J. A. “Eschatology,” in Hastings, op. cit., vol. 5, pp. 373-391. See 
p. 685.
Maitland, Charles. The Church in the Catacombs. London: Longman, Brown, 
Green, and Longmans, 1846.
Margolis, Max L. The Story of Bible Translations. Philadelphia: Jewish Publish­
ing Society of America, 1917.
Mosheim, Johann Lorenz von. Historical Commentaries on the State of Chris­
tianity. (Vidal tr.) London: Cadell and Davis, 1813-35. See p. 910.
Mathetes, Epistle of, to Diognetus. See The Apostolic Fathers. See pp. 796-801.
Medical Education and the Regulation of the Practice of Medicine in the United 
States and Canada. Illinois State Board of Health, 1883.
Migne, J[acques] P[aul]. Patrologiae Cursus Completus. . . . Series Graeca, Lute­
tiae Parisiorum: J. P. Migne, 1857-66. 161 vols. in 166. See pp. 1018, 1019.
Milner, Joseph. The History of the Church of Christ. Revised by Isaac Milner. 
Philadelphia: Hogan and Thompson, 1835. 2 vols. See p. 1017.
Moore, George Foot. Judaism in the First Century of the Christian Era, the Age 
of Tannaim. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1927-30. 3 vols. See 
pp. 652, 657.
Morland, Samuel. The History of the Evangelical Churches of the Valleys of 
Piemont. London: Printed by Henry Hills for Adoniram Byfield, 1658. 
See p. 635.
Morrow, Glenn, R. Introduction. Plato’s Timaeus. Translated by Benjamin Jow- 
ett. Library of Liberal Arts, no. 14. New York: The Liberal Arts Press, 
1949. See pp. 564, 595.
Müler, K. O. A History of the Literature of Ancient Greece. Continued after 
the author’s death by John William Donaldson. London: John W. 
Parker and Son, 1858. See pp. 709, 723, 724.
\^->^5Jave, Orville. Nave’s Topical Bible. Chicago: Moody Press.
Neander, Augustus. General History of the Christian Religion and Church. 
Translated by Joseph Torrey. Boston: Houghton, Mifflin and Company, 
1871. 5 vols. and Index. See pp. 910, 911.
Neutestamentliche Studien für Rudolf Bultmann, zu seinem siebzigsten Geburstag 
am 20. August, 1954. Berlin: Töpelmann, 1954.
Newman, Albert Henry. A Manual of Church History. Philadelphia: The Ameri­
can Baptist Publication Society, 1933. 2 vols. See pp. 716, 778, 868.
Novatian. A Treatise of Novation Concerning the Trinity, in ANF, vol. 5, pp. 
611-644. See pp. 905-908.
The Old Testament in Greek, According to the Septuagint; ed. for the syndics 
orTEe~TTnIversrty Press by Henry Barclay Swete. Cambridge, England: 
University Press, 1907-12. 3 vols. See p. 635.
Origen. Works, translated by Frederick Crombie and Allan Menzies, in ANF, 
vol. 4, pp. 221-669 and vol. 9, pp. 287-512. See pp. 864, 997, 1000, 1008-1011, 
1015-1017, 1019-1022.
1094
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Oswald, Martin. Introduction. Plato’s Statesman. Translated by J. B. Skemp. The 
Library of Liberal Arts, no. 57. New York: The Liberal Arts Press, 1957. 
See p. 566.
The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church. Edited by F. L. Cross. Lon­
don: Oxford University Press, 1958. See pp. 667, 709, 712, 714, 848, 850, 
870, 912, 915, 978, 979, 994, 1007.
The Pastor of Hermas. Translated by F. Crombie, in ANF, vol. 1, pp. 7-58. See 
pp. 785-790.
Pelikan, Jaroslav. The Shape of Death. Life, Death, and Immortality in the Early 
Fathers. New York: Abingdon Press, 1961. See p. 835.
Petavel, E. The Problem of Immortality. Translated from the French by Freder­
ick Ash Freer. London: Elliot Stock, 1892. See pp. 488-498, 490, 491, 606, 
704, 711, 782, 798, 802, 824, 1008.
Philo, with an English translation by F. H. Colson and G. H. Whitaker. Cam­
bridge: Harvard University Press; London: William Heinemann Ltd., 
1956, 10 vols. and 2 supplements. Loeb Classical Library. See p. 739. 
Plato. Plato’s Cosmology. Translated by Francis MacDonald Cornford. The Li­
brary of Liberal Arts, no. 101. New York: The Liberal Arts Press, 1957. 
See p. 598.
------------. Plato’s Gorgias. Translated by W. C. Helmbold. The Library of Lib­
eral Arts, no. 20. New York: The Liberal Arts Press, 1955. See pp. 569,
583, 585.
------------. Plato’s Phaedo. Translated by F. J. Church. The Library of Liberal
Arts, no. 30. New York: The Liberal Arts Press, 1954. See pp. 569, 575-
584, 597, 1001.
------------. Plato’s Phaedrus. Translated by W. C. Helmbold and W. G. Rabino-
witz. The Library of Liberal Arts, no. 40. New York: The Liberal Arts 
Press, 1956. See pp. 569, 585-591.
------------. The Republic, with an English translation by Paul Shorey. Cambridge,
Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1953. 2 vols. Loeb Classical Library. See 
pp. 565, 569, 570, 584.
------------. Plato’s Statesman. Translated by J. B. Skemp. The Library of Liberal
Arts, no. 57. New York: The Liberal Arts Press, 1957. See p. 566.
------------. Plato’s Timaeus. Translated by Benjamin Jowett. The Library of Lib­
eral Arts, no. 14. New York: The Liberal Arts Press, 1949. See pp. 564, 
569, 592-598.
Polycarp, Epistle of, to the Philippians. See The Apostolic Fathers. See pp. 792- 
794.
Poly carp, Martyrdom of. See The Apostolic Fathers. See p. 795.
Le problème littéraire et historique du roman pseudo-clémentin. Etude sur le 
rapport entre le gnosticisme et le judéo-christianisme. Paris, 1930. See 
Appendix B.
Pseudo-Clementine Literature. The Clementine Homilies. Translated by Thomas 
Smith, Peter Peterson, and Dr. Donaldson, in ANF, vol. 8, pp. 225-346. 
See pp. 913-915.
Pseudo-Clementine Literature. Recognitions of Clement, translated by Thomas 
Smith, in ANF, vol. 8, pp. 75-222. See pp. 915, 916.
Pusey, E. B. What Is of Faith as to Everlasting Punishmentf In reply to Dr. 
Farrar's challenge in his Eternal Hope, 1879. London: James Parker & Co., 
1880. See pp. 820, 828, 830.
Quasten, Johannes. Patrology. Westminster, Maryland: Newman Press, 1950-53. 
2 vols. See p. 912.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1095
Recognitions of Clement. See The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 8, pp. 75-211. See 
pp. 915, 916.
“Recognitions of Clement, Introductory Notice to,” in ANF, vol. 8. See p. 912.
Rehm, B. Geichische Christliche Schriftsteller. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1953. 
See p. 912.
“Remains of the Second and Third Centuries.” Translated by B. P. Pratten, in 
ANF, vol. 8. See pp. 849, 850.
Revue Biblique, 59 (1952), 219-238; 60 (1953), 41-82. “Affinités littéraires et doc­
trinales du ‘Manuel de Discipline.’” 62 (1955). See Appendix A.
Richardson, Alan, ed. A Theological Word Book of the Bible. London: S.C.M. 
Press Ltd, 1957. See p. 147.
Riddle, B. M. See Ante-Nicene Fathers. See p. 912.
Ritter, Heinrich. The History of Ancient Philosophy. Oxford: D. A. Talboys, 
1838, 1839. 3 vols. See pp. 543, 551, 607, 608.
Ritter, Constantin (1859-1956). Platon: seine leben, seine schriften, seine lehre. 
München: Beck, 1910-23.
^/Robertson, A. T. Word Pictures in the New Testament. New York: Richard R. 
Smith, Inc., 1931. 4 vols. See p. 325.
Rogers, Arthur Kenyon. A Student’s History of Philosophy. New York: The Mac­
millan Company, 1926. See pp. 714, 717.
Rohde, Erwin. Psyche. The Cult of Souls and Belief in Immortality Among the 
Greeks. Translated by Hillis. New York: Harcourt, Brace 8c Company, Inc., 
1925. See pp. 535, 536, 538, 543, 544, 546, 548, 549, 551, 552, 554, 555, 603, 
604, 609, 611, 613.
Rothe, Richard. Dogmatik. Heidelberg: Mohr, 1870. See p. 826.
Ryle, Herbert Edward. The Canon of the Old Testament. London: Macmillan 
and Co., 1904.
Salmond, S. D. F. The Christian Doctrine of Immortality. 2d ed. New York: 
Charles Scribner’s Sons, [1896], See pp. 535, 548, 549, 606, 617, 698-701, 717, 
778, 920, 973.
Schaff, Philip. History of the Christian Church. New York: Charles Scribner’s 
Sons, 1903. 7 vols. See pp. 877, 901.
Schoeps, Hans Joachim. Ur gemeinde, Judenchristentum, Gnosis. Tübingen: 
J. C. B. Mohr, 1956. See p. 912.
Scofield Reference Bible. Edited by C. I. Scofield. New York: Oxford University 
Press, 1917. See p. 259.
The Second Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians. Translated by Kirsopp Lake, 
in The Apostolic Fathers, vol. 1. Loeb Classical Library. See p. 765.
A Select Library of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church. 
Second Series. Edited by Philip Schaff and Henry Wace and others. Grand 
Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1952-56. 14 
vols. See pp. 762, 778, 785, 792, 795, 808, 848, 904, 910, 1065-1069.
Skemp, J. B., translator. Plato’s Statesman. The Library of Liberal Arts, no. 57. 
New York: The Liberal Arts Press, 1957. See p. 566.
Smith, William, ed. Dictionary of the Bible, 1860-65. 3 vols. London: John Mur­
ray. See p. 242.
Socrates. The Ecclesiastical History of Socrates Scholasticus. Revised translation 
by A. C. Zenos, in NPNF, 2d series, vol. 2, pp. ii-178. See p. 904. 
r\ Strong, James. The Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible. New York: Eaton 8c 
Mains, 1890. See pp. 149, 152.
Tatian. Address of Tatian to the Greeks, in ANF, vol. 2, pp. 65-83. See pp. 836- 
840.
1096
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Taylor, Alson Edward. Plato, the Man and His Work. 2d ed. New York: Mac 
Veagh, Dial, 1927.
The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles. See The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 7. 
See pp.' 776-778.
Terry, Milton S. Biblical Hermeneutics. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan 
Publishing House, 1956. See p. 241.
Tertullian. The Writings of Tertullian, translated by S. Thelwall, and Peter 
Holmes, and Robert Ernest Wallis, in ANF, vol. 3 and vol. 4, pp. 3-166. 
See pp. 950, 953, 955-958, 960, 962, 964-968.
The Testament of the XII Patriarchs. Assen, 1953. See Appendix A.
Theologie und Geschichte des Judenchristentum. Tübingen, 1949. See Appendix 
A.
Theophilus. Theophilus to Autolycus, in ANF, vol. 2, pp. 89-121. See pp. 841-848.
Trench, Richard Chenevix. Notes on the Parables of Our Lord, revised. Grand 
Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1962. See p. 241.
------------. Synonyms of the Nau-JTestament—with some etymological notes by
A. L. Mayhew. New ed. London: Regan Paul, Trench, Trubner and Co. 
Ltd., 1906. See p. 443.
Trent, Council of. Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent. Original text 
with English translation by H. J. Schroeder. St. Louis: B. Herder Book 
Co., 1941. See p. 635.
The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia. . . . An Authoritative and Popular Presenta­
tion of Jews and Judaism Since the Earliest Times. Edited by Isaac Land­
man. New York: The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia, Inc., 1939-43. 10 
vols. See p. 681.
Van der Woude, A. S. Die messianischen Vorstellungen der Gemeinde von Qxim- 
rdn. Assen, 1957. See Appendix A.
Vergilius Maro, Publius. The Aeneid. Translated by W. F. Jackson Knight. The 
Penguin Classics. Middlesex: Penguin Books Ltd., 1956. See p. 625.
Ver Nvoy, A. P. “Andrew' Jackson Davis—The ‘Poughkeepsie Seer,’ ” Dutchess 
County Historical Society, Year Book, vol. 32, 1947, pp. 39-62.
Von Döllinger, Johann Jfoseph] I[gnaz]. The Gentile and the Jew in the Courts 
of the Temple of Christ: an Introduction to the History of Christianity. 
Translated from the German by N. Darnell. London: Longman, Green, 
Longman, Roberts, and Green, 1862. 2 vols. See pp. 599, 601-603, 606-608, 
611, 612, 618, 619, 621, 625-631.
Wallesz, E. J. “Melito’s Homily on the Passion,” in The Journal of Theological 
Studies, XLIV (1943), pp. 41-52. See p. 758.
Westcott, Brooke Foss. A General Survey of the History of the Canon of the New 
’ Testameiit. 4th ed. London: Macmillan and Co., 1875. See pp. 763, 804.
------------. The Gospel or The Resurrection. Thoughts on Its Relation to Reason
a?id History. London: Macmillan and Co., Limited, 1898. See p. 605.
Weymouth, Richard Francis. New Testament in Modem Speech. Boston: The 
Pilgrim Press, 1902. See pp. 288, 292, 301, 410, 443, 490.
White, Edward. Life in Christ: A Study of the Scripture Doctrine on the Nature 
of Man, the Object of the Divine Incarnation, and the Conditions of Hu­
man Immortality. 3d ed., rev. and enlarged. London: Elliot Stock, 1878. 
See p. 494.
Wilder. Alexander. History of Medicine. New Sharon, Maine: New England Ec­
lectic Publishing Co., 1901.
Williams, Robert R. A Guide to the Teachings of the Early Church Fathers. 
Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Co., 1960. See p. 848.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1097
Wolfson, Harry Austryn. Philo. Foundations of Religious Philosophy in Juda­
ism, Christianity, and Islam. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard Univer­
sity Press, 1948. 2 vols. See pp. 719, 727-739.
Young, Robert. Analytical Concordance to the Bible. New York: Funk & Wag­
nalls Company, [n.d.]. See p. 149.
Zeitlin, S. History of the Second Jewish Commonwealth. Philadelphia: Dropsie, 
1933. See p. 652.
Zeller, Eduard. Aristotle and the Earlier Peripatetics. Being a translation from 
Zeller’s philosophy of the Greeks by B. F. C. Costelloe and J. H. Muirhead. 
London: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1897, 2 vols. See pp. 533, 604, 605.
------------. A History of the Eclecticism in Greek Philosophy. Translated by Sarah
F. Alleyne. London: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1833. See p. 533.
------------. A History of Greek Philosophy From the Earliest Period to the Time of
Socrates. Translated by Sarah F. Alleyne. London: Longmans, Green, and 
Co., 1881. 2 vols. See pp. 533, 535, 539, 542, 544-546, 549, 550, 553, 708.
------------. Outlines of the History of Greek Philosophy. 13th ed. Revised by Dr.
Wilhelm Nestle and translated by L. R. Palmer. New York: Meridian 
Books, Inc., 1937. See pp. 540, 550, 608, 708, 713-715, 770.
------------. Plato and the Older Academy. Translated by Sarah F. Alleyne and
Alfred Goodwin. London: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1888. See pp. 533- 
594.
------------. Socrates and the Socratic Schools. Translated by O. J. Reichel. Lon­
don: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1885. See p. 533.
------------. Stoics, Epicureans, and Sceptics. Translated by O. J. Reichel. London:
Longmans, Green, and Co., 1880. See pp. 533, 610, 612, 614.
PERIODICALS
De Jonge, M. “Christian Influence in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs,” 
Novum Testamentum 4, 1960. See Appendix A.
------------. “The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs and the New Testament,”
in K. Aland et al., eds., Studia Evangelica. Berlin, 1958. See Appendix A.
“Die neuentdeckten Qumrantexte und das Judenchristentum der Pseudoklemen­
tinen," Neutestamentliche Studien für Rudolf Bultmann. Berlin, 1954. 
See Appendix A.
Journal of Theological Studies. London, 1900-5; Oxford, 1906-49; N.S., Oxford, 
1950 ff. See p. 912.
Kuhn, J. G. “Die Beiden Messias Aarons und Israels.” New Testament Studies 
I (1955). See Appendix A.
Rowley, Harold Henry. The Covenanters of Damascus and the Dead Sea Scrolls. 
Bulletin of the John Rylands Library, vol. 35, no. 1, September, 1952. 
Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Subject Guide
An Analytical Outline Is Here Presented in Lieu of a Customary Index
PART I 
(Chapters 1-10)
Old Testament Evidence
1. Conditionalism Versus Immortal Soulism .......................................................................................
I. Purpose and Scope of This Vital Quest________________________________________
1. Fundamental Questions That Demand an Answer ....................................................
2. Sole Source of Reliable Information ..............................................................................
3. Author’s Personal Declaration of Faith .................................................................
4. Scope of the Ground Covered ........................................................................................
5. Basic Definition of Conditionalism ...............................................................................
II. Consistency and Obvious Soundness of Conditionalism ................................................
1. Adam’s Potential for Immortality Was Conditional ..........................................
2. Conditionalism Harmonizes Divine Goodness With Human Freedom ..............
3. Conditionalism Attested Biblically, Logically, Historically ....................................
III. 
Eternal Torment Involves Pagan “Dualism” Postulate .............................................
2. Man Created in the Image of God .................................................................................................
I. Introductory Survey of Record of Creation .....................................................................
II. 
Creation in “Image of God” Not a Valid Argument .............................................
1. “Image of God” Does Not Connote “Immortality” for Man ............................
2. No Valid Reason for Singling Out Immortality ..._.......................................................
3. Fundamental Fallacy Revealed by Parallel Syllogisms .............................................
III. “Living Soul” Does Not Connote Immortality ............................................................
1. Living Soul Not a Separate Entity ...........................................................................
2. Innate Deathlessness Not Part of Original Endowment..........................................
IV. “Breath of Life” Equated With “Spirit 
and “Spirit of God” ..............................
1. “Breath”—“Breath of God”—“Spirit”—"Spirit of God” ..................................
2. “Breath of Life,” “Spirit of Life”—Same Principle of Life ............................
3. “Spirit,” or “Breath, 
Never Identified With Soul .............................................
4. Possessors of< “Breath of Life” Subject to Death ......................................................
V. Clarifying Distinctions Between Soul and SDirit .............................................................
1. “Soul” Dependent Upon Presence of “Spirit” ........................................................
2. Spirit and Soul Have Series of Contrasts __________________________________
3. “Spirit” Returns to God Who “Gave It” ________________________________
4. To “Save a Soul” Is to Save a Man 
......................................................................
5. Biblical Portrayal of Death ................................................................................................
3. Prohibition, Probation, Temptation, and Fall................................................................................
I. 
One Prohibition Placed Upon Man in Eden ..............................................................
II. Freedom of Will. Is Moral Accountability ........................................................................
1. Freedom of Will Is Essence of Being ______________________________________
2. Endless Defiance Would Thwart God ..............................................................................
3. Ultimate Destruction for Incorrigible Defiance 
....................................................
III. Temptation at Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil ..................................................
IV. Satan Himself the Undercover Tempter in Eden ............................................................
V. Lucifer’s Rebellion in Heaven Transferred to Earth ....................................................
1. Pride and Jealousy Fomented Rebellion in Heaven ...............................................
2. Eden Becomes the New Battleground 
„______________________________
3. Lucifer: Highest Angel Becomes Lowest Devil ____________________________
4. Satan’s Dual Lie Had But Single Point ___________________________________
VI. Essence of Fall Was Believing Satan’s Lie ____________________________________
4. The Gospel of Genesis 3:15 Proclaimed ...........—.....................................................................
I. 
The Doom of Death and the Hope of Life ...................................................................
1. The Terrors of Disobedience ............................................................................................
2. The First Glimmer of Hope ...................-.........................................................................
II. Glorious Gospel Provisions Begin at Gates of Eden __________________________
1. Becomes Father of Race Under New Probation ....................................................
2. Tree of Calvary Becomes Third Tree of Eden ........................................................
3. Placed on Probation, Given Second Chance ............................................................
III. Promised Seed Is Master Key to Atonement Mysteries ............................................
1. "Highway of the Seed” Begins ...................................................................................
2. Conflict of the Ages Begins —..... 
 
 
 
—..............................
3. Personal Application of the Fall to Us ____________________________________
IV. “Coats of Skins” Typified Righteousness of Christ .....................................................
1. Divine Propitiation Provided ____________________________________________
2. Deeper Mysteries of _Atonement Enfolded ________________________________
V. Christ’s Central Place in Gospel of Eden --------------------------------------------------------
1. Becomes Son of Man to Restore Lost Man ________________________________
2. Assumes His True and Central Place 
_________________________________
3. Processes and Provisions of Redemption and Restoration -----------------------------
4. Enabling Provisions of Redemption ______________________________________
1099
17
17
17
18
18
19
19
20
20
21
22
23
29
29
31
31
32
33
34
34
35
36
36
36
37
38
38
39
39
40
40
40
42
42
44
44
45
46
47
48
50
50
51
52
54
55
57
57
57
58
59
60
60
61
61
62
62
62
63
63
64
64
6466
67
68
1100
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
5. The Penalty of Death for Disobedience .....;..... 
 
-........... 
 
-.....-------------
I. A Second Chance Provided for the Sinner ....................................-.....................................
1. A Reprieve Granted Adam and Eve ................................................................................
2. Significance of Probation for Race .....................................-............................................
II. 
Adam Died Judicially on Day of Transgression ......................................................—
1. Rhetorical Figure of Prolepsis Employed ......................-............................-...........—
2. Other Instances Are Not Misunderstood ....................................-.................................
3. Sands in Time’s Hourglass Begin Falling .......................................................................
4. Finality of Death Imposed Not Specified .......................................................................
III. Encompassing Involvements of Death Penalty .................................................................
1. “Death” Embraces Total Punishment for Sin ........................-.........--------------------
2. Justice Requires Penalty Be Understood .......................................................................
3. “Second Death” Completes the Death Penalty ..........................................................
4. “Second Death” Is Loss of Life, Not Continuance ......................................................
5. Doom Applies to Man as a Whole ...................................-.................................................
IV. Supreme Argument Against Eternal Torment 
.................................................................
1. Death Penalty Stems From Law and Authority ...................................-.......................
2. Question Settled at Highest Level .....................................................................................
V. 
Sleep the Beautiful Euphemism for Death 
.................................-........................-.....
1. First a Sleep, With Resurrection Awakening ..................-..........................................
2. Implications of the Metaphor of Sleep ......................................................-.........-.....
3. Time Obliterated to the Sleeper .........................................................................................
4. “Sleep” Is Undeviating Synonym for “Death” ....................................-..................
6. Redemption in the Period of the Sacrificial Altar ............................................................................
I. 
Cain and Abel Tested by Sacrificial Offering System .............................................—
1. Fatal Lack in Cain’s Bloodless Offering ............................................................................
2. Larger Involvements of Sin, Death, and Salvation ....................................................
II. 
Unfolding Portrayal to Abraham Included Resurrection ..............................................
1. Abraham’s Test of Faith in Gospel Provision ..............................................................
2. Provision of Resurrection Recognized by Patriarchs .—............................................
3. Only the Dawn; Not Yet the Noontide ......................................................................
III. Two Ways to Glory—Translation and Resurrection ......................................................
1. Enoch and Elijah Translated Without Dying .......................................................-.....
2. Moses’ Resurrection: First to Break Bonds of Death ...............................................
IV. Annual Round of Tabernacle Services Typified Gospel Realities ..............................
1. Yearly Enactment of Plan of Redemption .....................................................................
2. Justice and Mercy Met in Type at the Ark .................................................................
3. Sin and Righteousness, Death and Life, Portrayed ..................................................
4. Penal Punishment Death Not Life Imprisonment .........................................................
5. Sinner Incurred Doom of Death 
—................................................................................
6. Entire Sacrificial System Fulfilled in Christ ...................................................................
7. Christ Actually and Truly Died in Atonement ...........................................................
8. Death Penalty Under the Divine Law 
..........................................................................
V. 
Christ, Prophesied First Fruit3, Rose on Precise Day ................................................
1. First Fruits a Fixed Part of Annual Service ...............................................................
2. “Every Man in His Own Order” .....................................................................................
3. First Fruits Resurrection Fulfilled on Very Day of Type —.................................
7. Eternal Destruction Is Decreed Doom of Wicked ............_................................................-.........
I. 
Utter Destruction Ultimate Fate of Intractably Wicked ............................................
1. Scores of Old Testament Verbs Signify “Destroy” .................................................
2. Imposing Array of Literal English Equivalents 
............................................................
3. Galaxy of Figurative Expressions Support the Literal ....................................-.........
4. Iterated and Reiterated in Key Chaptere ......................................................................
II. 
Multiple Terms Signify Complete Destruction of Being .........................................
III. Eternal Torment No Part of Death Penalty .......................................................................
1. Torture No Part of Jewish Sacrificial Rite ...................................................................
2. Torture No Part of Mosaic Penal Code ..........................................................................
IV. Eternal Destiny Revolves Around Intent of “Life” and “Death” ............................
1. Life and Death-—Keys That Unlock Inspired Intent ..................................................
2. Platonic Perversion of Death as Perpetual Life 
 
..................................-..............
3. Innate-Immortality Postulate Reverses True Exegesis ...............................................
4. Christ’s Death. Not Sufferings, Constituted Atoning Sacrifice ...............................
5. Destruction Not Eternal Torment the Punishment ..................................................
V. 
Stock Objections Invoked Collapse Under Scrutiny 
..............................................
1. Isaiah 33:14—Contention Collapses Under Scrutiny .................................................
2. Isaiah 66:24—Carcasses, Undying Worm, Unquenchable Fire ..............................
3. Deprived of Life, Not Consigned to Misery .................................................................
4. Daniel 12:2—Resurrections to Life and to Judgment ......................-.......................
5. Conclusion: Contentions of Three Citations Collapse .............................................
8. Prophetic Witness Concerning the “Last Things” ..........................................................................
I. 
The Two Advents Focal Points of All Prophecy ...........................................................
1. Master Key to Man’s Destiny ................................................................................................
2. Issues of Time and Eternity .................................................................................................
3. Key to Divine Movements of the Ages ............................................................................
4. Only True Philosophy of History ........................................................................................
II. 
Outline Prophecies Mark Out Highway of the Centuries ..........................................
1. 
Continuity, Comprehensiveness, and Repetition ......................................................
69
69
69
71
71
72
72
73
73
73
74
74
75
76
77
77
77
78
79
79
79
80
80
83
83
85
86
87
88
89
90
92
93
94
95%
97
97
98
99
99
100
101
101
102
102
103
105
105
106
106
107
107
108
111
112
112
113
113
113
114
114
115
115
115
117
119
120
120
122
122
122
122
123
123
125
125
2. Destiny of World Powers of History Portrayed ............................................................. 
126
3. Course of Empire Gives Way to God’s Kingdom ...................................................... 
127
4. Now Living in “Time of End” ......................................................................................... 
127
5. Sublimity of Revelation Surpasses Human Comprehension ....................................... 
128
III. Significance of “Day of Lord” and Cognate Terms ......................................................... 
131
1. Transcendent “Day of the Lord” ....................................................................................... 
131
2. Second Advent to Terminate “Latter Days” ............................................................... 
131
3. Resurrection Is Climactic Feature of Advent ............................................................... 
132
4. Eternal Restoration Is Reward of Righteous ............................................................... 
134
5. Wicked to Receive Punitive Destruction ........................................................................ 
134
IV. Solemn Procession of Prophetic Witnesses Testify ........................................................ 
135
1. Panoramic Survey of Old Testament Witnesses ............................................................. 
135
2. Constant Succession of Eschatological Glimpses ............... 
 
 
 
 
136
V. Isaiah—Star Witness on Inspiration’s Witness Stand ............................................ 
 
 
138
VI. 
Major Results Spring From “Day of the Lord” ......................................................... 
140
1. Scenes of Judgment Dominate Closing Portrayal ........................................................ 
140
2. New Earth Becomes Eternal Home of Redeemed ...................................................... 
141
3. Obliteration of Sin Eventuates in Clean Universe .................................................... 
142
4. Resurrection and Millennium Clarified in New Testament .................................. 
142
5. Barren Condition of Earth During Millennium ........................................................... 
143
9. 
Technical Terms and Usages Preclude Innate Immortality .................................................. 
145
I. 
Must Understand Key Old Testament Terms Through Usage ............................... 
145
II. 
Meaning of Nephesh in the Hebrew of the Old Testament 
.................................. 
146
1. “Nephesh” Has Several Common Meanings ............................................................... 
146
2. A General Definition of Nephesh ....................................................................................... 
147
3. Basic Idea That of Individual Himself ............................................................................ 
147
III. Nephesh as Translated in the English Versions ................................................................. 
148
1. English Translation Reveals Significant Facts ............................................................. 
148
2. Interesting Variations in R.S.V................................................................................ 
 
 
150
3. Problems Confront the Translators ................................................................................... 
150
4. Three Clear Conclusions Concerning “Nephesh” ...................................................... 
151
IV. “Ruach” and “Neshamah” Have a Variety of Meanings ........................................... 
152
1. Context Must Indicate Best Translation .......................................................................... 
152
2. “Neshamah” and “Ruach” in Poetic Parallelism ...................................................... 
153
3. The Life, Principle That God Imparts ............................. 
 
 
154
4. “Ruach” Has No Separate Conscious Existence ......................................................... 
155
V. 
Relation of “Spirit” or “Breath” to Life and Death .................................................. 
155
1. “Breath of Life” and “Spirit of God” the Cause of Life .......................................... 
155
2. Spirit Distinct From Life It Produces ................ 
 
 
156
3. Restoration of Spirit at Resurrection ................................................................................. 
157
VI. 
Fundamental Distinction Between Man and Beast .................................................... 
158
1. Immortality Not Conferred by Inbreathed “Breath” ................................................ 
158
2. Totally Different From Brute Creation .......................................................................... 
158
10. 
Weak Arguments Formulate Unworthy Platform .............................................. 
 
 
160
I. 
“She’61’s” Most Suitable Rendering Is “Gravedom”................................................. 
160
1. Difficulty Created by Variant Translations .................................................................... 
160
2. “Hell” a Wholly Unsuitable Translation ...................................................................... 
161
3. “Gravedom”—Most Suitable Rendering for “She’ol” ............................................. 
162
4. Suspension of Life in “She’ol” Awaiting Resurrection .............................................. 
162
5. Darkness of “She’ol” Dissipated by Light of Resurrection ..... 
 
 
163
6. “She’ol”: Place of Death, Not Life .................... 
 
 
164
7. “She’ol” and “Death” Are Frequently Synonymous 
v................................ 
164
II. 
Origin of “Gehenna” (Ge Hinnom) Symbol of Final Destruction.......................... 
165
1. Historical Background of “Gehenna” ............................................................................... 
165
2. Associated With Upsurge of Necromancy .................................................................... 
166
3. Josiah Transforms valley Into Refuse Pit ............... 
 
167
III. Three Supporting Citations Break Down Under Scrutiny .............................................. 
168
1. Recourse to Weak Arguments an Unworthy Procedure ........................................... 
168
2. Jonah Not Dead: So Case Is Dismissed .......................................... 
 
 
169
IV. Isaiah’s Parabolic Taunting Ode on King of Babylon........ 
 
 
170
1. Personified Trees Rejoice Over Fallen Monarch ........................................................... 
171
2. Paths of Glory Lead but to Grave ....................................................... 
 
 
172
V. 
Ezekiel’s Parabolic Dirge Over Pharaoh of Egypt ......................................................... 
172
1. “She’61” Contrasted With State of Living ................................................................... 
173
2. Parabolic Scourge Not Construed Literally ................................................................. 
173
VI. Saul Deceived by Necromancy of Medium of Endor ......................................................... 
174
1. Evil Spirits Personating the Dead ....................................................................................... 
175
2. Saul’s Recourse to Forfiidden Craft of Necromancy .................................................. 
176
3. Saul Deceived; Slain for His Transgressions ................................................................. 
177
4. Crux of the Whole Portrayal ............................................................................................... 
177
5. Cruel Hoax and Its Modern Counterpart .......................................................................... 
179
6. Grandeur of God’s Wondrous Provision ................ 
 
 
 
 
 
179
SUBJECT GUIDE 
1101
1102
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
PART II (Chapters 11-28) 
New Testament Evidence
11. Christ’s Infallible Testimony of Life Versus Death ......................... 
 
_.............«..........
I. 
Definitive Testimony of Jesus, Supreme Witness of All Time -----------------------
1. Jesus Christ—Star Witness of All Time ........................—............................................
2. Fatal Clash Comes Over Man’s Destiny 
..------------------------------------------------
II. 
Transcendent Scope and Significance of Incarnation __________________________
1. Master Key to All Redemptive History -------------------------------------------------------
2. Becoming Mam He Retains Humanity Forever ______________________________
3. Retains Only Scars of Sin in Universe ---------------------------------------------------------
4. Purpose of incarnation Was Fivefold ................................................................................
III. Eternal Life—Throbbing Heart of John’s Gospel Story ................—.........._.........«...
1. From Bleakness of Sin to Radiance of Salvation .........................................................
2. New Testament a New Revelation of Life ----------------------------------------------------
3. Brought About by New Spiritual Ingeneration .........«................................................
IV. Two Progenitors, Two Births, Two Contrasting Destinies _____________________
1. Significance and Scope of the Term “Life” _................................................................
2. Natural Dying Life; Supernatural Endless Life 
..............................................—
3. Nicodemus the Pharisee Held to Innate Immortality ------------------------------------
4. “Living Water” Springing Up Unto “Everlasting Life” ------------------------------
5. Central Doctrine of John’s Gospel ...—.........................................................................
6. Controversy Over Bread From Heaven and Resurrection .....................................
7. Jewish Challenge of Advent, Resurrection, Damnation ---------------------------------
8. Blinded by Platonism Jews Reject Life-Truth ---------------------------------------------
9. Many Followers Turn Away Because of Claims ...................................................-.....
V. 
Rejection Comes Over Amazing “Z&e-Life” Claims ..................................................
1. Conflict Develops Into Supreme Crisis ........ 
 
 
 
—..................
2. Again Sought to Stone Him Because of Claims .—......................................................
3. Miraculous Raising of Lazarus From Death --------------------------------------------------
4. Burden of Christ’s High Priestly Prayer -------------------------------------------------------
5. “Life Solely in Christ” John’s Paramount Theme .....................................................
6. Contingent Immortality Gives Honor to Christ ..........................................................
12. Coordinates All Aspects of Life, Death, and Destiny ..................................................................
I. 
Significance of Christ’s Life and Death in Plan of Redemption ....................—
1. Christ—Revealer of God and Redeemer of Man ......................................................
2. Life-giving Scope and Significance of Christ’s Death ..................................................
3. Christ’s Death Summit of Sacrifice for Man ................ 
 
 
—------------------
4. Rejection of Christ’s Redemptive Provisions Supreme Sin ....................................
II. 
Pivotal Place of Christ’s Teachings on Life, Death, and Destiny .........................
1. Proclamation of Truth and Confutation of Error .......................................................
2. Key to Understanding Conflicts of Centuries ........... 
 
—..........................
III. Sets Pattern for Eschatological and Chronological Sequence .....—........................_.....
1. Prophetic Repetition for Emphasis and Amplification ............................................
2. Repetition—Clearly Established Pattern of Prophecy ............................................
3. First Coverage Leads Up to the “End” ........._.............................................................
4. Second Coverage Likewise Leads to Advent ......... 
 
-.............«...
5. Celestial Signs Are Chronologically Placed ...................................................................
6. “Hour” Not Known, Imminence Can Be Known __________________________
IV. Transcendent Events Mark “End of the World” .........—............................................—
1. Preparatory Events, Coming in Glory, Final Separations .......................................
2. “Wheat” Into God’s Garner; “Tares” Into Fire .....................................................
V. 
Apostles’ Descriptions Agree With Christ’s ...................................................................
1. Second Advent Ushers In “Day of the Lord” .............................................................
2. Second Advent Is Day of Separation ------------------------------------—-----------------------
3. Eternal Results of Final Reaping ........._........... 
 
 
 
 
 
—................
VI. 
“Sleep” of Death Followed by Resurrection “Awakening” ....................................
1. Christ and Paul Both Employ Metaphor of Sleep ...................................................
2. No Conscious Lapse of Time Between Death and Resurrection ..........................
3. Premise of “Sleep” Only Way of Understanding Paul ..........................................
4. Sleeping Dead Do Not Precede the Living ................................................................
5. Intent of the “Quick” and the “Dead” 
------.---------------------------------------
VII. 
The Resurrection Provision Pivotal in Christ’s Teaching -----------------------------
1. Christ’s Resurrection Prerequisite to Ours .................................................................
2. Resurrection Is of the Whole Person 
 .......... 
 
—............-.........«...
3. Certitude of Resurrection Rests on Christ’s Infallible Word ................................
4. Not Uninterrupted Survival but Resurrection ...............................................................
13. Christ’s Great Parable of the Lost Opportunity .........................................................................
I. 
Problem Text (Luke 16:19-31): Parable-Fable of Dives and Lazarus 
--
1. Clearly One of Christ’s Many Parables _.......................................................................
2. Uttered When Jews Derided His Teachings --------------------------------------------------
II. 
Significant Place of Parables in Christ’s Teaching ..«-------------------------------------
1. “Parable” and “Fable,” Definitions and Distinctions ---------------------------------
2. Parabolic Method Adopted to Circumvent Prejudice ------------------------------------
3. Revealed to Disciples; Concealed From Hostile Jews 
----------------------------
183
183
183
184
185
185
186
187
188
188
189
189
190
191
191
193
193
195
196
197
197
198
199
200
200
201
202
204
205
205
207
207
207
208
210
211
211
212
213
214
217
217
218
219
219
220
221
221
222
223
223
224
224
225
226
227
228
229
229
230
230
231
232
233
234
234
235
237
237
237
239
240
4. Number and Scope of Christ’s Parables ___________________________________ 
241
5. Parables Not a Sound Basis for Doctrine ___________________________________ 
241
III. Doctrinal Dogmas of Pharisees in Time of Christ .......................................................... 
242
1. Platonic Postulates Embraced by Time of Christ ..................................................... 
242
2. Paralleling Allegories in OT Imagery ............................................................................. 
243
3. Not Biographical Sketch but Parabolic Fable ............................................................... 
243
IV. Christ’s Great Parable of the Lost Opportunity ................................ 
 
 
 
 
245
1. Rejoicing in Heaven: Resentment by Pharisees ___________________________ 
245
2. Logical Climax of “Lost Opportunity” Parable ____________________________ 
246
V. 
Salient Points 
and Perplexing Problems Outlined _________________________ 
247
1. Terse Oudine of the Parable ______________________________________________ 
247
2. Key Terms and Expressions Examined ........................................................ 
 
248
3. Sufficiency of Scripture} Unwillingness to Believe __________________ 
 
 
250
14. Gravity of Ascribing False Teachings to Christ -------------------- 
 
 
252
I. Josephus Illuminates Dives-Lazarus Story 
............................................................... 
252
1. Representative Character of Josephus’ Depiction .................................................... 
 
252
2. Multiple Features of Hades Described ............................. 
 
 
 
 
254
3. “Just 
Guided by “Angels” to “Bosom of Abraham” ............. 
 
 
254
4. “Unjust” Dragged to “Neighborhood” of Hell ............................................................. 
255
5. Impassable Gulf Separates the Two Groups ....................... 
 
 
 
255
6. Eternal Torment for Wicked After Judgment ---------------- 
 
256
7. Deflecting Inroads in Inter-Testamental Period .......... 
 
 
257
8. Advocates Inject Unwarranted Additions .............. —...... 
 
 
 
 
258
II. Literalism Violates Consistency; Vitiates Christ’s Witness, Overturns Scripture
T estimony ..... 
 
 
 
259
1. Scofield Makes Passage Wholly Literal ............. 
 
 
 
 
259
2. Inconsistencies Involved in Literal Interpretation _...................................................... 
260
3. Literalism Contradicts Christ’s Explicit Declarations .............................................. 
261
4. Literalism Contradicts Inspired Revelation’s Dictums ..... 
 
 
 
262
III. Gravity of Ascribing False Teaching to Christ, Embodiment of Truth ...... 
 
263
1. Use of Parable Not Endorsement of Its Theology .................................................... 
263
2. Gravity of Implied Charges Against Christ ...................... 
 
 
 
263
3. Makes Christ Guilty of Purveying Error and Perversion ..................................... 
264
4. Demands of Resurrection Brought On Crisis ...... 
 
264
IV. 
Major Area of Disagreement Between Christ and Pharisees ......................................... 
265
1. Differences as Opposite as Light and Darkness ..................................... 
 
 
265
2. Christ Must Not Be Arrayed Against Christ ............ 
 
 
 
 
266
V. 
Conclusion: Immortal Soulism Collapses Under Scrutiny ......................................... 
268
1. Fourfold Case Against Popular Contention ................................................................. 
268
2. Specific Counts Against Acceptance Are Determinative ............................................ 
269
15. Christ’s Majestic Answer to the Penitent’s Plea ....................................................................— 
270
I. 
Problem Text (Luke 23:43): Penitent Thief—“Today” and “Paradise” ........... 
270
1. Setting of This Amazing Episode ......................................................................— 
«... 
270
2. Acquainted With Christ’s Claims and Offers ............................................—.............. 
272
3. What, Where, and When Is “Paradise”? ......................................... 
 
 
 
 
272
II. 
Three “Heavens and Earths”—Past, Present, Future .................................................. 
273
1. No Conflict Between Peter’s and Paul’s Versions ....................... 
 
 
274
2. Paradise of First Earth Restored in Third Earth ...................... 
 
-.................. 
274
III. Penitent Neither in Kingdom Nor in Paradise That Day ................................................ 
275
1. Did Not Die on Same Day ........................... 
—.......— 
— 
275
2. “Together” That Day Only on Adjoining Crosses .................................................... 
275
3. Jesus Went to the Grave, Not to Paradise, That Day ............................................ 
276
4. Not in Heaven During “Three Days and Nights” ............................................ 
 
277
IV. Meaning Completely Altered by Position of Comma _ 
 
 
 
278
1. Punctuation Constitutes Exegesis—Right or Wrong .................. 
 
278
2. Placing of Comma Determines Meaning ...................................... 
 
 
 
279
V. Determining Evidences on the Technical Side ...;.------- 
 
 
 
 
 
279
1. Punctuation Based Entirely on Human Authority _____ 
 
280
2. PuncUiation Not Introduced Till Time of Renaissance ......................................... 
280
3. Relationship of Greek Adverb “Semeron” to Problem .................................... 
 
 
281
VI. Most Sublime Episode of Christ’s Redemptive Career ............... 
 
 
 
282
1. Recognized in Jesus the Coming King ............................. 
 
 
 
283
2. Symbol of Multitudes in Earth s Eleventh Hour ....................................................... 
284
3. Problem Removed by Shift of Comma ............_............................................................— 
284
4. Beware of Putting Falsehood on Lips of Christ .......... 
 
 
284
16. Christ Portrays Doom of Wicked as Utter Destruction ................. 
 
 
286
I. 
Seventeen Graphic 
Illustrations of Doom of Wicked . 
 
286
1. Six Illustrations From Inanimate Life .................. 
 
 
 
 
286
2. Second Group Based on Human Life .............................................................-...........— 
287
3. All Portray Total and Final Extinction ......... 
 
 
287
II. Christ’s Meaning of “Eternal” Fire, Punishment, Damnation _______________ 
288
1. Meaning Determined by Noun to Which Attached _________________________ 
289
2. Divine Actions or Activities May Be Terminable .................... 
 
 
 
290
III. Christ’s Explicit Teachings on “Hell” Examined ...................... 
 
 
 
291
1. Two Terms Used by Christ ..................... 
 
 
 
 
 
 
291
2. Christ’s Specific Teachings on Gehenna __ 
 
 
 
 
292
3. Explanatory Notes on the Seven Texts ___ 
 
 
293
SUBJECT GUIDE 
1103
1104
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
4. Inspired Key to Expression “Eternal Fire” ....................................-................
5. Not Misery but “Destruction” Is Eternal ......................................................
IV. 
“Hades”—True Understanding Based on NT Usage, Not Pagan-Romanist
1. Pagan Origin and Influence of “Hades” ................................................................
2. English Translations Molded by Romanist Backgrounds ...............................
3. Hades Connected With Death, Never With Life ........._........................-......
4. Hades Clearly the Grave, or Gravedom ...........................................................
5. All Souls Remain in Gravedom Until Resurrection .......................................
6. Gravedom: Place of Repose Throughout Death-Sleep ...................................
V. 
Problem Text (Mark 9:43-48): “Their Worm Dieth Not” .........................
VI. 
Sin’s Punishment Does Not Continue Through All Eternity ........................
17. Theologian Paul on Life, Death, and Immortality .—.....................................................
I. 
“Christ Our Life” Is Post-Pentecostal Theme ...................................................
1. Proclaimed First to Jews, Then to Gentiles 
.................................................
2. Paul Preaches With Futility to Platonic Athenians .......................................
3. Romans: Immortality a Gift Through Christ ......................................-..........
4. 1 Corinthians: Immortality Must Be “Put On” ..............................................
5. 2 Corinthians: Central Theme. Christ Our Life ...........................................
6. “Eternal Life” Theme Runs Through Remaining Epistles ......................
7. Peter, lames, and Jude Give Same Emphasis .................................................
II. 
Heart of Pauline Theology—Gift of Life Instead of Destruction .............
1. Redemption of Man Brings Life and Immortality .........................................
2. Tremendous Scope of Salvation ..............................................................................
3. Opening Message Is on Eschatology ........_...........................................................
4. Punishment of Wicked Is Total Destruction ...............................................
III. Places All Messages in Graphic Eschatological Setting .......................................
1. Second Advent Involves Resurrection and Translation ................................
2. “Day of the Lord” Brings “Sudden Destruction” to Sinners ...................
3. Attendant Circumstances of Advent Portrayed .............................................
4. Coming Apostasy Paul’s Grave Concern .............................................................
5. Differentiates Between Resurrection of Righteous and Wicked ...............
6. Our Vile Bodies Changed at Advent ..................................................................
7. Seducing Spirits Impinge on God’s Unapproachable Immortality ...............
8. Immortality Brought Into Focus Through Gospel ..............._...............-.........
IV. Pauline Portrayal and Usage of “Immortal” and “Immortality” .................
1. Absolute Immortality Is Attribute of God Alone —......................................
2. Christ the Rcvealer of Immortality to Man 
....................................................
3. Immortality Not Present Possession of Humanity .................-..................
4. Man, Now Mortal, to Put On Immortality ...................—...........................
5. Resurrection Is Time of Putting On Immortality .............................................
6. Those Not Receiving Immortality Are Doomed .............................................
7. Immortality Predicated Only of God ................................................................
18. Paul’s Leading Problem Passage (2 Cor. 5:1-9) .................................................................
I. 
“Absent From the Body”: “Present With the Lord” ......................................
1. Peril of Invoking the Isolated Verse 
.............................................................
2. Contention: Death Only a “Transition” ............................................................
3. Contention: Soul Now Enjoying Celestial Life of Bliss ..............................
4. Unknown in Christian Church Until Nearly a.d. 200 ..................................
II. 
Setting and Intent of Paul’s Unusual Portrayal ................................................
1. Two Lives for Believers—Present and Future ................................-.................
2. Earthen Vessels Must Be Replaced 
................................................................
III. Full Text of Problem Passage With Definitions ....................................................
IV. Five Basic Considerations Involved .....................................................-....................
1. Three Consecutive States Impressively Portrayed ...........................................
2. Shrinks From Being Unclothed in Death ..........................................................
3. Longs for Eternal State 
 
........ 
........ 
—
4. Intermediate State the Basic Question ..................._.........................................
5. Death Not a Point of Time, but a Period .....................................................
6. Interim Death State Versus Eternal Resurrection State .............. 
 
_...
7. Significance of Term “Not Made With Hands” .............................................
8. Exemplified in Christ’s Natural and Resurrection Body ..............................
9. Earthly Tabernacle Temporary; Heavenly Temple Eternal .......................
10. 
Simultaneous Reunion and Reward at Christ’s Return ............................
V. 
Glossary of Key Words and Phrases by Verses ...................-.............................
VI. 
Expositional Survey of Passage by Verses ............................................................
1. Verse 1—Earthly Home Dissolved; Heavenly House Eternal ...................
2. Verse 2—Groaning for Immortality Beyond Resurrection ..........................
3.. Verse 3-—Clothed Again After Naked, State of Death 
..................................
4. Verse 4—Mortality to Be Swallowed Up by Immortality .......................—
5. Indwelling Spirit Is Pledge of Our Resurrection ...........................................
6. Verse 6—At Home in Body; Absent From the Lord .....................................
7. Verse 8—Interval of Death Separates From Presence With Lord ............
8. Recapitulation: Three States for Man ..............................................................
19. Paul’s Other Problem Passages ..................................................................................................
I. 
(2 Cor. 12:2-4): Paul’s Vision—“In or Out of the Body” ........................
1. Exact Specifications of Passage . ..............................................................................
2. Visions Produced by Agency of Holy Spirit ........................................................
294
295
297
297
297
298
298
299
300
300
301
303
303
303
305
305
306
308
309
310
310
310
311
311
313
314
314
314
314
315
316
317
318
318
319
319
320
320
320
320
322
323
324
324
324
324
325
326
326
327
329
330
331
331
331
332
332
333
333
334
335
336
338
339
340
340
342
342
343
345
346
346
347
348
348
348
349
3. “Visions” Inseparable Part of Prophetic Role .................... 
 
 
350
4. Paul’s Vision of Heaven Matched by Isaiah, Daniel, John ..................................... 
351
5. Absurdity of “Soul’s Separation” Theory ...................................................................... 
352
6. Preposterous Conclusions Involved ..................................................................................... 
353
II. (Phil. l:2d;24): “To Depart, and to Be With Christ” ............................................... 
354
1. Basic Principles of Sound Interpretation .......................................................................... 
354
2. Passage Regarded as Bulwark of Immortal-Soulism .................................................. 
355
3. The Problem Passage in Its Entirety ............................................................................. 
356
4. Historical Background for Philippian Epistle ............................................................. 
356
5. The Twin Gateways to Glory ........................................................................................... 
358
6. Paul’s “So” Precludes Every Other Means ................................................................... 
358
III. Paul’ Baffling Dilemma—“Life 
or “Death” ................................................................... 
359
1. Christ “Magnified” by Either Life or Death .............. 
 
 
359
2. Involvements and Advantages of Death .......................................................................... 
360
3. 
Christ Will Call Forth From Dusty Beds ...................................................................... 
361
4. 
Only Two Designated Ways to Glory ............................................................................. 
361
5. Paul’s Multiple Testimony as to “When” ...................................................................... 
362
6. Resurrection, Not Death, Ushers Into Presence of Christ ....................................... 
363
IV. Paul’s Great Third Choice—Translation ............................................................................. 
364
1. Translation Far Better Than Living or Dying ............................................................. 
364
2. 
Desired to Be Loosed, Set Free From Earth ............................................................... 
365
3. Relation of Problem Passages to Whole of Scripture .................................................. 
366
20. 
Unique Witness of Epistles of Peter and John ............................................................................... 
368
I. Peter’s Portrayal of Cataclysmic End Events ..................................................................... 
368
1. Imposing Outline in Sweeping Strokes ............................. 
 
 
368
2. Characteristics of Centuries That Precede ...................................................................... 
370
3. Coming Deluge of Fire in “Day of the Lord” ............................................................. 
371
II. Problem Text (1 Peter 3:19)—Preaching to “Spirits in Prison” ............................ 
372
1. Doubtful Texts Invoked to Support Doubtful Positions ........................................... 
372
2. Profound Implications of Papal Position ....................................................................... 
374
3. Christ Went Nowhere in Death; Preached to No One ........................................... 
375
4. Christ Was Made Alive; Did Not Continue Alive During Interim ..................... 
375
5. When and to Whom Did Christ Preach? ........................................................................ 
376
III. Christ Truly “Died” According to Prediction, Fulfillment, Attestation ................. 
377
1. Explicit OT Prophecies of Forthcoming Death ............................................................. 
377
2. Jesus’ Own Unequivocal Predictions of His Death .................................................... 
377
3. Inspiration’s Record of Christ’s Death .............................................................................. 
378
4. Apostolic Witness to Christ’s Death ................................................................................... 
379
5. Christ’s Post-Ascension Testimony From Heaven ....................................................... 
381
6. Christ’s Death Established, Ceritified, Attested ........................................................... 
381
7. All Is Lost if Christ Did Not Actually Die ................................................................... 
381
8. Multiple Benefits Annulled if Christ Did Not Die ...................................................... 
382
IV. Problem Text (2 Peter 2:4)—Fallen Angels Detained in “Tartarus” ........................ 
383
1. Place of Detention for Fallen Angels ............................................................................. 
384
2. No Punishment Before Decisions of Judgment .............................................................. 
384
V. 
John’s Epistles: Life in and Through Christ Is Central Thought .......................... 
385
1. Life Manifested, Promised, Possessed in Christ .......................................................... 
385
2. Possession of Eternal Life Conditioned on Indwelling Christ ................................ 
386
21. Revelation—Inspiration’s 
Supreme Portrayal of Human Destiny ....................................... 
388
I. 
Tremendous Scope and Grand Finale of Book of Revelation ................................ 
389
1. Sweeps in Past, Present, but Primarily Future ........................................................ 
390
2. Triumph of “Seed” and Crushing of Serpent ............................................................... 
390
3. “Day of the Lord” Is Master Key to Apocalypse ...................................................... 
391
4. Covers Transition From Time to Eternity ...................................................................... 
393
5. Complete Vindication of God and Righteousness ........................................................... 
394
II. “Day of the Lord”—God’s Great Day of Reckoning With Man .............................. 
395
III. OT Texts and Terms Portraying “Day of the Lord” ...............................................-..... 
396
IV. NT Portrayal of Day of the Lord Jesus Christ 
............................................................. 
398
V. 
“Day of the Lord”—Fulfills in Historical Actualities of Apocalypse ...................... 
399
1. New Note Has Increasing Volume and Tempo ..................................-................-....... 
400
2. Detailed Bill of Particulars in Apocalypse .................................................................... 
401
3. “Old” Passes Forever; “New” Established Forever .................................................... 
401
4. Consummating Testimony Seals Age-old Witness ........................................................ 
402
22. Apocalypse Reveals Final Fate of Wicked ...................................................................................... 
404
I. 
Teaching of the Apocalypse on Final Punishment ...................................................... 
404
II. 
Gehenna “Lake of Fire” Totally Destroys All Sinners ............................................. 
405
1. “Second Death” Tied In With “Day of Wrath” ................................................... 
405
2. “Lake of Fire” Equated With “Second Death” ....... 
—....................... 
406
3. “Lake of Fire” Is Predicted “Gehenna of Fire” ....................................................... 
406
4. Constitutes Inexorable Chain of Evidence ...................................................................... 
408
III. Problem Text (Rev. 14:11)—Torment Day and Night; Smoke Ascending Forever 
409
1. Terms of Revelation 14:11 Limited to SpecifiecTGroup .......................................... 
409
2. Smoke Ascends Up Forever—Fires Burned Out ........................................................ 
410
3. Neither “Torment 
nor “Smoke’’ Are Eternal ...................................................... 
411
4. “Father” of First “No-Death” Lie Last to Die in Gehenna .............................. 
412
IV. No Eternally Seething “Lake of Fire” in Coming “New Earth” .............................. 
413
1. 
Dogma of Eternal Torment Involves Notorious Dualism .................................... 
413
SUBJECT GUIDE 
1105
1106
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
2. 
Celestial Conflict Terminates on Earth ..................... 
 
 
 
414
3. 
New Earth and New Jerusalem Gloriously Real ____ 
 
415
4. 
Endless Life in Christ Undeviating Note of Apocalypse ------- 
 
 
 
416
23. Greek Terms and Usages—“Psuche'’ (Soul); “Pneuma ’ (Spirit) ------- 
 
419
I. Characteristic Advantages, Disadvantages, and Pitfalls of Greek .................. 
 
419
1. Issue of Immortality of Paramount Concern _________________________________ 
420
2. 
Conflict Over Punishment of Wicked ___________ 
 
 
 
 
420
II. 
“Psuche” in New Testament Usage ---------------- 
 
 
421
1. Hebrew Background of the Early Church ............ 
 
 
 
 
 
421
2. 
How the Translators Rendered ‘ Psuche” __..—.................................................. 
 
422
3. 
Meanings of “Psuche” Fall Into Four Categories ............... 
 
 
 
 
423
III. “Pneuma” in New Testament Usage ---------------------- 
 
425
IV. Exit and Re-entry of the Spirit ....................................................................................... 
 
427
1. Departure of “Spirit” From “Body” at Death 
............... 
 
 
 
427
2. Variant Ways of Expressing Act of Dying 
.......... 
 
 
 
 
428
3. “Spirit” Departs at Death: Restored at Resurrection ............................ 
 
429
24. Terms and Usages: “AiOn” and “Aionios” 
............. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
431
I. Principles Governing the Meaning of "Aidn” and “AiOnios” ......... 
 
 
431
1. Definitions and Usages ...... 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
431
2. Specific “Aidnios” Usages Outlined ....................... 
 
 
 
433
II. 
“Aidn” and “Aionios” in the Contrasts of Scripture 
...................................... 
433
1. Golden Rule: Perpetuity Within Limits ......................................................................... 
433
2. Two Determinative Principles re “Aidnios” .......... 
 
 
 
 
434
3. Gehazi’s “For Ever”-Leprosy Lasted Until Posterity Extinct .......................... 
 
434
4. Length Governed by Noun to Which Attached —............................. 
 
 
 
— 
435
5. Body Blow to Immortal-Soul Theory ...... 
 
 
 
 
 
436
6. Restricted Use in the Apocalypse ....................................... 
 
-....................... 
436
III. Texts Exemplify Diversified Meanings of “Aidn” and “Aionios” ......... 
 
 
436
IV. Sound Interpretative Principles Emerge for Guidance .................................................... 
438
1. Vast Scope of Meaning of “Aion’ Exhibited .....................................................-....... 
439
2. God Has Infinity; Man Does Not 
....................... 
 
 
440
3. “Aionios”—Eternal in Results, Not in Process .........-..........................-...........-....... 
441
4. Revelation 20:10—Example of Limited Torment ................ 
 
 
 
442
5. Beware of Unscriptural Foundations and Unsound Reasoning —..........;............. 
443
25. Terms and Usages: “Immortal,” “Incorruption,” “Immortality,” “Eternal Life” — 
445
I. 
“Immortality”—Springs From God. Bestowed on Man ......................... 
 
 
445
1. “Athanasia” (“Immortality”)—Possessed by God; Put On by Man ................... 
445
2. “Immortality” Is Immunity to Death or Destruction .................................................. 
446
3. Not Natural Endowment but Special Bestowment ................................v.................... 
446
“Athanasia,” “Aphthartos,” “Aphtharsia”—Restrict Innate Immortality to God 
447
1. “Aphthartos” (“Incorruptible”) Likewise Confined Exclusively to God ...... 
447
2. “Aphtharsia” (“Incorruption”)—Not Inalienable Possession of Man ................. 
448
3. Observation ............................... 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
449
III. The Five English Uses of Immortal/Immortality Examined ................ 
- 
449
1. God the Possessor, Man the Future Receiver ............................................... 
 
 
449
2. Recapitulation of Fivefold Witness .................. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
452
IV. Problem 
“Eternal 
Life” 
and 
“Immortality”—Differences, Similarities, 
and
Relationships ....................................-............. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
452
1. Problem: Are “Eternal Life” and “Immortality” Equivalents? 
— 
452
2. God’s Immortality Absolute; Man’s Always Contingent ........................ 
 
453
3. Eternal Life-—God’s by Nature; Man’s to Receive ..................................................... 
454
4. Both Eternal Life and Immortality^ Center in Christ ................................................. 
455
5. Eternal Life Based on Dual Relationships ......... 
 
 
455
6. Sound Conclusions Deducible From Scripture Evidence ......... 
 
 
456
V. 
Eternal Life—Present Possession, but in Christ ............. 
 
 
457
VI. 
Immortality—God’s Alone, Man’s to “Put On” at Advent ...................................... 
459
VII. 
Basic Twofold Provision-Condition of Eternal Life ....................... 
 
 
459
1. Similar to Christ’s Relationship to the Father ........ 
 
 
 
4ol
2. Life of God Implanted Through New Birth .......... 
 
 
 
461
VIII. 
Believers Predestined Heirs of Eternal Life Hereafter 
.
 
 
 
462
1. Already Heirs, Awaiting Time of Possession ......—........................................................ 
462
2. Proleptic Figure Employed re “Eternal Life” ....................................-...........-.......... 
463
3. Eternal Life Vested in Christ, Not in Us ....................................... 
 
 
464
4. Minor Heir Does Not Have Possession Until of Age .....................—.............-............ 
464
26 Technical Terms: Sleeping, Waking, Resurrection ..................................................— 
— 
466
I. 
“Sleeping” and “Awakening”—NT Terms for Death and Resurrection ............. 
466
1. Multiple Speculations Over State in Death ---------- 
 
 
 
466
2. “Sleep”—Common Term for “Dead in Christ” ................-........................-..... 
 
467
3. Figure of “Sleep” Used Only of First Death ............................. 
 
—.... 
468
4. Uniform Usage Determines the Meaning ...................................................-................... 
469
5. “Sleep” Implies Assurance of "Awakening” .............................-.................................. 
470
6. "Awalcening” From Death-Sleep Is Inspired Terminology .......... 
 
 
471
7. Translation Conceals Reiterated “Awakening” Emphasis ......................—.............. 
472
8. Bears Vital Relationship to Advent Hope .................................... 
 
-............ 
474
II. 
Two Separate General Resurrections—^>f Righteous and Wicked . 
 
 
474
1. Two General Resurrections Follow in Sequence.............................-.............................. 
474
2. Resurrection Universal in Operation --------------------------- 
 
475
II.
3. 
Drama of Rebellion, Sin, 
and Death Over
.
 .................. 
 
 
 
 
476
III. Glory of Our Immortalized Resurrection Bodies ......................... 
 
 
476
1. Resurrection of Body Indispensable to Future Life .................................................... 
476
2. Continuity of Identity and Personality Preserved .................................................. 
 
477
3. Resurrection Bodies to Be Vastly Different ................................................ 
 
 
478
4. “Spiritual Bodies” Perfectly Adapted to Resurrection Life ............................. 
 
 
479
IV. Many in Heaven Through Special Resurrection or Translation ............................. 
 
480
1. Enoch, Moses, and Elijah Are Earliest Trophies ........................................................... 
480
2. Glorified Moses and Elijah Appear at Transfiguration ....................... 
 
482
3. Special Resurrection at Christ’s Resurrection ................ 
 
 
483
4. God’s Stipulated Way for Immortalization 
................................................................ 
483
5. General Resurrection and Translation at Christ’s Return ............................. 
 
484
27. Terms and Usages: Final Disposition of the Wicked ....... 
 
 
 
486
I. Multiple Terms Affirm Destruction, Perishing, Extinction ........................................... 
486
1. English Translations Signify Utter “Destruction” ............ 
 
 
 
486
2. Constable’s Considered Supporting Conclusions ....................._................................... 
488
II. 
Greek Terms Affirm “Destroy,” “Consume,” “Perish,” “Obliterate” ............. 
488
1. Leading Greek Terms Defined ................................................. 
 
 
 
 
488
2. Not One in List Implies Eternal Torment ...................................................................... 
490
III. 
Weymouth’s Devastating Charge of Manipulated Meanings ................................... 
491
. IV. Succinct Summary of Over-all Evidence ......... 
 
 
 
494
28. Summing Up the Case for Biblical Conditionalism ......................................................................... 
498
I. Conditionalism Accentuated and Enforced in New Testament ..................................... 
498
1. Complete Harmony Between Testaments 
.............................. 
 
 
498
2. Immortalization Accentuated and Amplified in New Testament ............................ 
499
3. Immortality an Acquisition, Not Inherent Possession .............................................. 
500
4. Contrasting Positions Succinctly Set Forth .............;......................................................... 
500
5. Immortal-Soulism Is Immortality Without a Saviour ...................................... 
 
501
6. Conditionalism Is Positive, Not Negative .............................................................. 
 
 
502
7. More Gained Through Christ Than Lost Through Adam ------------ 
 
503
II. Issues Illuminated Through Significant Series of “Two’s” ............................................ 
504
1. Two Worlds: Temporal and Eternal ..................................... 
 
 
505
2. Two Adams: The Natural, Then the Spiritual ........................................................... 
506
3. Second Adam: Progenitor of Immortal Race ................................................................. 
507
4. Two Births: First Fleshly, Second Spiritual and Eternal .................................... 
508
5. Two Covenants: First of Works, Second of Faith ..... 
 
 
 
 
508
6. Two Classes: Carnal and Perishing, Heavenly and Abiding ..................................... 
509
7. Two Kingdoms: Of God and of Satan ....................... 
 
 
509
8. Two Advents: In the Flesh, and in Power and Glory .................................................. 
510
9. Two Resurrections: To “Life” and to “Damnation” 
— 
510
10. Finality of Separation Occurs at Second Advent .............................. 
 
 
511
11. Two Deaths: First Death for All, Second Only for Wicked ................................... 
512
12. Second Death Follows Second Resurrection .................................... 
 
 
513
13. Second Death for Irreclaimably Wicked Only .......................................................— 
514
14. The Two Ways: Way of Life, and Way of Death ...................................................— 
515
15. Destined Endings of the Two Ways .................................................................................. 
516
III. 
Fundamental Fallacy of Immortal-Soulist Concept ...... 
 
 
517
1. 
Dualism Not Part of Divine Plan of the Ages ...................................... 
 
518
PART III 
(Chapters 29-43)
The Platonic Postulate
29. Greek Philosophy Reaches Summit of Pagan Thinking ............................... 
 
 
 
529
I. 
Greek Thinking Exhausts Uninspired Speculative Reasoning ................................. 
529
1. Imprinted Immortal-Soulism on World Thought ......................................................... 
529
2. First Confined to Poets and Philosophers; Never Generally Held .......................... 
531
3. Early Teaching Portrays Joyless Afterworld ....................... 
 
 
531
4. Five Stages in Philosophical Development ................................................... 
 
 
531
5. This Chapter Based on Recognized Authorities .......................................... 
 
 
533
II. Preliminary Stage—Initiated by Poets, Cults, and Mysteries ............. 
 
534
1. Homer: Persistence of Life Beyond Death ................................................... 
 
 
 
534
2. Transmigration Theory Introduced by Dionysiac Cult ................. 
 
 
536
3. Orphics: Permeated With Pantheism and Reincarnationism ............................... 
537
III. Philosophical Developments—Ionic, Eleatic, and Pythagorean Positions ................. 
540
1. Ionian School: “Air,” “Water,” “Fire,” “Infinite 
................................................ 
540
2. Eleatic School: Philosophy Becomes Pantheistic ....................... 
 
 
 
 
 
 
541
3. Heraclitus: Soul Is Immortal Spark From Eternal Fire ............................................ 
543
4. Pythagoras: Eternity of Soul and Successive Transmigrations .............................. 
545
30. Sophists React Against Conflicting Speculative Schools ____________ 
 
547
I. 
Paralleling Tragic and Lyric Poets Buttress Positions ........ 
 
 
547
1. Tides of Poetic Opinion Ebb and Flow .................................... 
 
 
547
2. Pindar: Soul_ Is 
Image of Eternity” ............................................................................ 
548
II. 
Inevitable Reaction Under Compromisers, Atomists, and Sophists .......................... 
549
1. Empedocles: Doomed by Sin to Transmigrations .................. 
 
 
 
549
2. Anaxagoras: Dualism and Dissolution of the Soul ....................... 
 
 
 
 
 
551
SUBJECT GUIDE 
1107
1108
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
3. Atomists: Conscious Existence Disappears at Death .------------------------------------
4. Sophists: Bring Speculative Philosophy to a Standstill ---------------------------------
5. Such a Survey Justifiable and Essential . —-----------------------------------------------.....
6. Unparalleled Impact of Grecian Philosophy ---------------------------------------------------
31. Plato—Pagan Fountainhead of Innate-Immortality Streams ..................................................
I. 
Interest Centered in Origin, Nature, and Destiny of Soul .......................................
1. Supreme Attempts to Interpret Riddle of Life —.......................................................
2. Impact on Jewish and Christian Thought 
.....—........................................................
3. Background and Essence of Plato’s Immortal-Soulism ...............................................
4. Present Life One Episode in Endless Sequence 
-------------------------------------------
5. Three Main Arguments of Indefeasible Immortality ..................................................
II. 
Complex Involvements of Plato’s Immortality Postulates ................—...................
1. Origin and Nature of the Cosmos ...........-........................................................................
2. Conflicting Recitals of Creation of Man ..........................................................................
3. Epitome of Plato’s Concept of Soul ----------.;------ —....................................................
4. Twofold Souls, Fixed Number, and Transmigration ...................... 
 
-.
5. Weird Aggregation of Platonic Concepts .......................................................................
6. Mythical lale of the Judgment Invoked ........................................................................
7. Dualism Involved in “Two” Eternal Souls .................................. 
—...............
32. Pagan Philosophy’s Basic Arguments for Immortal-Soulism ....................................................
I. 
The “Phaedo”—Peak of Plato’s Teaching on the Soul -------------- 
 
—..................
1. Immortal-Soulism Not Originally Held by Plato .......................................................
2. Distinctive Angles of Three Dialogues ................................................................-..............
3. “The Soul Is the Man” ....... 
 
 
 
-...............................................................
4. Socrates Welcomes Death as “Initiation” to Afterlife ...........................................
5. Death Declared “Final Step” Into “True Being” ......................................................
6. Death: “Separation” of Soul From “Body” ....................................-.........................
7. Popular View: Soul Perishes at Death —............................... 
 
 
 
-............
8. Living Are Born “Only From the Dead”t...................v..................................................
9. Soul Declared “Immortal.” “Indestructible,” “Indissoluble” ..............................
10. Postulate of Soul’s Pre-existence Involved .....-..............................................................
11. Souls Must Have Existed Before Birth ........................ 
 
-..................
12. “Soul” Invisible, Unchangeable; “Body’’ Visible, Changing ................................
13. Souls “Imprisoned” in Succession of Animal Bodies ................................................
14. Soul “Wears Out” Succession of “Many Bodies” ...................................................
15. Soul as Instrumental “Harmony” Argument Dismissed .........................................
16. Soul’s Immortality Connotes Indestructibility —....................................................—
17. Fancied Fate of Incorrigibly Wicked ............................................................-..................
18. Drinks the Hemlock and Faces “Journey” ................................................................
33. Immortal Human Souls Part of World-Soul 
.. ..................................................................
I. 
“Phaedrus”—Mythical Flights of Composite Winged Souls .......................................
1. Crucial Conflicts Between “Parts” of Soul ...................................................................
2. Tripartite Division of Soul Built on “Myth” ...............................................................
3. “Fault” in “Wings” and “Black Steed” . _..............................-................................
4. Soul Not “Derived,” Hence Not “Destructible” ------------------------------------------
5. “Two Souk”: One “Good,” One “Evil” ......................................................................
6. “Self-motion” Is “Essence” of Soul ....................... 
 
........................................
7. “Immortal Soul” Plus “Mortal Body” Equals “Living Being” ...........................
8. Wing Their Way With the Gods ............. 
 
 
-...........-.....
9. Vicissitudes of Disembodied Souk and Wings .........................................................—
10. Time Schedule of Progressive Incarnations -----------------------------------------------------
11. Second Incarnation After Thousand Years -----------------------------------------------------
12. Souk Become Like the Gods They Follow .....................................................................
II. 
“Timaeus”—“Human Soul” Diluted Part of “World-Soul” .................................
1. Plato’s Theory of Universe and Man ...............................................................................
2. “World-Soul” With Stars as “Divine Souk” ...............................................................
3. Dualism: Evil Will Never Cease to Be ...........................................................................
4. “Soul” Is Source of All Motion ...................................................................................—
5. “Intermediate” Existence Between “Being” and “Becoming” ............................
6. Immortal Part of Man Fashioned by Primal Creator 
...................... 
 
-..
7. Successive Births in Scale of Transmigratory Degradation .....................................
8. All Animated Life Included in “Living Beings” ................ 
 
-..................
9. Man’s “Immortal Soul” Declared Housed in Head ....................................................
34. Skeptical Reactions Erupt Against Platonkm ---- 
 
 
 
------------------------------
I. 
Aristotle Abandons Plato’s Postulate of “Pctsonal” Immortality ..........................
1. Questions Plato’s Reasoning on Immortality .................................................................
2. Arktotle in Sharp Contrast With Plato ...........................................................................
3. Soul Is the “Principle of Life” .............................................................. 
 
—.
4. Only Divine Reason Is Immortal ........................................................................................
5. Separated Soul Has No “Independent Existence” ......................................................
6. Tripartite Nature: Body, Soul, and Mind .............................------------------------------
7. Rohde Summarizes Aristotle’s Position .........................................................................
8. Zeller on Pre-existence, Incarnations, and “Personal Immortality” .........—........
9. Westcott Agrees With Zeller, Rohde, and E)raper ......................................................
10. Other Scholars Agree in Foregoing Evaluations .........................................................
11. Centuries-old Conflict Over Arktotle’s Position ..........................................................
II. 
Widespread Opposition by Stoics, Epicureans, and Skeptics ------------------------—
553
554
556
557
558
560
560
560
562
562
563
564
564
564
566
568
569
569
571
573
573
573
574
574
575
575
576
576
577
577
577
578
579
579
580
581
582
582
584
585
585
585
585
586
587
587
588
588
589
589
589
590
591
592
592
593
594
595
595
596
597
598
598
599
599
600
601
602
602
603
604
604
604
605
605
606
607
SUBJECT GUIDE 
1
1. Stoicism: Materialistic Pantheism; Ultimate Loss of Personality ..........................
2. Periodic Reabsorptions Into Deity .....................................................................................
3. The Soul a Fragment of the Divine ....................................................................................
4. Eternal Soul-Essence Loses Personal Individuality ......................................................
5. Hopelessness and Inadequacy of Stoicism ..........................................................................
III. Epicureanism—Gross Materialism and Cessation of Soul ...............................................
1. Death Brings Permanent Cessation of Life ...................................................................
2. World Formations Result of Blind Chance ...................................................................
3. Pleasure Canonized Without Restraint ............................................................................
4. Separated Soul Utterly Ceases ................................................................................................
5. May Reappear as Another Person ....................................................................................
6. Irreconcilable Clashes Between Stoics and Epicureans ................................................
IV. Skeptics—Pyrrho Undermines Basis of Immortal-Soulism .............................................
35. Pathetic Despair Predominant Among Roman Thinkers .............................................................
I. 
Widespread Revolt Against Platonic Positions 
............................................................
1. Barren Comfort of Stoics, Epicureans, and Skeptics ..................................................
2. Manilius: Holds a Fatalistic Pantheism 
.........................................................................
3. Cicero: Vacillates Between Belief and Doubt ...............................................................
II. 
Lucretius—Bleak Materialism and Eternal Death-Sleep ..............................................
1. Book Synopsis Reveals Stark Materialism ........................................................................
2. The Terrifying Issues of “Death” .....................................................................................
3. The “Idle Fancy of Fools” ....................................................................................................
4. “Rarified Wind” Leaves Body at Death ........................................................................
5. Both Spirit and Body Arc Mortal .....................................................................................
6. Ridicules “Immortal Spirits” Seeking Bodies ...............................................................
7. Death: Eternal Sleep With No Awakening ...................................................................
III. 
Skepticism, Pantheism, Emanation, Refusion—All Intermingled ..........................
1. Catullus and Horace: Death, Sleep of Eternal Night ................................................
2. Vergil: Spark of World-Soul Fire Returns to Source .............................................
3. Ovid: Divine Spark Gave Being to Man 
........................................................................
4. Seneca: Uncertainty and Contradiction Mark Witness .............................................
5. Pliny: Pantheistic Universe; Man Part of God .............................................................
6. Epictetus: Refusion of Soul Immediate at Death ......................................................
7. Plutarch: Idea of Annihilation Is Intolerable 
.............................................................
8. Marcus Aurelius: Seul Reabsorbed Into World-Soul ..........................................-.......
9. Tacitus: Believer in Fatalistic Principle .........................................................................
10. 
Conclusion: Both Views Lead to Extinction of Personality ................................
36. Alexandrian Jews Forsake Ancestral Platform .................................................................................
I. 
The Tragedy of the Great Departure ................................................................................
II. 
Character and Significance of Apocryphal and Pseudepigraphal Teachings ......
1. Prophets Followed by Priests and Priestly Struggles ..................................................
2. Apocryphal and Apocalyptic Writings Appear 
.........................................................
3. Pseudepigrapha Invokes Prestige of Former Prophets ................................................
4. Influenced by Thinking of Surrounding Nations ........................................................
5. Apocrypha Excluded From Palestinian Canon ...............................................................
6. Extensive Coverage Justified and Imperative ...............................................................
III. Historical Background of Jewish Captivities and Decline ................................................
1. Subjugation by Babylon, Then by Persia 
........................................................................
2. Syrian Oppression and Maccabean Revolt ...................................................................
3. Rome’s Dominance, Jerusalem’s Destruction, and the Diaspora..............................
IV. Triple Exposure to Immortality Postulate in Three Captivities ....................................
1. Egyptian Immortal-Soulism and Transmigration ........................................................
2. Persian Retributionism and Deadly Dualism ...............................................................
3. Greek Immortalism Based on Philosophical Speculation ...........................................
4. Antiochus Seeks to Replace Jewish Usages With Grecian ........................................
5. Apocryphal Writings Emerge During Maccabean Period .........................................
6. Pagan Dualism Makes Its Impress ...................................................................................
V. 
Alexandria—Intellectual Center of Learned World .......................................................
1. Alexander’s Vision of Greek Intellectual Dominance ..................................................
2. Ptolemies and Seleucids Struggle for Mastery ...............................................................
3. Hebrew Students Inducted Into Greek Learning ........................................................
VI. 
Proc.ep Whereby the Jews Changed Their Anthropology .........................................
1. Shifting From the Ancestral Foundations .......................................................................
2. Presented Religious Views in Philosophical Setting ....................................................
3. Transmitted From Jews to Christians ................................................................................
4. Philo Fuses It Into a System ................................................................................................
VII. 
Source of Revolutionary Concepts of Unseen World ....................................................
1. Revolutionary Concepts Developed in Time of Maccabees ....................................
2. Persian Impact Strengthens Resurrection Concept ......................................................
3. Speculations Crystallize as to Intermediate State ........................................................
4. Climax Reached in Platonic Concepts Under Philo ..................................................
5. Etemal-Hell Concept a Pagan Invention ..........................................................................
6. Successive Exiles Leave Permanent Impress ...................................................................
37. Alien Note Injected Into Inter-Testament Writings .......................................................................
I. 
Pseudo-Sibyllines—“Mortal” Man’s Role in Drama of the Ages ..........................
1. A Reflection of One View of the Soul ............................................................................
2. Portrayed Drama of the Judgment ...............................................................................
109
607
608
608
609
610
610
610
611
612
612
613
613
614
617
617
618
619
619
621
622
623
623
624
624
624
624
625
625
626
626
627
627
628
628
629
629
630
632
632
633
633
637
638
639
639
640
640
640
641
641
643
643
644
644
644
645
646
647
647
647
649
649
649
650
650
651
652
652
653
653
654
655
655
657
659
659
660
1110
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
II. 
Fateful Destiny of All Mankind Portrayed ..............................................................
1. Man Is Mortal; God Is Immortal ..............................................................................
2. Fateful Judgment Day Tries “Mortal” Men —........................................-.......
3. Resurrected After Fire Reduces to Ashes .......................................... 
 
-......
4. Four World Powers and Eschatological End ...................... 
 
-.................
III. Variant Positions Presented by Minor Writers ...........................................—.............
1. “Tobit”: Grave Is Eternal in Annihilation Effects .........................................
2. “Sirach”: No Remembrance in the Grave ............................................................
3. “Judith”—Supports Etemal-Torment Concept 
................................................
IV. Differing Books of Maccabees Exemplify Divergencies ..........................................
1. “2 Maccabees”—Innate Immortality With Prayers for Dead ......................
2. Believes Both in Immortality and in Resurreciton ................................................
3. Prayer to and Sacrifices for the Dead Commended ..............................................
4. Vicarious Suffering Expiates God’s Anger ..............................................................
5. Hope of “Seven Biothers” Based on Resurrection ............................................
38. Innate Immortality Established by Last Century B.C. ...... 
 
-..............
I. “The Book of Jubilees”—Soul Survives: Resurrection Abandoned ....................
1. Innate Immortality Already Firmly Established ...................................-.............
2. Body Rests; Spirit Lives On Independently ..............................................-..........
II. 
“4 Maccabees”—Presses Immortal-Soulism Beyond All Predecessors ...........
1. Men Go to Respective Rewards at Death .............................................................
2. Righteous Immediately Received Into Heaven .................—................................
3. Wicked Punished With Eternal Torture 
...........................................................
III. “The Wisdom of Solomon”—Strange Combination of Glaring Contradictions
1. Curious Admixture of Truth and Error ....................................................................
2. Immortality Is for the Righteous Only .................................................................
3. “Translation” of Some Is Alluded to .......................................................................
4. Destruction of Wicked Is Utter End ........................;...............................................
5. Immortality Is Fruit of Righteousness and Obedience .....................................
IV. Innate Immortality and Noxious Involvements .........................................................
1. Unabashedly Avows Innate Immortality ....................................................................
2. “Wisdom” the Source of Immortality .—................. 
 
-........
3. The Righteous Only Seem to Die ...............................................................................
4. Assumes Pre-existence of the Soul ........................-...................-...........................
39. Majority Adhere to Historic Conditionalism .................._.......................................................
I. 
“Ethiopic Enoch”—Underworld Torments End in Annihilation ..................
1. Somber Scenes of Judgment Day Depicted ................................................-...........
2. Resurrection Expressly Portrayed ....................... 
 
-...........-.................
3. Wicked to Be Utterly Consumed .............................-..................................................
4. Torments of Accursed in Underworld ........................................................................
II. 
“Slavonic Enoch”—Eternal Heaven and Unending Hell for Immortal Souls
1. First Jewish Propounder of “Six-Thousand-Year” Theory .............................
2. Souls Prepared for Eternity Before World’s Formation ...................................
3. Free Will, Death, Punishment, and Reward .......................................................
4. Righteous “Live Eternally” in Paradise ...............................................................
5. “Merciless Tortures” Are “Eternal Inheritance” of Wicked 
v.........
III. “Syriac Baruch”—Conditionalist View; Righteous Sleep Till Resurrection ...
1. Death, Sleep, and Resurrection 
 ...........................................................................
2. Eschatological View of the Last Thin« .................. 
 
-...............................
3. Righteous Dead Sleep Until Messiah’s Return .......................................................
IV. Sets Forth the Conditionalist School of Immortality ....... 
 
-........
1. Epitome of Baruch’s Hope of Judaism 
..................................................................
2. Prays for End of Mortality and Corruption ...........................................................
3. Coming Judgment and Messiah’s Advent ................................................................
4. Resurrection and Assemblage of Righteous Dead ..............................................
5. The Dust Gives Up the Dead .....................................................................................
6. The Punishment of the Wicked ..........................................-.....................................
7. Body Raised Immortal and Incorruptible ...............................................................
8. A 
Terminable Retribution” Indicated ..................................................................
40. “2 Esdras” Maintains the Conditionalist View ......................................................................
I. 
“2 Esdras”—Immortalization of Righteous and Destruction of Wicked
1. History Explained in Light of Original Sin .................................................-........
2. World s End, Final Judgment, and Results ..........................................................
3. “Mortal” World Succeeded by “Immortal” Age .....-.......................................
II. 
Documented Evidence of Ezra’s Conditionalist Position —.............................
1. “Mortal Man” in a “Corruptible World” .............................................................
2. “New Age” and the Intermediate State .................................................................
3. Righteous to Live, While Ungodly Perish .......................-.......................................
4. General Resurrection and Final Judgment ............................................................
5. “Sleepers” in the “Dust” Called Forth ...................................................................
6. The Wicked Are Doomed to Destruction 
........................................................
7. Wicked, as a “Flame,” Ultimately “Extinguished” ...........................................
8. “Treasures of Immortality” Made Manifest to Ezra .........................................
9. Wicked Brought to “Death by Torment” ...............................-.............................
10. Wicked Perish Because of Disobedience ...................................................-............
11. Ezra’s Single Prophecy Deals With Eschatology .........................-......................
12. Time’s Last Hours, and Mortality ...........................................................................
661
661
662
662
663
664
664
664
665
666
667
667
667
668
668
671
671
672
672
673
673
674
674
675
676
676
677
677
677
678
678
679
679
680
681
681
682
682
683
684
685
685
686
686
686
686
687
688
688
689
689
689
690
690
690
691
691
691
692
693
693
694
694
695
696
696
696
697
697
697
697
698
699
699
700
700
701
41. Neoplatonism’s Development—Jewish, Pagan, and Christian .................................................. 
703
I. Alexandria—Seat of Two Paralleling Schools ..................................................................... 
703
1. Greek Philosophy Takes Root in Roman Empire ..................................................... 
703
2. Neoplatonic School Result of Eclectic Choice ............................................................. 
704
3. Alexandria the Center of Conflicting Cultures ............................................................. 
705
4. 
Pagan Neoplatonism Becomes Anti-Christian ............................................................. 
706
II. Pagan Neoplatonism—Greek Philosophy’s Last Stand .................................................... 
707
1. Philo: Precursor, Builds Upon Emanation Theory ...................................................... 
707
2. Lucius: Asserts “World-Soul” Principle ........................................................................ 
708
3. Numenius: Incarnations Punishments for Previous-Life Sins ................................ 
708
4. Ammonius: Lays Foundations for Neoplatonism .................................................... 
709
5. Plotinus: Orientalism. Dualism, Emanation, Reabsorption .................................... 
709
6. Porphyry: Skeptic, Yet Holding to Universal Soul ................................................. 
713
7. Iamblichus: Mythology, Astrology, Necromancy .......................................................... 
713
8. Julian: Suppresses Christianity, Exalts Paganism ...................................................... 
714
9. Proclus: Mystic Union of Soul With Deity ................................................................. 
714
III. 
Paralleling Christian Catechetical School ........................................................................ 
715
1. Alexandrian Center Exerts Powerful Influence .............................................................. 
715
2. Characterized by Speculation and Allegorization ...................................................... 
716
3. Shadows Deepen Into Midnight of Middle Ages .......................................................... 
716
42. Philo Judaeus Fuses Platonic Philosophy With Judaic Doctrine ............................................... 
718
I. Alexandria, Seat of Two Paralleling Schools ..................................................................... 
718
1. On Borderline of Old and New .......................................................................................... 
718
2. Blends Various Views Into Single System ..................................................................... 
719
3. Pre-eminent Champion of Immortal-Soulism ............................................................... 
719
II. Basic Features of Philo’s Teaching Concerning Man ........... 
 
 
720
1. “Revelation” the Distinguishing Principle of Neoplatonism ................................ 
720
2. Philo’s Concept of God Was a Synthesis ...................................................................... 
722
3. Greek and Hebrew Thought Blended by Allegorization ........................................... 
722
4. Strange Conflicting Concepts of Logos ............................................................................ 
723
5. Flash Pictures of Philo’s Immortal-Soulism .............. 
 
 
724
6. Philo’s Responsibility in the Great Departure ............................................................. 
726
III. Scope and Significance of Philo’s Innovation ............ 
 
 
 
727
1. Contrives “Agreement” of Biblical and Philosophical “Truth” ....................... 
727
2. Strikes at Origin and Destiny of Man ............ 
 
728
3. Genesis Narrative of Creation Vitiated ..............................................................-............ 
729
4. Like All Living Creatures Man Has “Animal” Soul .................................................. 
730
5. Man Also Has Immortal “Rational Soul” ..................................................................... 
731
6. Curious Theory of “Unbodied Souls” .................................................-........................... 
732
7. Role of Unbodied Soul-Angels ................................................................-........................... 
733
8. Definition and Function of Rational Soul ........................................................................ 
734
9. Immortality Defined as “Eternal Persistence” ............................................................... 
734
10. Resurrection and Immortality of Soul ............. 
 
735
11. Definitive Meaning of “Fatherland” of Soul ............................................................... 
735
12. Souk Return to Realm of “Unbodied” ............................................................................ 
736
13. Merges Immortality and Resurrection .............................................................................. 
737
14. Endless Punishment of the Wicked ................................................................................... 
737
15. Attested by Scholarly Authorities ....................................................................................... 
739
16. Twin Streams Merge at Alexandria ................................................................................... 
740
43. Dead Sea Scrolls—Permeated Throughout With Conditionalism ........................................... 
741
I. 
Timing and Teaching of Essene Brotherhood ................................................................ 
742
1. Views of the People of the Scrolk ...................................................... 
 
 
 
 
743
2. Like Waldenses of Medieval Times ..................................................................................... 
743
3. Approaching End of Present Age ................................... 
 
 
744
4. Major Empnasis Is on Last Things ..................................... 
 
 
745
5. Prominent Place Given to Angels ..................................................................... 
 
 
745
II. Comprehensive Witness of Scrolls on Man’s Nature and Destiny .............................. 
746
1. Sinners “Perish”; Righteous “Destined” for “Life Eternal” .............................. 
746
2. Righteous Stand in God’s Presence Forever ................................................................. 
746
3. Man Created for Eternity ....................................................................................................... 
747
4. No “Escape” for Wicked in “Final Doom” ................................................................. 
747
III. Fate of Wicked Is Utter Extinction ......................................................................................... 
748
1. Wicked to Be “Found No More,” “Cut off,” Wiped Out ..................................... 
748
2. Burned Until They Be “Destroyed” .............................................................................. 
749
3. Righteous “Never Die”; Wicked “Wither” ................................................................. 
749
4. Angels Brought to Judgment and Hell .................................... 
 
 
750
IV. Eternal Redemption and Utter Extinction ............................................................................ 
750
1. “Dust” Return to “Dust” ....................................................................................................... 
750
2. “Perdition Eternal” vs. “Enduring” for All Time .................................................. 
750
3. Iniquity Cannot Exist in God’s Presence ........................................................................ 
751
4. “Mortal Flesh” Redeemed Forcvermore .......................................................................... 
751
V. 
Wicked Cease and Wrong Disappears Forever ............................................................. 
752
1. Wicked Will Cease to Exist ................................................................................................ 
752
2. Final Clash of Good and Evil ................................................................................................ 
752
3. “Everlasting Redemption” vs. “Annihilation” ............................................................. 
752
4. Wrong Will Disappear Forever ...................................... 
 
 
753
5. Significance of the Great Digression in Jewry ........................................................ 
 
 
753
SUBJECT GUIDE 
1111
1112
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
PART IV 
(Chapters 44-64)
The Theological Trilemma
44. Subapostolic Writers Consistently Conditionalist ......................................-..............................
I. Significance of Testimony of Apostolic Fathers ...................................................................
II. 
Clement of Rome—Neither Innate Immortality Nor Eternal Torment ...............
1. Clement on the Nature and Destiny of Man ...................... 
 
-..............
2. Second Advent and Resurrection .Hope Dominant ...................................................
3. Theme Persists Throughout Genuine Epistle ................................................................
4. Advent Note Even in Spurious Second Epistle .............................................................
5. Significant Silences in Clement’s Witness ........................................................................
6. Immortality a “Gift” of God, to Be Sought For ........—......................................
7. Death Is Cessation of All Life .......................................................................................
8. Wicked to Perish, Be Destroyed, Cease to Exist .......................................................
9. Constable’s Summary of Clement’s Views ........... 
 
 
-.......;..........................
III. 
Ignatius of Antioch—Immortality Solely for Saints; Sinners to Perish ............—
1. To the Ephesians: Immortality Is 4 Gift” of Christ .........-...................................
2. To the Magncsians: Death Is Ceasing to Be ------- 
 
-............
3. To the Trallians: Life Through Christ’s Death ........................................................
4. To the Romans: Resurrection Follows Sleep of Death .............................................
5. Epistle to Polycarp: Sleep, Resurrection, Immortality ...........................................
6. Gift of God Versus Wages of Sin ........................................................-..............................
45. Immortality Bestowed at Advent; Wicked Destroyed ...................................................................
I. 
“Didache”—Follows Standard Pattern on the Two Ways ...........................................
II. 
Eschatological Concept of Early Church in Outline .............-.....................................
1. The Common Theme of Subapostolic Age .....................................................................
2. Involvements of the “Way of Life” ....................................... 
 
-..................
3. “Way of Death” Contrasted With “Eternal Life” Provision ..............................
4. Perils of Coming Apostasy Portrayed ...........................................................................
5. Eschatological Outline of Last Things ............................................................................
III. Barnabas—Contrasts Eternal Life With Eternal Death ...............................................
IV. Coming Destruction of Satan,_ Sinners, and All Evil .......................................................
1. Basic Contrast Between Life and Death ........................................................................
2. Life Through Christ; Death Through Sin ......................................................................
3. Death From Sin Involves Destruction ...........................................................................
4. Two Ways: of “Darkness” and of “Light” ....................................-...........................
5. “Eternal Death”: Synonym for Second Death ..............................................................
6. To "Perish” Is to Exist No More 
.......................................... 
 
-.........
V. 
Eight Lexical and Inescapable Conclusions to Be Deduced —...............................
46. Immortality a Gift; Death Is Utter Destruction ..... 
 
-.............-.............................
I. 
Two Destinations Portrayed in Multiple Forms ---------------------------------------------
1. Eternal Life and Eternal Destruction ......................... 
-.................-....................
2. Past Saints Have “Fallen Asleep” ..........—
............... 
-....................
3. Persecution and Triumph of Church Symbolized ........................................................
4. Righteous Have Life; Wicked No Life ............ 
-................................
5. Wicked Are to Perish at Last 
.................... 
 
 
 
—........ 
 
-..........
6. Righteous in Life to Come; Wicked Consumed .............................................................
7. Wicked Destined to Everlasting Ruin ..............................................................................
8. Punishment Is Proportionate to Sin .—......................................-...................................
9. Incorrigibly Wicked “Die for Ever” .................................................................................
10. 
Conclusions From Notable Silences in Hermas .........................................................
II. 
Polycarp—Resurrection Is Immortality’s^ Sole Gateway ..............................................
III. Conditional Resurrection the Determining Factor ..........................................................
1. Ignatius’ Admonitions Regarding Immortality ...............................................................
2. Resurrection Pivotal in Man’s Future ...................................-......................................
3. Sole Basis of Hope for “Future World” ..........................................................................
4. Strictures on Deniers of the Resurrection ...................................................................
5. Resurrection “Both of Soul and Body” ............................................................................
6. No Allusion to Eternal Torment ........................................................................................
IV. “Epistle of Mathctes to Diognetus”—“Immortal Soul” and “Eternal Fire”
Problems 
.......................................................... 
 
...............................................................
1. Put to Death; Restored Through Resurrection .............................................................
2. The Relationship of Soul and Body 
...............;.........................................................
3. First Use of “Immortal Soul” in Christian Writings ............................................._.
4. Christ Sent as “God” and “Saviour”: Comes Later as Judge ..............................
5. Every Blessing Conferred Through Christ ...................................................................
6. Christ, Incorruptible and Immortal; Man; Corruptible and Mortal .................
7. Eternal Fire; Both a Process and a Termination ........................................................
V. 
Summarizing Conclusion Concerning the Apostolic Fathers .......................................
47. Justin Martyr Augments Subapostolic Conditionalism .................................................................
I. 
Ante-Niccne Period Infiltrated by Platonic Immortal-Soulism ..............................
1. Frontal and Flanking Attacks Develop ...........................................................................
2. Gnosticism Undermines Teaching of Resurrection ....................................................
3. Neoplatonic Mysticism Supplants Literalism .................................................................
4. Release of the Soul From the Body 
.............................................................................
5. Immortal-Soulism Well-nigh Extinguishes Blessed Hope .........................................
757
757
762
763
763
764
764
765
765
766
766
767
767
768
771
771
772
772
773
774
774
775
775
776
776
777
777
778
779
779
780
781
781
782
783
783
785
786
786
786
787
788
788
789
789
790
790
791
791
792
793
793
794
794
794
795
796
797
797
798
798
798
799
800
801
803
803
803
804
805
805
806
6. 
Writers Segregate Themselves Into Three-Way Split ....................................... 
806
II. Justin Martyr—Champions and Amplifies Apostolic Conditionalism ....................... 
807
1. 
Dawn of 
a New Era in Christian History .............................................. 
808
2. Champions the Only True Philosophy ................................................................................. 
809
3. 
Prophetic 
Outline, Second Advent, and Resurrection ............................. 
810
III. Justin’s Primary Definitions and Usage of Basic Terms ................................................ 
811
1. “Immortal Existence” and “Ceasing to Exist” ........................................................... 
811
2. “Destruction” Is Cessation of Existence ........................................................................ 
812
3. 
“Immortality” Means “Not Subject to Death”.............................................. 
 
 
813
IV. Justin’s Definitive Positions on 
Nature and Destiny of Man .......................................... 
813
1. Contended for Literal Resurrection of Dead ............................................................... 
813
2. Souls Not Taken to Heaven at Death ............................................................................ 
814
3. “Man” Composed of Both “Body and Soul” ................................................................ 
814
4. Denies Separate Immortality of the Soul ........................................................................ 
814
5. Teaches Utter Extinction of the Wicked .......................................................................... 
815
48. Justin on Final Annihilation of the Wicked............................................................................................ 
816
I. Apologies Amplify Intent of Everlasting Punishment ...................................................... 
816
1. 
Christ’s Judgment Precedes Punishment of Wicked 
............................................... 
818
2. 
“Eternal Punishment” Not Eternally Conscious 
Suffering ........................... 
818
3. 
Righteous Deemed Worthy of Incorruption .................................................................. 
819
4. 
Each Goes to “Punishment or Salvation” ....................................................................... 
820
5. Prays for “Existing Again in Incorruption” ................................................................... 
820
6. Punishment Is Proportionate to Sin ................................................................................... 
821
7. Question of “Sensation After Death” .............................................................................. 
821
II. Intent of “Aiónion” Fire for Sinners ...................................................................................... 
823
1. Godly Immortalized; Sinners Punished in “Aionion” .......................................... 
 
 
823
2. Extent Not Known to Man; Determined by God ............................................................ 
824
3. Immortality Is Promised; Not Yet Possessed ................................................................. 
825
4. “Aiónion” Punishment Is by Fire ................................................. 
 
 
 
 
825
5. Final Disposition at Second Advent ...................................................................................... 
825
III. Scholars Recognize Justin’s Position on Destruction of Wicked ...................................... 
826
IV. Dialogue—Righteous to Be Immortalized, Wicked Destroyed ......................................... 
827
1. Categorically Denies Innate Immortality and Transmigration ................................. 
827
2. Some “Never Die”; Others Suffer Determinate Punishment ................................... 
828
3. Created Beings May Be “Blotted Out and Cease to Exist” ...................................... 
828
4. Separated From Body, Soul Ceases to Exist ....................................................................... 
829
5. Christ Coming Again to Destroy the Wicked ......................................................... 
 
 
829
V. 
Disposition of Righteous and Wicked .................................................................................... 
830
1. “Some” Punished With Fire; “Others” Receive Immortality .................................. 
830
2. Saints Raised Incorruptible and Immortal ......................................................................... 
830
3. Soul Not “Taken to Heaven” at Death ............................................................................. 
831
4. Wicked Punished as God Deems Proper ............................................................................. 
831
5. “Destruction” Is Equated With “Death”_...................................................................... 
 
832
6. “Torment” Not Identical With “Destruction” ................................................................ 
832
7. The Resurrected Face Contrasting Destinies .................................................................. 
832
49. Tatian, Theophilus, and Melito—Continue Conditionalist Witness .......................................... 
834
I. 
Tatian—The Soul Is “Not Immortal” but “Mortal” ................................................... 
834
II. Tatian’s Confession of Faith on Soul, Here, and Hereafter ................................... 
 
 
835
1. Nonexistent in Death, Existent Again Through Resurrection .................................... 
836
2. Sin and Death Come Through Free Choice ..................................................................... 
836
3. Soul “Not Itself Immortal,” but “Mortal” ....................................................................... 
837
4. Punishment of Demons Versus Punishment of Men ................................................... 
838
5. Pagan Confusion Versus Christian Consistency and Truth ........................................ 
838
6. Place Trust in Scripture; Follow “Father of Immortality” ........................................ 
839
III. Theophilus of Antioch—Man Created a Candidate for Immortality ............................. 
840
IV. Immortality Conferred on Righteous; Destruction Is Fate of Wicked 
..................... 
842
1. Mortality “Put Off”; Immortality “Put On” .................................................................. 
842
2. “Seek” Immortality; Escape “Eternal Punishments” ................................................. 
843
3. Presents Foundational Bases for Faith ................................................................................ 
844
4. Nature and Peril of Unfallen Man in Eden......................................................................... 
844
5. 
Expelled From Eden 
Lest He Remain 
in Sin Forever ................... 
845
6. Returns to Paradise After Resurrection and Immortalization .................................... 
845
7. Immortality a Reward, Not an Original Possession ....................................................... 
846
8. 
Man Chooses Either 
Everlasting Life, 
or Death .................... 
 
 
847
9. 
Righteous to Escape 
Eternal Punishments .................................................... 
847
10. Wicked Consumed in Final Conflagration ............................................... 
 
 
 
 
847
11. God’s Care for the Dead ............................................................ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
848
V. 
Melito of Sardis—Death a Long Sleep; Immortality Regained Through Christ .... 848
1. Eternal Christ Was Creator of Man ...................................................................................... 
849
2. Coming Flood of Fire to Destroy Earth ................................................................................ 
849
3. Christ Died That We Might Be Raised ............................................................. 
 
 
849
4. Sleep of Death a Long Silence .................................................... 
 
 
 
 
850
5. Death and Dissolution From Disobedience ......................................... 
 
 
851
6. Corruption and Destruction From Disobedience ..................................... 
 
 
851
7. Ransoms and Restores From Grave ...................................................... 
 
 
852
50. Gnostic-Manichaean Perversions Compel Restatement of Truth ................................................ 
 
853
I. 
Scope of Gnosticism’s Sinister Heresies ................................................................ 
 
 
854
SUBJECT GUIDE 
1113
1114
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
1. Blighting Characteristics of Gnosticism .....................................
2. Strange Medley of Borrowed Elements .........................................
3. "Demiurge,” "Emanations,” and "Aeons” .............................
4. Mankind Cast Into Three Basic Categories ....................... _.
5. Redemption Conceived of as Liberation From Matter ........
6. Gnostic Dualism Versus Apostolic Monism ..................................
7. Dualism Involves Endless Duration of Wicked ......................—
8. Blasphemously Denied Deity of Christ ..........................................
9. Rejected Old Testament and Maligned "Jehovah” .................
10. 
Like Termites Eroding Basic Structure ........................................
II. 
Underlying Unity Despite Wide Diversity .....................................
1. Valentinus Injects "Intermediate” Waiting Place ........................
2. Fantastic Degrading Notions of Saturninus ..................................
3. Basilidcs’ "Transit of Soul” From Mithraism ............................
4. Marcion Rejects Heart of Christian Faith .....................................
5. Carpocrates Taught a Licentious Ethic ..........................................
6. Gnostic Heresies Force Church to Define Faith ........................
III. Recapitulation of Principal Errors of Gnosticism .............................
IV. Menace of Manichaeism Imperils Post-Nicenc Church .................
1. Origin, Characteristics, and Amazing Spread ...............................
2. Essence of the Manichaean Movement ............................................
3. Christian Aspect Emasculated and Nullified ..................................
4. Fantastic Concepts of Body, Soul, Redemption, Resurrection
5. Based on an Absolute Dualism .........................................................
6. Church Rites, Polity, and Ceremonies ............................................
51. Irenacus of Gaul—Conditionalist Champion on Western Outpost ...........
I. 
Unique Position as Contender for Orthodoxy ..............................
1. Pupil of Conditionalist Polycarp, of Smyrna ................................
2. Lifelong Foe of Contemporary Heresies 
......................................
3. General Survey of Irenaeus’ Definitive Treatise ........................
4. Stands as Bulwark Against Universal Innate Immortality ....
5. Wicked Destined to Cessation of Being .........................................
6. Eschatological Outline Portrays Last Events ...................................
7. Christ Came to Undo Ruin Wrought by Adam ..............................
II. 
Irenaeus’ Basic Doctrinal Positions and Definitions ..................
1. Mortal Man Must Be Immortalized at Resurrection .................
2. To Live Is to "Exist”; to Die, to “Cease to Exist” ..................
3. Eternal Life Is “Bestowed” Eternal Existence ...............................
4. Immortality Restricted to the Righteous .........................................
5. Disobedience Caused Loss of Man’s Immortality .....................
6. Union With Christ Results in Immortality ..................................
7. Future Destinies Determined by Contrasting Resurrections ....
8. Incorruption Means “Incapable of Decay” .....................................
9. Incorruption Now “in Promise.” Not Yet in Possession ...........
10. Resurrection Bodies Arc Totally Distinct .......................................
11. To “Perish” Means Ultimate Nonexistence ..............................
12. Punishment Is "Punitive,” Not "Purgative” ............................
13. Eternal Punishment Is Eternal Loss of Life ...............................
14. Life Dependent on Gratuity of God ..................................................
52. Irenaeus Voices Preponderant Belief of Church ..............................................
I. 
Foremost Second-Century Contender for Conditionalism ...........
1. Grapples With Basic Issues of Controversy ...................................
2. Remarkable Scope of Analysis of Error 
.......................................
II. 
Devastating Exposure of Gnostic Errors and Countering Truth ....
III. Irenaeus’ Personal Creed Then Preponderant Belief of Church ...
1. Irenaeus’ "Creed,” and "Conferred” Immortality ......................
2. Irenaeus’ Statement Never Again True ..........................................
3. Gnosticism Is But Camouflaged Paganism .....................................
4. Made Incorruptible and Immortal at Resurrection .................
5. Eternal Continuance Is “Bestowed” and “Imparted” ...............
6. "Perpetual Duration” Is Unending “Existence” ......................
IV. Multiple Arguments for Conditional Immortality ............................
1. Union With God Prerequisite to Immortality ...............................
2. Must Sense Dependence Upon the Life-givcr ............................
3. Adam Separated From Tree Lest He Be "Immortal Sinner”
4. Believing and Obedient "Honoured With Immortality” .........
5. Gift of Immortality Restricted to Believers .................................
6. Eternal Fire for Satan and His Followers .....................................
7. Immortality Received Only Through Christ ..............................
8. God Who Gives "Earthly’ 
Life, Can Bestow Immortality ...
V. 
Fate of Wicked Is Final Annihilation ...............................................
1. Distinguishes Between Body and Soul .............................................
2. Irenaeus’ Definition of Death 
..........................................................
3. Second Death—Hell, Lake of Fire, Eternal Fire ......................
4. Final Annihilation of the Wicked .....................................................
5. Fruition of All Hopes and Provisions ..............................................
53. Novatian of Rome—Conditionalist Opponent of Cornelius .......................
854
855
857
858
859
859
860
860
861
861
862
863
863
864
865
865
865
866
867
867
869
870
870
871
871
873
873
873
875
875
876
876
877
878
879
879
880
880
880
881
881
882
882
882
883
883
883
884
884
886
886
887
887
888
889
889
891
891
892
892
893
893
893
894
895
896
896
897
897
898
899
899
900
900
900
901
902
I. Novatian—Immortality of God and Mortality of Man .................................................... 
902
II. Arguments Based on Natures of Creator and Creature .................................................. 
904
1. Man’s Disobedience Brought “Mortality” 
................................................................. 
904
2. Expelled From Eden to Forestall “Immortality of Guilt” ..................................... 
905
3. God, Without Beginning or End, Is Consequently “Immortal” .......................... 
905
4. God “Incorruptible” and Therefore “Immortal” ...................................................... 
906
5. Man Made With “Materials of Mortality” ................................................................... 
906
6. Word of Christ “Affords Immortality” for Man .......................................................... 
907
7. Man “Destined” for “Attainment” of Everlasting Life 
......................................... 
907
8. Humanity Died, Not Deity, on the Cross 
............................................................... 
908
III. Arabian Believers in Soul’s Death and Resurrection ......................................................... 
909
1. Conditional Immortality “No New Doctrine” ............. 
 
910
2. Origen Established “Immortal-Soulism” in Alexandria ........ 
 
 
910
IV. “Clementine Homilies”—Fictional Views by “Clement’s” Fabricated Characters 
911
1. Clashing Views and Uncertain Dating .............................................................................. 
912
2. Ranges Over Creation, Life, Death, Punishment ...................................................... 
913
3. Wicked Consumed and Destroyed by Fire ............................................................ 
913
4. Clement Sets Forth “Peter” as Immorlal-Soulist ...................................................... 
914
5. Free Will Explains Presence of Sin and Death ............................................................. 
914
6. Immortalized Through Christ’s Reign ...... .................................................................. 
915
7. Subsequent “Recognitions” Sustain “Homilies” Portrayal .................................. 
915
54. Arnobius of Africa—Last Ante-Nicene Conditionalist Spokesman ........................................... 
917
- 
I. Final Extinction of Incorrigibly Wicked .............................................................................. 
917
1. Meets Paganism on Its Own Ground ................................................................................ 
918
2. Immortality for Righteous; Extinction for Wicked .................................................. 
919
3. Man Created Capable of Either Destiny 
.................................................. 
919
II. Comprehensive Survey of Arnobius’ Arguments and Evidences ................................... 
920
1. Arnobius Presents the Case for Christ ............................................................................ 
920
2. Christ Opened the Gate of Immortality .......................................................................... 
921
3. Searching Questions on Life, Death, and Hereafter .................................................. 
921
4. A Destruction That Leaves Nothing Behind 
................................................-.............. 
922
5. Ultimate “Annihilation” Is Man’s “Real Death” .................................................. 
922
6. Man Not “Immortal” Like God; Only “Creatures” .................................................. 
923
7. Sweeping Survey of Paganism’s Inadequacy ................................................................. 
923
8. Claims and Assumptions of Immortal-Soulists ............................................................. 
924
9. “Enriched With Eternal Life” Through Christ ........................................................... 
924
III. Boon of Immortality Is God’s Gift . .................................................................................... 
925
1. Assured Immortality Versus Blotting Out of Existence ......................................... 
925
2. “Gift” of Immortality Is the “Grant” of God ............................................................. 
925
3. Either Salvation or Destruction Awaits All ................................................................. 
925
4. God Alone Is Immortal and Everlasting .......................................................................... 
926
5. The Great Alternatives Are Placed Before All ............................................................. 
926
6. “Prize of Immortality” Is Before Us ................................................................................. 
926
55. Athenagoras—First Ecclesiastic to Assert Innate Immortality .................................................... 
928
I. 
Athenagoras—Pathfinder on Revolutionary Road ......................................................... 
930
1. Bases Contention on Philosophy, Not Scripture _......................................................... 
931
2. Repeatedly Uses Plato’s “Immortal Soul” Phrasing .................................................. 
932
3. Battery of Supporting Equivalents Employed ............................................................... 
932
II. 
Earlier “Plea”—Devoid of “Innate Immortality” 
Concept .................................. 
933
1. Angels Are Created Beings; Some “Fell” ..................................................................... 
934
2. Dubious Setting of Term “Immortal Soul” ................................................................. 
934
3. Heathen “Gods” Simply Deified Men 
........................................................................ 
935
4. Fate of Sinners Worse Than “Annihilation” ............................................................... 
935
5. Our Bodies to Be Reconstructed at Resurrection ........................................................ 
935
III. The Resurrection—Wholly Committed to Innate-Immortality Thesis ....................... 
936
1. Man Created for “Perpetual Existence” ........................................................................ 
936
2. Dual Premise for Eternal Existence ................................................................................. 
937
3. Gist of the Resurrection Argument ................................................................................... 
937
4. Resurrected Bodies Will Be Incorruptible .................................................................. 
938
5. Destined for “Perpetual Duration,” Not Final Extinction .................................... 
939
6. Unceasing Existence Forestalls Ultimate Annihilation ........................................... 
939
7. Pledged Continuance of “Being in Immortality” ...................................................... 
939
8. Man: An Immortal Soul in a Perishable Body 
..................................................... 
940
9. Resurrection Imperative So Body-Soul May Continue Forever .......................... 
940
10. Continuity of Being Interrupted by Death 
.............................................................. 
941
11. “Sleep” of Death Involves Blackout of Consciousness ............................................. 
941
12. Reunion of Body and Soul Necessary for Recompense ........................................... 
941
13. Man’s Punishment Not Assigned to Soul Alone _........................................................ 
942
14. Reconstitution of Body and Soul Into Same Being .............................................. 
943
15. Those Failing God’s Objective Are Punished Proportionately .............................. 
943
16. Denies Ultimate Annihilation for the Wicked ............................................................. 
943
17. Disregards and Repudiates the Biblical “Perish” ...................................................... 
944
IV. Logical Demands of Athenagoras’ Reasoning ...................................................................... 
944
56. Tertullian—Projector of Eternal-Torment Corollary ................................................................... 
947
I. 
Formulation of the Dogma of Endless Torment ........................................................... 
948
1. Tertullian’s Espousal of Montanism ................................................................................. 
949
2. First to Formulate Dogma of Endless Torment ........................................................ 
950
SUBJECT GUIDE 
1115
1116
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
3. Persecution Forms Background of Retributive Torment .........................................
4. Influenced by Stoic “Philosophy” While Rejecting Its “Theosophy” 
.......
5. Characteristics of His Diversified Writings .................................................................
6. Still Held to Major Prophetic Outline __________________________________
II. 
Threefold Basis of “Eternal Life in Hell” Postulate _______________________
1. Three Axioms Underlying Eternal-Torment Postulate .........................................
2. Invokes Plato in Affirming Immortal-Soulism ____________________________
3. Rejects Plato’s Pre-existence Contention .........................................................................
4. Definitive Declaration of Soul’s Origin _____________________________________
5. Tertullian’s Definition of the Soul _________________________________________
6. Conglomeration Leads Into Hopeless Perplexity- ......................................................
7. Drew Supplemental Support From Montanist “Visions” .........................................
57. Tertullian Holds Wicked Ever B urn but Never Consume ...................................................
I. 
Mystic Everlasting Fire That Never Consumes Victims ...........................................
1. Nonconsuming Fire Causes Endless Torture ___________________________
2. Exults Over Eternal Torment of Persecutors .............................................................
3. Eternity of Sin Involved in Monstrous Concept ...........................................................
II. 
Alters Basic Scripture Intent to Sustain “Torment” Theory ................................
1. “Incorruption 
Misapplied to Wicked in Hell ..................................... 
 
_...
2. “Immortality” Wrongly Applied to Wicked ................................................................
3. “Destruction’s Plain Intent 
Set Aside .........................................................................
4. “Immortal Souls” Cannot Perish in Hell ....................................................................
5. “Body” Destined for “Eternal Killing” in Hell ......................................................
6. Resurrection of Flesh Is for “Eternal Killing” ........................................................
7. Perverts Meaning of “Death” and “Dying” ...........................................................
8. Forced to Give Improper Turn to Terminology ....................................................
9. Employs Devious Artifice of Distortion ..........................................................................
58. Universal Restoration Substituted for Eternal Torment .........................................................
1. Significance of the Alexandrian School ..........................................................................
2. Characteristics of New Alexandrian School ................................................................
3. Hour of Peril for Expanding Church ..........................................................................
4. Grave Involvements of Origenism .......................................................................................
5. Roseate Expectations, but Gross Perversions _______________________________
6. The Progressive Path of Departure ...................................................................................
7. Platonic Influence Supersedes That of Apostles .......................................................
8. Baleful Effects of Accepting Platonism ..........................................................................
9. Origenism Banned Under Justinian .............................................................................
59. Rise and Spread of Neoplatonic Restorationism ............................................................................
I. 
Clement of Alexandria—Reverses Position in Transition Hour .............................
1. Develops Introduction to Philosophic Christianity .....................................................
2. Meeting Point of Two Converging Lines ....................................................................
3. Swings to Immortal-Soulism in Latest Treatise ........................................................
II. 
Earlier Declarations Couched in Conditionalist Terms ..........................................
1. Immortality a Reward to Be Received ..............................................................................
2. “True” and “Sure” Immortality Is “Gift of Eternal Life” ..............................
3. God Is Giver of Everything Eternal: Otherwise Death ...........................................
4. Immortality Came Not Through Law, but Through Christ ................................
5. Turned Away From Sole Source of Life .....................................................................
6. Destruction Is Penalty for Disobedience .........................................................................
7. Immortality Set Over Against Destruction .................................................................
8. Everlasting Habitations; Immortality; Eternal Mansions .....................................
9. Angels Conduct Redeemed to Eternal Life ..................................................................
10. 
The Soul Is “Not Naturally Immortal” .....................................................................
III. Exhortation to the Heathen Still Stresses Life Only in Christ .......................................
1. Christ Offers “Immortality”; Sin Brings “Destruction” .........................................
2. Christ Brings Light of Eternal Life ................................................................................
3. Eternal Life Versus Eternal Death .................................................................................
4. Perfect “Boon of Immortality” Bestowed .......................................................................
5. Christ Offers to Conduct Us to Immortality ...............................................................
IV. The Instructor Intertwines Our Immortality With Christ ............................................
1. Christ’s Commands Are “Paths to Immortality” ........................................................
2. Are to Put On Immortality of Christ .............................................................................
3. Present Chastisement Deters From Everlasting Death ..................................................
4. To Put On Robe of Immortality .....................................................................................
V. 
Switches in Stromata to Bald Immortal-Soulism ____________________________
1. Exempts Platonism From Paul’s Strictures________________________________
2. Old Testament Law Leads to Immortality ..................................................................
3. Knowledge of God Communicates Immortality .............................................................
4. Immortality of Soul Openly Avowed ..............................................................................
5. All Punishment Regarded Restorative 
......................................................................
6. Purged by the “Fire of Wisdom” ...................................................................................
7. Christ Preaching the Gospel in Hades ..... —........—................................................
8. Dubious Fragments Assert Soul’s Immortality ............................................................
60. Origen—Projector of Universal-Restoration Theory ........... 
 
 
 
-...............
1. Became Head of Catechetical School at Eighteen .....................................................
2. Finally Deposed and Deprived of Office -----------------------------------------------------
I. 
Depreciates Literalism; Exalts Mystical and Spiritual ______________________
951
952
952
953
954
954
954
955
955
956
956
957
959
959
959
960
961
962
962
963
964
964
965
966
966
967
968
969
969
971
971
972
973
974
975
975
976
978
978
979
980
981
982
982
982
983
983
984
984
985
985
986
986
986
986
987
988
988
988
989
989
989
989
990
991
991
992
992
992
993
994
994
994
996
9%
998
998
1. Master Mind of Mystjcal Interpretation ................................................ 
 
 
 
 
998
2. Allegorization Determined Entire Exegesis ................................................... 
 
 
999
3. Origen’s Three “Senses” to Scripture ......................................................... 
 
 
999
II. Universal Restorationism Origen’s Answer to Tertullian’s Eternal Torment ...... 
1000
1. Distorts an Obvious Bible Truth ....................................................................................... 
1000
2. Plato the Sponsor of Both Views ................. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1001
3. Life Falsely Promised 
Instead of Death ................................................................ 1001
4. Two Equally Injurious Perversions ................................................................................. 
1002
5. Avoids One Pitfall Only to Fall Into Another ............................................................. 
1003
III. Pivotal Christian Doctrines Assailed by Origen .............................................................. 
1004
1. Scriptures Robbed of Authoritative Force .......................................... 
 
 
1004
2. Swept Apostolic Faith Into Discard ................................................................................. 
1005
3. Pre-existence Coupled to Restorationism ..................................... 
 
 
1005
4. Impinged Vaunted Freedom of Will .............................................................................. 
1005
5. Relationships to the Empire Revolutionized 
............................................................. 
1006
IV. Revolutionary Concepts of Life, Death, and Destiny ...................................................... 
1006
1. Strange Contentions in Anthropology ............................................................ 
 
 
1006
2. Adam’s Fall Made Allegorical ....................................................................... 
 
_............ 
1007
3. Revolutionary Concepts of Eschatology ........ 
 
 
1007
4. Mystical Interpretation Invoked to Evade Literalism ................................ 
 
 
1007
V. Documented Definitions and Usages .......................................................................................... 
1008
1. Men Are Souls in Bodies ...................................................................................................... 
1008
2. Soul Is Immaterial, Invisible, Immortal ......................................................................... 
1008
3. Death Neither Perishing Nor Destruction ................................................................... 
1009
4. “Destruction” Is Not Ceasing to Be ................................................................................. 
1009
5. “Fire” Consumes Fuel of Sin ............................................................................................ 
1010
6. “Consuming Fire” Simply Refines ..................................................................................... 
1010
7. Earth’s “Change” Is Not Annihilation ............................................................................ 
1010
8. “World’s End” Is Its Subjugation .................................................................................. 
1010
9. “Fall” Counteracted in Future Ages .............................................................................. 
1011
61. Origen’s Multiple Departures From the Faith .............................................................................. 
1012
I. Adopted Heathen Transmigration Fallacy .................. 
 
 
1012
1. Discards God’s Solution to Sin Problem .......................................................................... 
1012
2. Taught Successive Transmigrations of the Soul 
.................................................. 
1013
3. Biblical Terms Explained Away by Allegorizing 
.................................................. 
1014
II. Allegorizing Substituted for Literalism ................................................................................... 
1015
1. Literalism of Creation Narrative Swept Aside ............................................................. 
1015
2. Denies Literal Truth of Biblical Records ...................................................................... 
1016
III. Spiritualizes Second Advent, End of World, and Millennium ..................................... 
1017
1. Second Advent Mysticized Into “Daily 
Coming ................................................... 
1017
2. “End of World” Localized and Individualized ............................................................. 
1018
3. Substitutes “Gradual Advance” for Cataclysmic End ................................................ 
1019
4. Denied Millennium Because Incompatible With His Scheme ................................ 
1019
5. Prophecies Deprived of All Force ....................................................................................... 
1020
IV. Holds Every Immortal Soul to Be Restored ...................................................................... 
1020
1. Soul Incapable of Death or Destruction .................................... 
 
 
1020
2. Every Rational Being to Be Restored ............................................................................ 
1021
3. Immortal Sinners “Conducted” to Salvation Slowly ............................................... 
1021
4. Weird Conclusions to Which Origenism Leads 
......................................... 
 
 
1022
V. 
Recapitulation: Twin Fallacies of Tertullian and Origen ....................................... 
1023
1. Utter Eradication of Evil Promised .......................................... 
 
 
 
 
1023
2. Fallacious Threats and Delusive Promises .................. 
 
 
1025
VI. Subsequent Churchmen Are Divided Between the Conflicting Schools ................. 
1026
1. Churchmen Who Supported Tertullian’s Eternal-Tormentism ............ 
 
1027
2. Ecclesiastics Who Favored Origen’s Universal Restorationism ............. 
 
 
1027
3. Conditionalism Gradually Forced Into Eclipse .................................... 
 
 
1028
62. Lactantius—Emitting Light Amid Encroaching Darkness ................ 
 
 
1029
1. Revolution in Roman Life and Thought ...................................... 
 
 
1029
2. Staying the Tide of Drift and Error ........................................................... 
 
 
1029
I. 
Historical Setting of Interest in Man’s Nature and Destiny .............................. 
 
1030
1. Scholarship Recognized by Two Emperors ............................. 
 
 
1030
2. First Attempt at Systematic Christian Theology ......................................................... 
1031
3. Comprehensive Character of Lactantius’ “Institutes” ................................................ 
1032
4. Course of Empire Portrayed in Prophecy 
................................................................... 
1033
5. Eschatological Concept Unveils Man s Destiny ....................... 
 
 
1033
6. Dubious Passages and Known Emendations ................................................... 
 
1033
II. Immortality—Lost Through Sin; Restored Through Christ ......................................... 
1034
1. God Is Eternal; Man’s Immortality Conditional ....................... 
 
 
1034
2. Nature of “First” and “Second” Deaths ...................................................................... 
1035
3. Adam Expelled From Eden and Immortality ........................................................... 
1035
4. Immortality Is “Reward” for Righteousness .................................................................... 
1036
5. Confusion and Ignorance Among Philosophers ............................................................. 
1036
6. Fallacious Concepts of Cicero ________________ 
 
 
1037
III. Christ the Source of Our Immortality ........................................................ 
 
 
1037
1. Christ Came to “Restore” Righteous to Life _______ 
 
 
 
1037
2. Took Our Mortality to Restore Immortality .............................. 
 
1038
3. Immortality Is Offered to All .................................................................. 
 
1039
SUBJECT GUIDE 
1117
1118
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
4. 
Contrasting Ends of the Two Ways .......... 
 
-..........
IV. 
Immortality Not Inherent, but a Gift ............................................
1. Provision for Attaining Immortality ____________________
2. So Placed as to Attain Immortality .................................................
3. Immortality Not a Consequence of Nature ________________
4. God Alone Can Confer Immortality ----------------------------------
5. Immortality Is Received as Reward ...................................-.......
V. 
Conditionalism Placed in Eschatological Setting ......................
1. False Philosophical Views on Immortality ..................................
2. Philosophical Confusion Regarding Immortality ..................
3. Righteousness Alone “Procures” Eternal Life ............................
4. Beginning and End of the World -------------------------------------
5. Formation of Man and Results of Fall .....................................
VI. 
Immortality’s Place in the Prophetic Outline 
........................
1. Rome’s Division, Antichrist, and Coming Climax .................
2. Second Advent and the Resurrection ..........................................
3. Paralleling but Distorted Concepts of Poets ..............................
4. Satan Bound, City; Planted. Wicked Destroyed .....................
5. Lactantius’ Conditionalism Presented to Emperor .................
VII. 
Pitfalls Lurk in Abbreviated “Epitome” ....................................
1. Contains Certain “Dubious Passages” That Mislead ..............
2. Lactantius Recognizes Hazard of Abridgment .........................
3. Preponderant View Is Conditionalist ...........................................
4. Presented With “Garment of Immortality” ................................
VIII. 
Significance of Lactantius’ Conditionalist Witness ......................
63. Athanasius—Then Conditionalism Into Eclipse 
........................................
I. Shifting Emphasis of the Three Schools Concerning the Soul
1. Historic Alignments in Ante-Nicene Period ................................
2. Post-Nicene Shifting of Greatest Import ..................................
3. Ultimate Ascendance of Eternal-Torment School ...................
II. 
The Athanasius-Arius Controversy and the Nicene Creed ....
1. Absolute Deity of Christ at Stake ....................................................
2. The Arian View Summed Up ........................................................
3. The Athanasian View Epitomized _________________________
4. The Scmi-Arian or Eusebian Concept .........................................
5. Tide of Battle Ends in Athanasian Victory 
..........................
III. Athanasius—Powerful Defender of Deity of Christ .....................
1. The Center of the Theological World .........................................
2. Four Times Banished in Stormy Career ..._.....................................
3. Championed Certain Aspects of Conditionalism ..................
IV. “The Incarnation” in Relation to Man’s Sin and Redemption
1. Classic Portrayal of Restoration of Man’s Life 
.....................
2. Direct Quotations Not Employed With Athanasius ...............
3. Man Not Created With Perverse Tendencies ..............................
4. Creator Must Both Renew and Restore .......................................
5. Became Man to Restore Life to Us ...............................................
6. Purpose of Public Death and Three Days in Tomb ...............
7. Prophecies Establish Facts of Incarnation ....................................
8. Answers Scoffing of Greeks Regarding Incarnation ...............
9. So Live as to Eat of Tree of Life .....................................................
64. Augustine—Immortal-Soulism’s Hour of Supremacy .................................
I. Projects Fallacious Philosophy of History ....................._......................
1. “Infallible” System of Doctrine Based on Authority ...............
2. Basic Fallacies of Augustinian Concepts ......................................
3. Already Committed to Immortal-Soulism Before Conversion
II. 
Augustine Sets Immortal-Soulist Pattern for Thousand Years ..
1. Projects New Philosophy of History ................................................
2. Everything That Conflicts Interpreted Spiritually ....................
3. Revolutionary Principles of Interpretation ................................
III. 
The Fatal Fallacy of Majority “Orthodoxy” ...............................
1. Biblical Truth Is Recognized in Time ...........................................
2. Orthodoxy Determined by Written Word ................................
3. Truth Crushed to Earth Springs Forth Again ............................
1039
1040
1040
1040
1041
1041
1042
1043
1043
1044
1045
1046
1046
1047
1047
1047
1048
1049
1049
1050
1050
1050
1051
1051
1052
1053
1054
1054
1054
1055
1056
1057
1058
1058
1059
1060
1061
1061
1061
1063
1063
1063
1064
1065
1065
1066
1066
1067
1067
1068
1070
1070
1070
1071
1072
1073
1073
1074
1075
1076
1076
1077
1078
Index of Personal Names
(The main discussion of the different commentators is indicated by figures in italics.)
Abraham, 674, 733, 735, 737, 831 
Aeschylus, 532, 547 
Agrippa, 642 
Agrippa II, 742 
Ahriman, 860 
Alexander, 644 
Alexander, Bishop, 1061 
Alexander the Great, 599, 641 
Alexandria, 903, 947 
Alger, William R., 549 
Ambrose, 640, 759. 977. 1055 
Ambrose of Milan, 1026, 1027 
Ammonius, 709 
Ammon ¡us Saccas, 702 
Anaxagoras, 532, 551. 552. 554, 623 
Anaximander, 532, 540, 541 
Antiochus, 645, 669
Antiochus Epiphanes, 640, 644, 666, 668, 670
Antiochus (IV) Epiphanes, 641, 648
Antipater, 642
Antonius Melissa. 994
Antoninus Pius, Ö08. 809
Aquinas, Thomas, 1074
Aristotle. 523, 529, 532. 533. 556, 558, 561, 
599-607, 617, 647, 713, 719, 723, 739, 838 
Aristotelian, 834 
Arius. 1053, 1059. 1060, 1062 
Arnobius, 523, 758, 807, 846, 917-927, 1030, 
1079
Arnobius of Sicca, 803. 1054 
Athanasius. 639, 759, 774. 1053-1069 
Athenagoras, 758, 841, 891, 929-946, 979, 1052, 
1069
Augustine, 561, 640, 759. 765, 766, 801, 868, 
879. 883. 943, 949, 952, 971, 974, 1027, 1028, 
1052, 1053, 1055, 1070-1076 
Augustine of Hippo, 528, 930, 947 
Augustus, Emperor, 642,
Aurelius, 873 
Autolycus, 841, 842, 843 
Ballou, 826
Barnabas, 769. 775, 776, 778-784
Barnabas of Alexandria, 758
Baruch, 691. 692
Baruch, Syriac, 687-689
Basil, 976, 1055
Basil of Caesarea, 759, 1028
Basilidcs. 862 , 864, 891
Beecher, Dr. Edward, 773, 783, 826, 828, 833
Beliah, 743
Ben Sira, 664. 665
Bonner, Dr. Campbell, 850
Brown, 778
Caesar. 625 
Caius Manilius, 619 
Caligula, 719 
Carpocrates, 862, 865, 891 
Cato. 616
Catullus, 616. 621, 625 
Cebcs, 567, 577, 578, 581, 582 
Celsus 803, 1003 
Cerdo, 891
Charles. Dr. R. H., 533, 534, 536, 549, 552, 
563, 564, 573. 671, 672, 673, 675, 678. 679, 
685 , 687 , 688 , 690, 695, 726, 735 , 739 
Chillingworth, William, 1076 
Christ. 183-302 
Chrysippus, 532, 1048 
Chrysostom, 759, 977, 1026, 1027, 1055
Cicero, 561, 616, 619, 620, 625, 626, 644, 704, 
1037, 1048.
Claudius, Emperor, 642 
Cleanthes, 532
Clement, 702, 715, 716, 726, 740, 757, 769, 778, 
848, 911-916, 996. 997 
Clement of Alexandria, 958, 978-995 
Clement of Rome, 758, 762-767 
Clement, Titus Flavius, 981 
Colet, John, 
561
Constable, Anglican Prebendary, 767, 822 
Constable, Canon Henry, 765, 801, 802, 823, 
884. 961, 1027 
Constantine, 909, 1032, 1049 
Copernicus. 653 
Cornelius, 903, 909 
Cornelius Tacitus, Publius, 629 
Cornford, Francis M., 597 
Coxe, A. Cleveland, 875, 1034, 1050 
Crombie, 1013 
Cynics, 808
Cyprian, 758, 947, 949, 977, 1026, 1027, 1054 
Cyril of Jerusalem, 639 
Cyrus, 641 
Decius, 998
Democritus, 532, 533, 610, 1044 
Dicaearchus, 1044 
Diderot, 555 
Diocletian, 917, 1031
Diodorus of Tarsus, 759, 976, 1027, 1028, 1055 
Diognetus, 796 
Dionysiac, 532
Dionysius, 716, 759, 976, 1055, 1057 
Dollinger, Dr., 602, 603, 606, 621 
Draper, John, 533, 534, 554, 555, 600, 605 
Drummond, James, 739 
Duns Scotus, 1074 
Elijah. 697. 737
Empedocles. 532 , 549, 550, 551, 554, 623 , 821
Encratites, 891
Ennius, 623
Enoch, 697, 766, 915
Enslin, 886
Epictetus, 616, 627 , 628
Epicurus, 532 , 610-613 , 622, 838, 924, 1036, 
1044 
Epiphanius, 640 
Er, 570, 571 
Eudemus. 603 
Euodius, 840 
Euripides, 532, 548
Eusebius, 715 , 758 . 759, 762 , 774, 791, 795.
808, 841, 848, 875, 909, 974, 998, 1027, 1028 
Ezra, 641, 696-702 
Fabian, 909
Fairbairn, A. M., 533-535 . 539, 540. 544, 549 
Farrar, F. W. 670, 683, 819, 901, 920 
Fisher, John, 561 
Freer, Frederick A., 844 
Gabriel. 654
Gaius Plinius Secundus, 627 
Gasler, T. H., 745 
Gciseler, 826 
German Hellenist, 723 
Gnostics, 804 
Gorgias, 532, 555 
Grabe. 899 
Gregory, 1055
Gregory of Nazianzus, 639, 640 
Gregory of Nyssa, 759, 977, 1028
1119
1120
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
Gregory of Thaumaturgus, 758, 976, 1027, 1028 
Grotto. 555
Grube, G. M., 533, 537 
Hagar, 733 
Hagenbach, 826 
Harnack, 980 
Helmbold, W. C., 586 
Heraclas, 702, 716
Heraclitus, 532 . 533, 541, 543, 544, 550, 623, 
994
Hernias, 757, 758, 785-791 
Herod, 642 
Herodotus, 539, 764
Hesiod. 523, 531, 532, 535-537, 541, 561 
Hierocles, 1031
Hippolytus, 758, 883, 998, 1027, 1054 
Hitchcock, 778
Homer, 523, 531, 532, 534, 535, 537, 541, 561, 
582
Horace, 616, 621, 625, 628 
Hobbs, Thomas, 561 
Hudson, Charles F., 798, 919
Iamblichus, 702, 713 
Ignatius of Antioch, 758 
Irenaeus, 523, 757-759, 767-775, 791, 807, 846, 
917, 919, 1(578 
Irenaeus of Gaul, 855 , 873-901 
Irenaeus of Lyons, 803 
Isaac, 674, 733, 831
i
acob, 674, 733, 737, 831 
amblicus, 713 
ames, 866
ason of Cyrene, 666, 667 
erome of Antioch, 639. 640, 759, 778, 841, 
949. 977, 1020, 1026, 1027, 1030, 1055 
Jesus Ben-Sira, 664 
,'ewry, 726, 753 
Johannine. 796 
John, 385-418, 791 
Jonah, 894
Josephus, 642, 658, 673, 718, 742-744
,'owett, Benjamin, 561, 564, 566, 594
Judas Maccabaeus, 640, 641, 645, 666, 668, 673
Julian, 702, 714
, ulius Africanus, 639
Julius Caesar, 616
Justin Martyr 
523, 559, 758, 796, 803-840, 
844. 919, 979, 1078 
Justinian, 559, 616, 715 
Juvenal, 616, 628
Kingsley, Charles, 561 
Kitto, 826
Kennedy, H. A. A., 739 
Lactantius, 523, 759, 846, 918, 1029-1052, 1054, 
1079
Laidlaw, Dr. John, 805 
Lamblichus, 532, 616 
Latham, Ronald E., 622 
Lecuippus, 532, 553, 554 
Leonides, 996 
Lcsbia, 621
Levinthal, Rabbi Israel, 653, 654 
Littmann, 681 
Lombard, Peter, 1074 
Lucian, 616, 629 
Lucius Apuleius, 629, 702, 708 
Lucretius, 616, 619, 622-625, 628 
Luther, 1076
McCracken, Dr. George R., 918, 920 
Manes, 867-869. 952 
Manilius, 616, 619 
Maranus, 828
Marcion, 809, 861, 862, 865, 891 
Marcus Antoninus, 791
Marcus Aurelius, 616, 627, 629, 796-800, 808, 
809, 849, 930
Mary, 832 
Massuet, 899 
Mathetes, 797, 798 
Maurice, F. D., 561 
Melito, 848-852 
Micah. 832 
Michael, 654 
Minos, 818
Minucius Felix, 758, 947, 1026, 1027
Mithras, 870
Montamsm, 835
More, Thomas, 561
Morrow 594
Moses, 708, 723, 733, 734, 743, 780, 781, 839
Neander, 909-911
Nebuchadnezzar, 641, 652
Nehemiah, 641
Nemesius, 759, 846
Nicolaitanes, 891
Nicomedia, 903
Novatian of Rome, 523, 758, 803, 807, 902-909 
1033, 1054 
Numenius, 702, 708, 709 
Origen, 528, 561, 564, 592, 606, 702, 706, 709,
715, 716. 726, 740, 758, 759, 762, 778, 805, 
828, 910, 911, 943, 947. 948. 971, 972, 974, 
975 , 979, 996-1028, 1052, 1054, 1055, 1058
Orimuzd, 860
Orpheus of Thrace, 537
Ovid, 616. 621. 626
Ovidius Naso, Publius, 626
Pamphilus of Caesarea, 758, 909, 976, 998, 1028
Pantaenus, 702, 715, 9/9
Papias, 757
Papyrus, Bodmer XIII, 850 
Parmenides. 532, 541, 542 
Paul, 303-367, 778, 917, 945, 963 
Pauline, 7%
Persius, 628
Petavel. Emmanuel, 605, 798, 802, 1027, 1028 
Peter, 368-385, 866, 915, 916, 963 
Pettingell. J. H., 1027, 1028 
Philo, 523, 528, 530, 533, 564, 642 , 651, 655,
658 , 659, 673 , 678 , 702 , 703 , 706, 
709, 716,
718-740, 742, 753 , 856, 970, 1063 
Pherecydes, 532, 838 
Pierius, 716, 758, 1028, 1054 
Pilate. Pontius, 642 
Pindar. 532, 548, 549
Plato, 523, 528, 529. 532-534. 546. 
555-576,
583, 585, 587-589, 591-596, 598, 599, 600-602, 
605, 644, 647, 704. 706, 708, 710, 713, 715,
716, 719, 720, 723, 729, 73Ö-734, 737, 738, 
740, 808, 812, 818, 821, 822, 838, 844, 848,
921, 922 , 92I>, 930, 933-935, 944. 
953-956,
970, 975. 978, 991, 993. 1001, 1003, 1014, 
1036, 1040, 1043, 1044. 1046, 1048, 1069
Pliny the Elder. 616, 621, 627, 628, 742, 764 
Plotinus, 532, 533, 616, 702, 706, 709, 710, 712, 
713, 875 
Plutarch, 532. 561, 616, 628 
Polycarp of Smyrna, 757, 758, 769, 774, 791- 
796, 841, 873, 874 
Pompey, 642 
Preller, 533 
Proclus, 702, 714, 715
Pythagoras, 529, 532, 533, 544-546, 550, 551, 
555, 556, 821. 838, 921, 1048 
Ptolemy Philadelphus, 649 
Pyrrho of Elis, 532, 614 
Porphyry, 616, 702, 713, 1031 
Raphael, 654 
Remiel, 654 
Rhadamanthus, 818 
Riddle, 913
Ritter, Prof. Heinrich, 533, 606, 607 
Robertson, Bishop Archibald, 1064
INDEX OF PERSONAL NAMES 
1121
Rogers, A. K., 717
Rohde, Erwin, 533, 538, 544, 549, 552, 554, 
555, 603-605, 609 
Rothe, 826 
Rousseau, 555 
Running, Dr. Leona, 742 
Salmond, Dr. Stewart D. F., 535, 606, 617, 
698, 717. 920 
Saraqael, 654 
Satan (Mastema), 672 
Satuminus, 862, 863, 891 
Saul of Tarsus. 917 
Schaff, Dr. Philip, 778, 877, 901 
Scurriolus, 1031 
Seleucus IV, Syrian king, 666 
Seneca. 616, 621, 627 
Septimius Severus, 979, 9%
Simmias, 567, 578, 581 
Simon bar-Cochcba, 643 
Simon Magus, 912, 913, 915 
Socrates, 529, 532, 556, 558, 559, 560, 561 571 
574-584, 587, 821 
*
Solomon, 640 
Stieren, 899
Stoics, 561, 607, 613, 614, 616, 619
Tacitus, 616, 629 
Tartarus, 654
Tatian of Assyria, 758, 803, 807, 834, 891, 919 
Tatianists, 835
Tertullian, 528, 
646, 758, 759, 762, 765, 766,
791, 801. 835 
876, 879, 883, 891, 910, 929,
943. 947-968, 
971, 974, 975, 981, 994, 996
1001-1004. 1024-1028, 1052, 1054, 1055, 1057, 
1069, 1071
Thales, 532, 540 
Thaumaturgus, 1054
Theodore of Mopsuestia, 759, 1027, 1028, 1055 
Theodosius II, 713
Theognostus, 716, 758, 1027, 1028, 1054 
Theophilus of Antioch, 758, 803, 807, 840-848, 
919 998. 1033 
Theophorus, 767 
Thrasyllus of Mendes, 708 
Titus, 642
Titus of Bostia, 759, 976, 1028 
Trajan, 768 
Trismegistus, 1044 
Tyndale, 1076 
Trypho, 809, 810, 831
Uriel, 654
Valentinus. 862, 863, 888 
Vergil, 616, 621, 626 
Voltaire, 555
Westcott, B. F., 605 
Wolfson, H. A., 719, 732, 734, 736 
Xenophanes, 532, 541, 542 
Zeitlin, Rabbi S., 652
Zeller, Dr. Eduard, 533 , 539, 542 , 544, 549, 
593, 594. 604, 605 , 610 
Zeno. 529. 541, 613, 647 
Zeno of Citium. 532. 533, 607 
Zeno of Elea, 532, 542 
Zephyrinus, 949 
Zerubbabel, 640, 641 
Zoroaster, 868
Scripture Index
Genesis
1:1 ............. 
 
29, 273
1, 2 ............................ 506
1-3 ....................... 391, 414
1 ‘ ‘
1 1 1 1 1 
1 
12 2 
2
6-8........................ 
 
428
20 
 34, 149
20, 
21, 24, 30 ............... 34
24 ....................................... 423
26 
 31, 
32, 159
26, 
27 ............................ 158
27 ....................... 31, 33, 42
31 .............................. 42 , 506
4 ............................... 61, 63
5 
54
7 
34, 35, 36, 38, 14«.
153, 
154, 
158, 
209, 423, 
429, 506
2:8 ................. 
 
 
 
 
273
2:8, 9 ..................................... 42
2:15-17 .................................. 42
2:16, 17 ......................... 69, 77
2:17 ... 54, 71. 73, 74, 110, 
115, 209, 382
3:1 ........................................... 52
3:1-6 ....................................... 47
3:3 ........................................... 42
3:4 
54, 201, 339, 382, 403,
412, 458
3:7 
................................ 57, 63
3:8 ................................... 57
3:9-13 ..................................... 58
3:14 ......................................... 49
3:15 
52, 58, 61, 62, 66, 67,
390. 497
3:16-24 .................................. 70
3:19 .... 35, 73, 77, 110, 165, 
209
3:21 ......................................... 63
3:22 
 34. 35, 416
4:4 ........................................... 85
4:10 ...................................... 171
4:13 ......................................... 85
5:1 
 31. 32, 159
5:5 
 71, 412
5:24 
 92, 132
6:3 
 
 
376
6:8-10 
 
 
62
6:17 
 38, 154
7:4 ........................................... 38
7:7 
 
 
39
7:14. 15 ................................ 38
7:21, 22 
 36, 38, 154
7:22 ....................................... 153
9:4 ........................................... 88
9:5 ................................ 
 
171
9:6 
 31, 158
9:26, 27 ................................ 62
12:1-4 ..................................... 62
12:3 ......................................... 62
12:7 ......................................... 61
17:14 ..................................... 490
17:19-21 
................................ 62
18:20 ....... 
 
171
19:24, 25 ............................ 111
19:28 ..................................... 410
20:3 ......................................... 72
20:7 ....................................... 73
22:7, 8 .................................. 88
22:11, 12 
 
 
88
22:13 ....................................... 88
22:14 ........................... 
 
 
88
22:16 
 
 
 
 
88
22:18 
 
 
61
25:8 .......................... 378
25:8. 9 ................. 41, 260
28:10-14 ...................... 62
28:12 
 
 
188
35:18 ......................... 150
37:35 ........... 161, 162, 163
42:38 ......................... 161
44:5. 15 ....................... 49
44:29, 31 .................... 161
48:14 ......................... 171
49:8-10 ....................... 62
49:10 .......................... 62
49:33 .......................... 41
50:13 .......................... 41
Exodus
10:28 .......................... 72
12:3-14 ...................... 100
12:33 .......................... 72
12:46 .......................... 62
16:20 
 
 
118
20:5, 6 ...................... 112
22:20 ......................... 109
23:12 ......................... 147
24:17 ......................... Ill
25:8 .......................... 100
25:40 ......................... 337
29:9 
 
 
437
29:39-42 .................... 100
29:43-45 .................... 100
30:33 ......................... 490
31:14 ......................... 490
31:17 ......................... 147
32:10 ......................... Ill
Leviticus
1:4 ............................. 61
3:17 .......................... 437
4-7 
............................ 112
4:32, 33 .................... 100
10:2 .......................... Ill
18:21 
 
 
166
19:26 .......................... 49
19:28 .......................... 35
19:31 ......................... 175
20:2 
 
 
112
20:6 .......................... 175
20:27 ......................... 176
21:1 ............................ 35
21:11 .......................... 35
22:4 ............................ 35
23:10, 11 ................. 
102
23:11 
 
 
103
24:14-16 .................... 112
27:29 ......................... 110
Numbers
5:2 
 
_ 
 
35
6:6 ............................. 35
6:11 
 
 
35
9:2, 3, 5 .................... 103
9:6. 7, 10 .................... 35
11:1 .......................... Ill
12:6 
 
 
350
15:33-36 .................... 112
16 
............................ 377
16:22 
 
 
37, 155
16:30, 33 ................... 161
17:12 ......................... 
72
19:11, 13 .................... 35
21:5-9 ......................... 62
21:6, 9 ....................... 49
22 
 
 
377
26:35 ......................... Ill
27:16 ............. 37, 155, 159
Deuteronomy
4:24 .................. 
 
Ill
4:40 
........................... 22
5:33 
.......................... 22
6:2, 24 ....................... 22
6:6, 7, 11 ................. 282
7:9 ............................ 112
8:1 
 
 
282
9:3 ............................ Ill
10:13 ......................... 282
11:8, 13, 28 ................ 282
13:18 ......................... 282
17:5 .......................... 112
18:10 .......................... 49
19:9 .......................... 282
22:21 
 
 
112
23:3, 6 ....................... 439
27:4 .......................... 282
28:39 
....................... 118
28:58, 59, 61, 63 ........ 114
29:20 .......................... 108
30:15 ................... 22, 515
30:15, 19.................... 163
30:16 ......................... 282
30:17, 18 .................... 22
30:18 ......................... 282
30:19 ......................... 515
31:2 ........................... 282
31:16 
80, 81, 229, 467, 468
32:22 ......................... 161
32:22, 24 ................. Ill
32:47 
 
 
22
32:48-51 
...................... 80
34:1-6 ......................... 94
34:5 .......................... 260
34:5, 6 ....................... 482
34:5-7 ......................... 80
34:10 ........................... 94
Joshua
1:1, 2 
 
 
80
8:28 .......................... 437
Judges
9:8-16......................... 243
9:8-15 ......................... 173
Ruth
1:1 ............................ 257
1 Samuel
2:6 
 161, 164
2:6-9 ......................... 163
22:16 
......................... 73
28:7 .......................... 176
28:8 .......................... 176
28:9, 10...................... 176
28:13 ......................... 177
28:13, 14 ................... 178
28:14 ......................... 177
2 Samuel
7 .......................... 
 
 
62
1123
7:12 _______________ 61, 81 
Job
7:15-17.............................— 62 
J
16:14 -------------- 
 
147 
1-21 
 
 
 
 
327
22:6 ------------------------------ 161 
3;i3 
 
 
 
82
22:16 ------------ 
 
153 
3:17, 18 .......................... 
 
 
79
4:9 .......................... 
 
 
153
1124 
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
1 Kings
4:17 ................. 
 
 
 
450
7:9 .................... 
 
161. 163
1:21 
_______________ 81,467 
7:21............. 81,82,229,469
2:6, 9 ________________! 161 
1ft °
2:9 .................. 
 
161
10:9 ......................... 
 
156
11:8 
 
 
 
 
 
161
2-10 
41 
81 
469 
12:7 
 
 
156, 
171
- -- ........ 
 
-- 
12:9, 10 
 
209
12:10 .................................... 159
2:37 
 
 
72
2:37 
42 ................... 73 
14.12 .......... ?9 g2 132 4?1
U 43 .....................4i 
81 
14:12> 13 .................... 163
11;« ...... 
 
»J 
14.12.15.............. 
 
136
14.QI 
 
 
""of 
14:13 
 
 
 
161, 360
15-8 
 
 
 
81 
14:14 
 
 
133> 479
s. 94............................81 
14:15 
........ 
 
 
133
{6.6 
 
 
 
81 
17:13 
 
- 
- 
 
162
fcioft ........................... 8 
17:13,16...................... 161
{7:17 ..........................,k} 
17:13-16 
 164, 165
0.9 
99 
................ 
17:14 ......................... 118
99.40’......................... 
Hi 
17:16 ............................ 79
92-50 .......................... 81 
18:5 .................. 108, 
109
M .......................... 
18:5, 6 ...... 
 
 
110
„ 
18:6 
 
 
108
2 Kings 
18:12 ......................... 108
18:13.......................... 108
1:12 .......................... Ill 
18:16 
 108, 110
2:11 ................ 
 
482 
18:17 
.
 
 
 
108
2:12 .......................... 482 
18:18 .................. 
108, 109
5:27 .......................... 435 
19:25............................ 131
6:17 ........ 
 
 
 
482 
19:25-27.. .................... 132
8:24 ----------------------- 81 
19:26 
 118, 133
10:35 ...... 
 
 
 
 
81 
20:7 .................. 
 
 
110
13:9 
 
 
 
81 
20:9 
 108. 110
13:13 ~~ 
 
 
 
81 
21:13........ 
 
 
161, 163
14:9 ......... 
 
243 
21:17............................ 109
14:16 ......... 
 
81 
22:20______ 
 
 
 
109
14:22 .......................... 81 
24:19........................... 161
14;29 
 
 
 
81 
24:20 ................... 118, 133
15:7 .......................— 81 
26:6 ........................... 161
18:22 
.................. 
 
 
81 
27:3 
.
 36, 37, 153, 156
15:38 ......................... 82 
30:15 .......................... 149
16:20 --------------------------- 82 
32:8 ........................... 154
17:17 ------------------------- 
 
49 33:4 36, 154, 155, 156,
20:21 
 
 
 
 
82 
209, 428
21:6 ....................... 
 
49 33:15, 16 .................... 350
21:J8 ........................... 82 
34:14............................ 156
23:10 ................. 165, 166 
34:14, 15 .... 36, 37, 154, 159
24:6 ......................... 
82 
34:15 ............. 
 
 
 
156
, 
, 
34:24 .—
.................... 109
1 Chronicles 
38:7 
.......................... 53
10:13,14................... 
 
177 
Psalms
28:9 .................... 
 
 
109 
rsaims
„ ^ 
, 
1:4 ............ 
 
 
 
 
 
109
2 Chronicles 
2:9 
109
6:5 ......... 80, 161, 163, 262
9:31 ______ 
 
 
 
82 
9:5 .................... 109, 110
12:16 
 
 
 
 
82 
9:17 
 
............... 110, 161
14:1 
 
 
 
 
 
82 
11:6 ..._ 
 110, 136
16:13 
.......................... 82 
13:3 ............ 79,82, 92 , 469
18:19-22 ..................... 177 
16 ............................... 62
21:1 ............................ 82 
16:9. 10 
361
26:2 
 
......................... 82 
16:10 
. 90, 161, 163, 276,
26:23 
.......................... 82 
299, 375, 423
27:9 .................. 
 
 
 
82 
16:11 ...... 
134, 141, 364
28:3 ........................... 166 
17:15 
 132. 472
28:27 ........................... 82 
18:5 ...... 
 
 
153, 161
32:33 ........................... 82 
21:4 ............................ 22
33:1-10 ........................ 166 
21:9 ...... 109, 110. Ill, 488
33:6 
 49, 166, 167 
21:10........................... 109
33:20 ...................... 82 22 ............................. 62
33:32 ..................... 
 
 
166 28:5 ............................ 76
30:3 .........
161
31:5 .... 37, 307, 375,, 378,427
31:5. 6 ....
157
31:1* ........
lbl,262
33:6 .........
29
33:7 .........
29
31
33:9 .........
31
33:19 
.....
29
31
33:20-27 ..
31
34:16 .......
109
34:21 .......
110
35:10 .......
171
36:9 .........
209
36:12 .......
109
37:1. 2 ...
108
37:2 .........
109,
110
37:9 .........
108
37:9, 22,
28, 34 ...
109
37:9. 34 ...
488
37:9-11 
...
i:34
37:10 ................ 108,
109.
110
37:10, 36 .
134
37:11 .......
141
37:20 .....
108, 109,110,i:34,
411, 488
37:22 .......
108
37:22, 34 .
K34
37:28 .......... 
108.
111,
134
37:34 ......
108,
141
37:36 .......
108
37:38 ......
76
108
40:6 .........
65
41:9 .........
62
45:12 .......
171
49:14 ......
163
49:14, 15
161
49:15 .......
134
49:19 .......
163
49:20 .......
110
50:3 .........
109
50:3-5 .....
132
50:3-6 ....
141
50:22 .......
110
52:5 ................ 76,
109
110
55:15 .......
161
55:23 .............. 109,
111,488
58:7 .........
109
59:13 ......
109
60:12 .......
110
62:3 .........
110
66:8, 9 ...
209
68:2 .........
109
134
68:10 .......
488
68:17 .......
482
68:17, 18
483
68:18 
....
62
69:28 ........
76
108
72:19 ......
110
73:18 .......
109
75:3 .........
109
76:5 .........
82
76:6 .........
82
85:10 ........
97
171
86:13 .......
161
88:3 .........
161
88:11 ......
262
89:3. 4 ....
61
89:48 . .
161
164
90:2 .......
454
90:5 .........
82
92:7 .........
109.111
92:9 ..........
110,499
94:23 .................. 22,109,134
96:13 ............... 132,
141,143
97:3 .........
111
98:9 .........
143
102:26 ....
371
SCRIPTURE INDEX
1125
104:4 ................ 
 
 
 
482
104:29 
 .................... 110
104:29, 30 ....... 40, 159, 429
104:35 
 108, 109
110:1 
 
 
 
 
62
115:17 
 
 
 
80, 262
116:3 .....................161, 164
118:12 
 
 
 
 
110
118:22, 23 .................... 62
119:11§ ....................... 110
139:8 .......................... 161
139:19 ........................ 110
139:24 ........................ 515
140:10 ........................ Ill
141:7 .......................... 161
145:20 .... 109, 111, 134, 488 
146:4 
39, 40, 80, 179. 203,
204, 262, 277, 428, 429
146:19 ....................... 179
150:6 ......................... 428
Proverbs
1:12 
 
 
161
2:22 
 109, 110
3:1, 2, 16 .................... 22
5:5 ............... 161, 163, 164
7:27 .............. 161, 163, 164
9:11 ............................ 22
9:18 .......................... 161
10:25 
 108, 110
10:27 .......................... 22
11:31 ......................... 141
12:7 .......................... 109
13:9 ......................... 109
13:13 ......................... 109
14:12 ......................... 515
15:11, 24 .................... 161
16:25 ......................... 515
23:14 ......................... 161
24:20 ......................... 109
27:20 ......................... 161
30:16 ......................... 161
Ecclesiastes
3:19 .......................... 158
5:15 ......................._... 327
7:14 .......................... 257
8:8 .........................40, 155
9:5 
 
 
 
 
36!
9:5-10 ....................... 163
9:6 
 
 
361
9:6. 10 ....................... 262
9:10 ....... 161, 163, 277, 361
12:7 
37, 38 . 40, 158, 159,
307 . 429, 430
12:13, 14.................... 136
12:14 ......................... 141
Song of Solomon
8:6 ................._... 
161, 163
Isaiah
1:28 ........ 
 
 
 
 
76
1:28, 31 ...................... Ill
1:31 ........ 
 
 
109
2:2 ............................ 399
2:12 .............. 131, 391, 395
2:22 .......................... 428
5:14 ............................ 161
5:20-24 ...................... 108
6:1 ............................ 352
6:2 ............................. 49
7:14 .................. 
 
 
62, 140
8:19, 20 ...................... 176
8:20 .............. 
 
355
9:6........................ 62, 140
9:18, 19................................ Ill
10:3 ....................................... 396
10:16-18 .............................. Ill
11:1-5 ..................................... 62
11:4 ....................................... 110
11:9 
 142, 517
13:6 ....................................... 396
13:6, 
9 
 131, 395
13:9-13.................................. 3%
14 ........................................... 164
14:4 ....................................... 172
14:4-11 .... 169, 170, 243, 269
14:8 ....................................... 171
14:8-10 ................................ 171
14:9 ....................................... 172
14:9, 11 ................................ 171
14:9. 11, 15 ..................... 
161
14:10, 11 .............................. 172
14:11............................. 118, 172
14:12 ...................................!... 52
14:12. 13 .............................. 53
14:12-18 ................................ 50
14:13, 14 ......................... 50, 53
14:17............................... 53, 404
24 ........................................... 139
24:1 ....................................... 138
24:19, 20 .............................. 371
24:19-22 .............................. 144
25 
 
 
139
25:6-8 .................................. 443
25:8 .............................. 134. 497
26:19 . 90. 132, 133, 139, 472
26:21 ..................................... 139
27:4 ....................................... 116
28:15 
 
 
163. 164
28 :15, 18 .............................. 161
29:20 .................................... 109
30:33 
....................... Ill, 167
33:10, 11 ................... 116, 117
33:10-12 .............................. 116
33:11, 12 ........................... Ill
33:12 
 
 109, 117
33:14 ................. Ill, 115, 117
34 
.......................................... 410
34:2 ....................................... 139
34:8 ....................................... 139
34:9 ....................................... 139
34:9, 
10 ........................ 
439
34:10. 
11 .......................... 
410
37:36 ..................................... 116
38:10, 14 ....................... 161
38:17-19 ........................... 
262
38:18 ..................................... 163
40:9-11 
................................ 
62
40:24 .................................... 110
41:11, 12 ................... 108, 110
42 
 
 
62
42:1 ......................................... 65
42:5 .......................36, 154, 159
43:17 ..................................... 110
45:12 .............................. 
209
47:14 .................. 
 
Ill
50:6 ....................................... 140
51:6 ..... 
 
 
139, 371
51:8 ....................................... 109
52:14 ..................................... 140
53 
 
 
62, 140
53:4-16 
 
........................... 188
53:6, 7 .................................. 100
53:7 ....................................... 377
53:8 ....................................... 377
53:10 ............................. 377
53:11 ...... 
 
284
53:12 ..................................... 377
54:5 —................................ 416
57:1, 2 ....................... 203
57:9 .......................... 161
57:16 ............ 
 
 
149
59:20 ........................ 140
60.1, 2 ...................... 139
61:2 .......................... 391
61:10 
 
 
63
62:11 ......................... 132
63:4 ......................... 391
65:17 .... 139, 142, 274, 402,
415, 506
65:17, 19 .................... 141
66:15, 16 ....... 119, 139, 140
66:15, 16, 24 .............. Ill
66:16 .......................... 76
66:22 ... 
134, 140, 141, 274,
415, 506
66:22, 23 ................... 117
66:23, 24 ................... 165
66:24 ...... 76, 115, 117, 119,
120, 168, 301
Jeremiah
2:13 .......................... 209
4:4 ........................... Ill
4:23-27 ...................... 143
7:20 .......................... 117
7:31 .................... 165, 166
7:32 .......................... 165
12:3 ............................ 76
18:15, 16.................... 437
19:6 .......................... 165
19:12 ......................... 165
19:13 ......................... 165
20:11 
 
 
120
21:8 .......................... 515
21:12 ......................... Ill
23:40 ......................... 120
25:12 
 
 
437
25:31-33 .................... 143
26:8 ............................ 73
27:5 .......................... 209
49:13 ......................... 437
51:39 
 82, 472
51:57 
 82, 404
Lamentations
2:3, 4......................... Ill
Ezekiel
3:18 
 73, 76
8:3 ............................ 349
11:24 ......................... 349
13:5 ................... 391, 395
15:6, 7 ....................... Ill
18:4 .......................... 136
18:4, 13, 18 ................. 75
18:4. 20 .. 39, 40, 76, 78, 99, 
109, 111
18:20 .................... 515
18:21 .......................... 99
18:26 .......................... 75
18:27 ......................... 515
18:32 
 515, 516
21:31, 32 .................... Ill
22:21, 22, 31 ................ Ill
28:1, 2 ........................ 53
28:3, 10 ....................... 53
28:12 .......................... 53
28:12, 13 .................... 53
28:12-18 ...................... 50
28:13 
 
 
53, 54
28:13, 15 ...................... 53
28:15 ............... 
 
 
53
28:16 .................... 53, 488
1126
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
28:17 ......... 
 
50, 53
28:18 ......................... Ill
28:18, 19 .................... 416
30:3 
 
 
131, 391, 395
31 ............................. 172
31, 32 ......................... 169
31:15, 16, 17 .............. 161
31:15-17...................... 173
31:18 ......................... 173
32 
 
 
 
 
172
32:18, 24 .................... 173
32:21 ......................... 173
32:21, 27 .................... 161
32:23 ......................... 173
32:27 ......................... 173
32:29 ......................... 173
32:31. 32 ................... 173
33:8, 14 ................. 73
35:9 .......................... 437
37:2 .......................... 157
37:5 ............................ 37
37:5, 6, 14 ........ 137, 157
37:5, 10 ...................... 428
37:6 ............................ 37
37:8 .......................... 157
37:10 ......................... 134
37:14 
 37, 134
Daniel
2 
 127, 217
2:19 .......................... 351
2:22 
 
 
126
2:28 .......................... 131
2:28, 29 .................... 126
2:35 .......................... 134
7 
......... 127, 217, 219, 316
7:9, 10....................... 141
7:9-11 ......................... 352
7:11, 26 .................... 497
7:13 ...................... 66, 186
7:13, 14 .................... 352
7:14, 27 ...................... 142
7:18 
 
 
134
7:22, 26 ...................... 385
7:23 ............ 
 
351
7:27 
 134, 141, 510
7:29, 30 ...................... 219
7:31 .......................... 220
7:36 
 
 
220
7:37-39 ...................... 220
7:37-44 ...................... 220
7:44, 50 ...................... 220
7:51 .......................... 220
8 
 
 
127, 217
‘ 2 ............................ 351
17 .......................... 131
17, 19...................... 135
9 
 
 
62, 217
9:26 .......................... 377
10:7 .......................... 351
10:10 .................. 
 
94
10:14 ......................... 131
11 ............................. 217
11:35, 40 .................... 131
12:1 .......................... 131
12-1-3 
136
12:2 . 79, 82. 90, 103^ 115,
120. 
134, 217, 467, 468,
469, 472, 475
12:3 .......................... 517
12:9 .......................... 131
12:13 .......................... 79
Hosea
13:14 .. 134, 137, 161, 163, 
299, 443
Joel
 
 395, 3%
............................ 3%
2. 11 ................... 137
li ____________ 
 
395
.................. 131, 396
■30 ...................... 137
............ 
 
 
131, 396
..................... 137, 222
, 14 .............. 223, 395
.......................... 137
1:15 
2:1 
2:1, 
2:1, 
2:11 
2:28 
2:31 
3 ... 
3:13 
3:16
Amos
5:6 ...........-............... Ill
5:18 
 131, 137, 396
5:18, 20 ................... 395
8:9 ............................ 137
9:2 ............................ 161
Obadiah
Jonah
2 
... 
2:2
395
108
169
161
Micah
4:8 ............................ 141
5:2 ...................... 62, 140
Nahum
4
5, 6
9 ....
10 .. 
15 ..
Habakkuk
171
111
142
109
109
2:5 .............. 161, 163, 165
2:14 .................... 137, 517
Zephaniah
1:7 ............................ 3%
1:7, 14 (2) ................ 395
1:14 .................... 131, 137
1:14, 15 .................... 396
1:15 .......................... 138
1:15-18 ...................... 131
1:18 .......................... 131
2:2, 3 ......................... 131
2:9 ........................ 437
2:11 .......................... 138
3:8, 9......................... 138
3:9 ............................ 142
Haggai
2:7 . 
2:13
132 
. 35
Zechariah
11:1
62
11:13 .......................... 62
12:1 .................... 159, 428
12:10 
 
 
62
13:7 ..................... 62, 377
14:1 .......................... 131
14:1-7 .................. 395, 396
Malachi
3:1 .........-.....-........................ 62
3:1-3 ..................................... 132
3:2 ...................... 131, 138, 397
4:1 .. 75, 105, 109, 111, 131, 
134. 138, 371
4:1, Í 
...................... Ill, 488
4:2 .........-............................. 138
4:2, 3...................................... 116
4:3................................. 108. 134
4:5 ...................... 131, 395, 398
Matthew
1 ........................... 
498
1:1. 20-23 .............. 
 
62
1:23 
 
 
188
2:13 ........................................ 492
3:10 ............................. 287, 490
3:10, 12 ................................. Ill
3:12 ........ 224, 487 , 490, 494
5:5 .......................................... 141
5:22 
 
 
261, 
292, 293
5:22, 29, 30 ................ 168, 298
5:26 
 
 
287
5:27-30 ................................. 293
5:29, 30 (2) ........................ 292
5 :30 ........................................ 407
7:12 ........................................ 287
7:13 .................... Ill, 487, 492
7:13. 14 .............................. 516
7:19 ........................................ 487
7:22 ................................ 52, 398
7:26, 27 ...............................: 286
7:27 ........................................ 487
7:29 ............................. 184, 286
8:12 ............................. 287, 407
8:20 
 
 
66
8:25 ........................................ 473
9:17 ........................................ 330
9:24.................................. 81, 226
9:24, 25 ................................ 469
9:25 ........................................ 226
10:8 ............................. 226, 474
10:22 ...................................... 464
10:28 
75. Ill, 168, 233,
261, 
292 , 293 . 
298, 407. 
409. 425, 487, 489, 492. 514
11:23.............................. 292, 298
12:14 ...................................... 492
12:25 ..................................... 266
12:38 ...................................... 335
12:39, 40 ............................... 335
12:40............................. 277, 377
13:10, 11 ............................... 239
13:24, 25 ............................... 222
13:30.............................. 78. 222
13:30, 40 ................... 286, 487
13:30, 48 ............................. 261
13:38 ...................................... 222
13:39 
 
 
222, 437
13:39-43 ............................... 223
13:40, 42 ................... Ill, 407
13:42 ...................................... 287
13:42, 48 , 50 ...................... 487
13:43 ..................................... 517
13:48 
 
 
286
13:49, 50 ............................... Ill
13:50 ...................................... 287
15:13 ...................................... 286
16:16 ..................................... 203
16:18.............................. 292, 298
16:21............................. 335, 377
17:1-8 ................................... 482
17:2 ......................-................ 93
17:3 ............................... 95, 260
SCRIPTURE INDEX
1127
17:8 ................ 
 
 
482
17:9 ................... 227, 474, 482
17:23 
 335 , 377
18:7, 8 ................................ 293
18:8 
 290, 294, 407
18:8, 9.................................. 292
18:9 
 292 , 294, 298, 407
18:11-17 .............................. 241
18:34 ..................................... 287
19:9 ....................................... 168
19:16 .................................... 456
19:29 ..................................... 327
20:2 ....................................... 378
20:6-16 ................................ 284
20:19 ................. 227, 335, 474
20:28............................ 377, 382
21:19 ..................................... 437
21:39 ..................................... 377
21:40, 41 .............................. 288
21:41 .................. 287, 489, 492
21:44 ..................................... 287
22:7 .................. 487, 489, 492
22:13 
 
 
287,407
22:23, 28, 30, 31 
 
........ 227
22:32 ..................................... 229
23:15, 33 ......... 168, 292 , 298
23:33 
 
 
261
24 
218, 223, 316, 368, 371
24:3................................ 221, 223
24:3-14.................................. 218
24:6 
...................................... 218
24:14 
 
 
219.221
24:15 ..................................... 217
24:22 ............................. 
219
24:27 ............................... 
219
24:27-31 
............................... 66
24:30 .................. 221, 223, 484
24:30. 31 ............................ 
95
24:31 .......................... 223, 485
24:39 ..................................... 186
24:46 ..................................... 221
24:51 
 
 
287
25:13. 31 .............. 
 
186
25:30 
...................... 287. 407
25:31. 32 ........ 221, 262, 512
25:31-33 ......................... 224
25:31-44 ................................ 261
25:31, 32, 41, 46 ............... 516
25:32, 33, 46 ..................... 262
25:34 
................................. 
512
25:41 
62, 
111. 221. 276,
288, 289, 290, 393, 408, 412 
25:41, 46 
111, 224, 295
25:46 . 136, 224, 288, 290, 
295, 
408, 
440, 441, 
443, 
456, 497, 512
26:28 .................. 88, 378. 382
26:38 ..................................... 378
26:41 ..................................... 426
26:64 ..................................... 186
27:20 ..................................... 487
27:38 ..................................... 270
27:39 ..................................... 336
27:40 ..................................... 336
27:45 ..................................... 284
27:46 ..................................... 284
27:50 .................. 428, 429, 378
27:50, 51 ............................’. 100
27:51-53 .............................. 483
27:52 
........................ 81, 469
27:52, 53 .............................. 510
27:53 
 
 227, 474
27:57, 58 .............................. 378
27:60 .............................. 
277
27:63. 64 .................. 226, 474
28:1-6 
 
 
265
28:5, 6 ............................ 
277
28:6 .......................... 232
28:13 ......................... 466
Mark
1 
 
 
218
2:22 
 
 
330
3:24, 25 ......... 
 
 
266
3:29 ..... 261, 288, 290, 440
4:9-12 
 
 
241
4:29 .......................... 222
4:38 ......................... 487
5:39 ..................... 81,469
8:31 .......................... 378
8:38 .......................... 186
9:4-10 ....................... 482
9:10 .......................... 482
9:22 .......................... 492
9:31 
 335, 378
9:42-50 ...................... 294
9:43 ............. 119, 294, 408
9:43. 45 ...................... 118
9:43 , 45 , 47 . .. 168 , 292 , 298
9:43-48 
 119, 300
9:45, 46 ...................... 294
10:17 ......................... 456
10:30 ................. 456, 506
10:34 .................. 335, 378
12:9 .......................... 487
13:26 
 
 
186
13:34 ................... 239, 424
14:58 ......................... 336
15:27 ........................ 270
15:29, 30 ................... 
336
15:37 ......................... 378
15:37, 38 ................... 
428
15:39 ......................... 378
15:43 ......................... 378
15:44 ......................... 378
15:46 ................... 232, 277
Luke
1:22 .......................... 351
1:47 .......................... 426
1:51 .......................... 487
1:70 
 433, 437, 439
2:34 ..................... 227, 474
3:17 .................... 408, 490
3:38 .......................... 158
4:34 .......................... 492
5:37, 38 ...................... 330
6:9 
 
 
492
6:49 .......................... 487
8:10 .......................... 241
8:52 
 81, 469
8:55 ..................... 426, 429
9:22 ..................... 335, 378
9:29 .......................... 482
9:31 .......................... 483
9:56 ..................... 
492
10:15 
 292, 298
10:18 
 
 
50
10:25 ........... 
 
456
10:42 ......................... 510
12:5 ............. 168. 292, 298
12:16-23 ..................... 424
12:40 
......................... 66
13:2, 3 ....................... 287
13:3 .......................... 293
13:4, 5 ................ 287, 293
13:7 .......................... 286
13:7. 9 ...................... 487
13:27-29 .................... 493
13:28 ......................... 287
14:14 . 102, 120, 227, 261, 
262, 475 
14:17, 18 .................... 266
14:23 ......................... 324
15:2 .......................... 245
15:7 .......................... 245
15:11-32 .................... 236
16:1-13....................... 236
16:9 ............ 246, 247, 416
16:11-13 .................... 250
16:12 ......................... 237
16:14.................... 237, 246
16:15 ......................... 246
16:16 ......................... 246
16:17, 18 ................... 246
16:19 ......................... 247
16:19-31 .. 234, 237, 243, 259
16:20, 21 ................... 247
16:22 ......................... 259
16:23 
. 247 , 259 , 292 . 298
16:23, 24 .................... 261
16:24 ......................... 247
16:25 ......................... 247
16:26.................... 247, 259
16:27 ......................... 247
16:28 ......................... 247
16:29................... 247, 251
16:30.....................247, 265
16:31 ........ 247, 264, 265
17:27 ......................... 287
17:27, 29 ............ 489, 492
17:29 ......................... 287
17:29. 30 .......... 
 
 
Ill
17:32 ......................... 287
18:18 ......................... 456
18:30.................... 456, 506
18:33 ......................... 335
19:10 
 
 
66
19:14, 27 .................... 287
19:27 ......................... 487
19:47 ......................... 492
20:16 
............... 287. 492
20:18 ....................... 
487
20:35 ...................... 
437
20:35, 36 ............ 103, 475
20:36 
............... 443, 452
20:37 
............... 226, 474
20:37, 38 .................... 233
21 
 
 
218
21:36 ......................... 186
22:15 ......................... 378
22:32 ......................... 368
23:38 ................ 
 
270
23:39 ......................... 270
23:40, 41 ............. 
271
23:42 
.............. 271, 276
23:43 
. 259, 272, 278, 279, 
280, 281, 282 
23:46 
37. 157. 277. 284
307. 375, 378, 427, 428, 429
23:50, 53 .................... 379
23:53 ......................... 277
24:3 .......................... 231
24:6, 34 .................... 
474
24:7. 21. 46 ................ 335
24:10, 34 .................... 226
24:37 ......................... 231
24:39 ......................... 231
24:45 
.............. 466, 467
24:46 ......................... 378
24:51 ...................... 
484
John
1:1-3, 14 .................... 64
1:1-4, 10 .................... 67
1:4 
 
 
191, 209, 461
1:4, 5 ......................... 192
1:5 ............................ 240
1:12 
 
 
507
1:12, 
13 
 
 
461 
6:66-68 
 
 
199 
14:2, 3 ................. 
 
 
484
1:14 .......................... 100, 340 
6:68 
 368 
14:3 ................... 232, 364, 474
1:14, 18 
 
 
 
188 
7:26 
 286 
14:6 
191, 199, 209, 231,
1:18 
 249 
7:38 
 191 
232 , 464
1:29 61, 84, 100, 188, 382 
7:40-42 
 61 
14:10 
........... 
 
 
461
1:51 
 
 
 
188 
8:12 .................... 192, 199, 200 
14:11 .................................... 461
2:19............................. 
 
335 
8:21 
 
 
 
201 
14:17, 18 ............................. 461
2:19-21 
................................ 100 
8:23 
 201 
14:19 
 
188, 232 , 504
2:20,....21 ....... 
 
 
 
 
335 
8:23, 24 
 201 
14:20 ..................................... 461
2:22 
 335 
8:24 
 
 
 
487 
14:30 ............................. 50, 510
3:2 ......................................... 386 
8:41 
 
 201 
14:23 
.................................... 461
3:3 ......................................... 508 
8:42 
 201 
15:1, 5 .................................... 199
3:3, 6, 7, 
14-17 
 
193 
8:44 
54, 201, 412 , 458 
15:1-6....................................... 462
3:5 
 
 
461 
8:51 ............... 
 
 
201, 387 
15:2 .................. 
 
 
487
3:3-7 
 190, 426 
8:56 ....................... 88, 89 
15:6 ............................ 287, 464
3:3-15 
 461 
8:58 
 201 
15:13 ...................................... 378
3:6, 7 
 508 
8:59 
 
 202 
16:11 
 
50, 52 , 
510
3:8 
 426 
9:5 
 199 
16:13 ...................................... 467
3:12 ....................................... 386 
9:32 ............. 
 
 
437. 439 
16:33 ...................................... 188
3:14, 15 .......... 62, 111, 284 
10:7 ......... 
 
 
 
 
199, 201 
17 ........................................... 205
3:15 
..................... 
 
 
456 
10:9. 10 ...................... 201, 202 
17:1-4 ................................... 205
3:15, 16 ....................... 188, 209 
10:10 
191, 487, 492 
17:2 .............................. 209, 457
3:15, 16,..36 ....................... 193 
10:10, 27, 28 
 209 
17:2, 3 ................................... 193
3:16 ... 
22 , 45, 63, 185, 189 
10:11 ....................... 201, 378 
17:3 ............................... 188, 457
191. 291, 382, 456, 490. 500 
10:11-14 
 205 
17:6, 26 ............................... 188
3:18 
 251 
10:14-16 
 202 
17:12 
 
 
487
3:19, 20 
 240 
10:15 ..................................... 378 
18:36 ...................................... 510
3:36 ................. 209, 458, 487 
10:17 
 378 
19:26 ..................................... 324
4:10-14 ................................ 196 
10:18 
 
 61 
19:30 
 
379, 428, 429
4:11-13 
 362 
10:27, 28 ............................... 504 
19:31-33 
............................... 275
4:14 ........... 188, 191, 209, 456 
10:28 
188, 192, 193, 
202, 
19:32 ,....33 ............................ 100
4:14, 36 .............................. 193 
458, 464 
19:33 
 
 
379
4:36 ......... 
 
 
456 
10:31 
................................... 202 
19:40-42 ................._.......... 277
5:11 ......................... 386, 387 
10:33 ..................................... 202 
19:42 ...................................... 232
5:12 
 
 
 
387 
10:39 .................................... 202 
20:17 .......................... 276, 277
5:13 
 
 
387 
11 
 
 
264, 265 
20:31.............................. 209, 499
5:20 
 387 
11:11 
81,467,468,469, 
21:7.22 ................................. 375
5:21 .............................. 198, 209 
470, 471 
21:20 ................. 
 
 
188
5:24 
188, 198, 458, 465, 
11:11, 14 ............................ 264
487 
11:11-13 ............................... 226
5:24, 25 
 
 
 
387 
11:11-14 ............................... 471
5:24-29 ................................ 464 
11:12 ..................................... 466 
Acts
5:24, 39................................. 193 
11:14 
 
 
470
5:25 ........... 209, 230, 471,511 
11:16,26 .............................. 490 
1-3 
4R3
5:26 .............................. 198, 461 
11:21 
 
 
202 
1-3 9........................................ 276
5:27............................................. 209 
11:23............................. 202, 
470 
l '9............................................. 484
5:28 
 
 
 
471 
11:24 
90, 200, 202. 204 
I Q.11....................................... ira
5:28. 
29 .... 79, 120, 198, 230, 
ITT?* 25 
 
 
191, 
511 
1'-10 
 
 
484
361 
0725 
199, 231. 464, 469- 
1 11 
 
 
484
5:29 
102, 103. 230, 261, 
1T725T~26'.... 1TO,'21K, SoST 
122 ........................................ 227
317. 475, 476, 511 
232, 504 
2 
 ........................ 999
5:39, 40 
 198 
11:27 ..................................... 203 
2 14........................................... 375
5:40 
 
 
......................... 487 
11:42 
 
................................ 487 
2:20, 21 .. 
 
 
398
6 
 
 
198 
11:43 ..................................... 204 
2-27 
162 
163 
276 
423
6:27 ................. 192, 198, 456 
11:43, 44 
„...471 
2:27 
30 
.’... 
375
6:27 , 40. 47, 54, 68 
193 
11:44 ................ 177, 204, 268 
2-27’ 31 
298 299 490
6:33, 47-51 ....................... 209 
11:45 ................. 204 
2-29’ 
 
 
232
6:35 ............................ 191, 199 
11:47 .................................... 204 
2-31 .....................227 298 375
6:35, 41, 48, 51 
 199 
11:47-54 
 265 
2-34 ................... 
298 467
6:39 .............................. 231, 511 
11:50 
 491 
2;43 .............................. 
’ 423
6'007 «L44’ 54 
20°- 204’ 
M
l ..................................... ™ 
3:15 :z
=
. 303, 417, 510
227, 474 
11:53 ................ 
 
 
 
204 
9.1a 
’ 070
6:40 ... 
200, 209, 231, 232, 
12:1, 9, 17 ............. 226, 474 
ai™ 
91................................. oVL
456, 460, 464 
12:7 ................ 
 
 
 
378 
oloV’ 21 ..............................
6:44 ..........................._ 
 511 
12:24 
 478 
{ 
 
¿,4 
¿on
6:47 
 
 
458, 465 
12:25 ......................... 457, 478 
\ 
0, 423> 487• 49°. 494
6:47-50 ................................ 200 
12:25, 50 ............................. 193 
3:28> 26 .................................. £1
6:49, 50 
 199 
12:31 
50, 52, 62, 188, 382, 
4:12 ...........-........................... 88
6:50 .............................. 197, 487 
487, 510 
 
 
-......... 428
6:51 
................................. 200 
12:31, 32 — ......... 
 
87 
8;19...-..................................... 428
6:53 
 197 
12:32 ............ 
 
 
378 
8:29 ------------------............... 303
6:53, 54................................... 200 
12:32, 33 ................... 61, 378 
8:39 ........................ 
 
 
60
6:54 .... 197, 387, 458, 465 
12:35, 36 ............................. 240 
7:48.............................................335
6:56 
........ 
 
 
 
460 
12:48 
 
 200, 
204 
7:88 ......... 
 
186> 3°7< 381
6:57, 58 ................... 197, 200 
12:50 
 
........................-..... 457 
7:89 ...............................- 429
6:61 
....... 
 
 
199 
13:8.......................................... 437 
7:89- 60 ............ 
 
 
467
6:63 ____ 
 
 
200 
14:2 ........................................ 262 
7:60 .................... 81, 429, 469
1128 
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
SCRIPTURE INDEX
1129
298
ZZZZ 293, W, 492
........................... 311
......................... 
327
.......................... 349
„......................... 351
.......................... 351
34 ..................... 368
 
 
 
 
60
.......................... 229
, 26 ..................... 348
.......................... 466
............... 
 
429
37 ..................... 298
 
 81, 469
.......................... 508
................. 487, 493
 
 
304, 457, 487
, 48 ..................... 305
......................... 457
.......................... 368
................... 437, 439
................... 349, 351
........................ 508
................... 
 
379
.......................... 305
.......................... 305
334
, 25, 28 ZZZZ.' 209
......................... 305
 
 192, 440
........................ 159
 
 262, 305
........................... 325
................... 349, 351
.......................... 358
.......................... 358
 
_... 380
......................... 104
, 18 .................... 349
.......................... 356
........................... 511
.......................... 349
, 31 .................... 487
102, 103, 313, 317, 
, 476, 511 
.... 102, 229, 380, 475
........................... 357
, 24 .................... 349
Romans
1:3 ............................. 61
1:4 ............ 376, 483, 510
1:16 .......................... 306
1:23 ................... 323, 447
1:32 .......................... 515
2:5-7 ......................... 398
2:6 ............................ 487
2:6-9 ......................... 322
2:7 .... 306. 320, 448 , 451, 
457, 459
2:12 ........... 
 
 
305, 490
2:17 
......................... 320
3:2 ............................. 56
3:23 .......................... 304
3:25 ...................... 61, 382
3:26 .......................... 64
4:6 .............. 
 
64
4:17 .......................... 463
4:25 .......................... 376
5:1, 2, 10 ................... 469
5:5 ............................ 487
5:6 ............................ 380
5:7, 8 ......................... 75
5:8 ............................ 380
5:8-11 
....................... 383
5:9 ..................... 206, 382
8:2
8:20
9 ....
9:1-9 
9:4-6 
9:10 
10:11 
10:11- 
10:39 
10:42 
11:25 
12:6 
12:23 
13:34- 
13:36 
13:39 
13:41 
13:46 
13:47 
13:48 
15:14 
15:18 
16:9 
16.31 
17:3 
17:18 
17:19 
17:24 
17:24 
17:25 
17:28 
17:29 
17:31 
18:3 
18:9 
20:20 
20:27 
20:28 
21:34 
22:17 
22:30 
23:6 
23:11 
23:13 
24:15 
475 
26:23 
27 .... 
27:23
5:9, 10......................... 61
5:10 ..................... 380 
, 382
5:12 ............................ 75
5:12, 15 .................... 209
5:13 
.......................... 77
5:14 .............. 94, 305 . 482
5:16 .......................... 306
5:20 .............. 101, 487 , 497
5:21 .......................... 457
6:5 ...................... 299, 380
6:6 .................... 476, 487
6:10 ..................... 75 
, 380
6:12 ..................... 307, 320
6:21 .......................... 515
6:21, 23 .................... 487
6:21-23 ...................... 306
6:22 .......................... 457
6:23 
45 . 49, 60, 63, 78,
84. 87. 101. Ill, 112, 191, 
209, 313, 320, 322, 410, 
434, 
451, 457 , 463 . 490. 
502
5 ............................ 487
6 ........................... 487
6, 10 ...................... 487
11 ...................... 
487
12 
 101, 207
13 .......................... 101
14 
......................... 101
23-27 ...................... 361
I 
 
 306, 459
1-4 
 
 
188
2, 10 ......................... 67
3 ............................. 65
4-9.......................... 426
9 ............................ 459
10 .......................... 459
II 
307, 313, 320. 345, 
375, 460, 477
13 ........... 
487, 509, 516
13, 34 .................... 490
14 .......................... 306
17 .................... 306, 462
18 .......................... 330
19 .......................... 462
22, 23 ............. 341, 342
23 ....... 306, 362 . 364, 462
29 
 336, 462
30 .......................... 462
32 ............................ 90
37 .......................... 469
39 .......................... 306
22 .................... 487, 492
10:4 ............................ 64
11:20, 
22, 
24 
.......... 487
13:11 ......................... 473
14:1 .......................... 183
14:9 
 
 
380
14:10-11 
.................... 475
14:17 ......................... 510
15:24. 26 ................... 487
16:20 
.............. 487, 497
16:25................... 437 , 440
16:25, 26 .................. . 439
16:26 ........... 439, 440, 441
1 Corinthians
17
17 8
119
123
130
22
27
214
317
487
 316
 398
 487
380 
63, 64
322, 323, 490, 493,
5:5 ......................................... 398
5:7 ................... 100, 103, 380
6:2, 3 .................................. 385
6:20 
 
 
61
7:39 
........................... 81, 
469
9:25 .............................. 323, 447
10:9 ....................................... 475
10:11 .................................... 437
11:7 ............................ 158, 159
11:30 ............................... 81, 469
15 
288, 299. 300, 316, 338,
443, 470, 472, 473
15:3 ........................................ 380
15:3, 4 ................................. 473
15:3-6 .................................. 228
15:4 ........................................ 380
15:5-7 
.................................. 473
15:6 ........................................ 469
15:6, 18, 20 ......................... 81
15:8 ....................................... 473
15:12, 13, 15, 16 ................. 229
15:12, 13, 21, 42 .................. 227
15:12-18 
.............................. 473
15:12-18, 20 ....................... 228
15:12-20 .......... 228, 229, 473
15:13, 18 ............................... 364
15:13-23 ................................ 233
15:15 
 
 
298
15:16, 18 .............................. 
346
15:16-18 ................................ 476
15:16-20 .............................. 475
15:17. 18............................... 501
15:17-20 ............................... 226
15:18 
307, 343. 469, 492
15:19 
................................... 307
15:20 ............... 467. 470, 473
15:20, 21, 51-55 ................. 203
15:20-23 ..................... 102. 299
15:21-24, 51-57 
516
15:22 . 
206, 230, 316, 323,
469. 475, 514
15:22. 32................................ 487
15:22-24................................... 475
15:23 
102, 120, 317, 475.
511
15:24 ...................................... 476
15:24-28.................................. 317
15:26 .... 302, 317. 416, 476, 
490, 497
15:28 ..................... 24, 46, 497
15:32 ......................... 346, 473
15:32, 35. 
42, 43, 52 
473
15:35 
 
.................... 473, 478
15:36 .......................... 478, 503
15:37................. 307, 331, 478
15:37-49 ........................ 
479
15:38 ........................... 307 , 477
15:40 .................................... 479
15:41 ................................... 479
15:42................. 449, 473, 479
15:42, 50, 
53. 54 .............. 448
15:42-44 ... 231, 
307, 
317,
329. 477
15:42-44, 52-55 
 
 
511
15:44 .... 307, 327. 473, 477, 
480
15:45 
191, 317, 423, 426,
445
15:45, 47 
 64, 187, 
507
15:45-50 ............................... 503
15:46 ...................................... 507
15:47 ...................................... 336
15:49 
158, 317, 336. 480
15:49-53 .............................. 190
15:50 ......................... 449, 480
15:50, 51 
........................ 479
15:51 
...................... 392, 
470
1130
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
15:51,
15:51-
15:51-
15:51-
15:52
15:52,
15:52-
15:52-
15:53
449,
15:53
323
15:54
449
15:54
15:55
15:55
15:56
15:57
52 .... 95, 143, 
479
53 .............. 102, 484
54 ....... 317, 344, 364
55 
 345, 362
447, 452, 473, 511
53 .................... 231
54 ....... 
 
 
 
227
55 .................... 307
320, 329, 346, 445,
451, 459. 477
54 .... 307, 319, 320,
 313, 322, 329, 446,
452, 459, 487
, 55 .................... 333
 
 
298, 299, 329
, 56 .................... 497
......................... 470
......................... 469
2 Corinthians
1:14 ..........
3:6 ............
4:1, 2, 4, 8,
4:1, 4 
 
...
4:3
 
 
398
 
 
487
 
 
347
347 
490, 491
4:4 ............... 50, 347, 437
4:7-10 ....................... 329
4:11 ................... 307. 320
4:14 ............. 
 
 
338, 477
4:18 ............. 340, 346, 506
5 ............................... 329
5:1 
332, 333. 334, 337,
339, 340, 342 . 380
5:1-9 ........... 324, 330, 339
5:2 ............. 339, 342, 363
5:2, 4 ................ 341, 342
5:3 ............. 325, 339, 342
5:4 
307 , 309, 320, 329,
331, 342, 343, 351
5:5 ...................... 339, 345
5:6 ..................... 339, 346
5:8 ............. 324, 339, 346
5:14 
......................... 380
5:15 .......................... 380
5:17 .......................... 461
5:18, 19 ...................... 61
5:21 
 61, 62 , 64. 86. 88
10:8 .......................... 487
11:3 ............................ 49
11:14 ........ 
 
 
48
11:23-27 .................... 360
11:24-28 .................... 329
11:27 ......................... 330
12:1 .......................... 348
12:1-4 .................. 259, 348
12:2 .......................... 272
12:2-4 ....................... 348
12:7 .......................... 329
13:10 ......................... 487
15:53 ......................... 308
Galatians
1:4
1:17
2:2 ..
2:3
2:4
2:20
3:8
3:13
3:16
3:16,
3:29
4:1
19
............. 438
.............. 311
.............. 349
.............. 350
.............. 350
455, 460, 461
OQ
:::::z:'6i;'‘38o
 
 
62
 
 
61
.............. 463
.............. 463
4:2 ............................ 463
4:4 ............................ 510
4:7 ............................ 463
5:15 .......................... 487
6:8 
310, 457, 487, 490,
502, 516 
6:15 ............ 
 
461
Ephesians
1:4 
Z........................ 464
1:5 
.......................... 469
1:6 
.......................... 382
1:7 
 61, 380
1:13, 14 .................... 345
1:20 .................... 226. 476
1:21 .......................... 370
2:1, 5 ......................... 487
2:2 ....................... 50, 62
2:7 ............................ 438
2:10 .......................... 461
2:13 
........................... 61
2:14-16 ...................... 100
2:16 ........... 
 
 
 
 
380
3:3-5 ......................... 186
3:6 ............................ 462
3:9 
 67 , 433
3:10 .......................... 370
4:8 
 
 
483, 510
4:8-10 ....................... 259
4:24 .................... 461
5:2 .................... 
 
 
380
5:14 ........... 226, 473, 474
6:11, 12 ....................... 50
6:12 ...................... 50, 370
6:24 ................... 448, 449
Philippians
1:6 ............................ 398
1:10 .......................... 398
1:20 ................... 359, 360
1:20-24 ... 254, 256, 355, 366
1:21 .......................... 360
1:23 .................. 355. 365
1:24 .......................... 359
1:28 .......................... 491
2:5-8 .......................... 90
2:7 ............................. 65
2:8 ............................ 380
2:9-11 
....................... 476
2:16 .......................... 398
2:27 .......................... 487
3:9 ............................. 64
3:10 .......................... 303
3:18 
 
 
515
3:19 
487, 489, 491, 515
3:20 .......................... 102
3:20, 21 .............. 327, 364
3:21 .... 231, 318. 336, 479, 
511
Colossians
1 ........... 
 
 
508
16, 17 ...................... 67
20 ........... 380, 382, 469
21, 22 
 
 
61
22 ................... 380, 382
26 
 
 
186
27 
 455, 461
10, 15 ...................... 370
14 ........................... 100
15 .......................... 483
16, 17 ....................... 100
3 
 203, 
464
4 
209, 231, 310, 336,
363, 364, 480
3:15 ....................................... 487
1 Thessalonians
1:10 ............................. 206. 382
2:19 ....................................... 338
4 
 
 
338, 470
4:6-17 ...................................... 92
4:13 ....................................... 470
4:13. 14. 15 ........................... 81
4:13-18 
203, 338
4:14 
104, 380, 466, 469,
470, 471
4:14-17 ................................ 364
4:15 
................. 229, 467, 470
4:15-17 .... 143, 223, 229, 344, 
468
4:16 
 
 
 
470. 471
4:16.17 
95.102,143.206,
314, 359, 363, 365. 510
4:17 ................... 362, 484, 511
5:2 ..................... 391, 395, 399
5:2, 3 ........................... 224, 314
5:3 ................................. 487, 494
5:4 ................................. 314, 391
5:6 ......................................... 466
5:9. 10 .................................. 380
5:10 ....................................... 470
2 Thessalonians
1:7, 8 ............ 
 
 
261
1:7-10 .................................. 315
1:8-10 .................................. 313
1:9 
290. 295 . 408. 440. 487,
490, 494, 499
1:10 ....................................... 365
2:1 ......................................... 363
2:1, 2 .................................... 399
2:2 ......................................... 395
2:3 ................................. 316, 487
2:4 ......................................... 316
2:5, 6.................................... 316
2:7. 8 
316
2:8 
476, 487 , 489, 490, 497,
512
2:9-11 
.................................. 316
2:11, 12 
 
 
316
1 Timothy
1:16 
 209, 310, 457
1:16, 17 ................................ 318
1:17 ... 33, 55, 320. 440, 445, 
447, 450, 454, 459
1:19 ....................................... 487
3:16 ...................... 67, 188 , 391
4:1 ................................. 131, 318
4:8 ......................................... 327
6:9 ..................... 487, 489, 494
6:12 ............................. 310, 457
6:12, 14 ................................ 318
6:15: 16 
32, 319, 414, 446,
459
6:16 .... 24, 55 , 67, 313, 323, 
440, 454 
6:19 ............................... 318, 457
2 Timothy
1:1 ................................. 209, 464
1:7 ......................................... 426
1:9 ..................... 438, 440, 464
1:10 .... 63, 68, 79. 99, 168,
207, 
310, 318, 
320, 
323, 
416, 443, 447, 448 . 449, 
451, 459, 463, 487, 497
SCRIPTURE INDEX
1131
1:12 .................... 318, 319
2:8 
 
 
61
2:15 ....................................... 324
2:18 ....................................... 362
3:1 ......................................... 131
3:2-5 ..................................... 319
4:1 
 229, 319
4:3, 4 ................................... 319
4:7, 8 .................................... 363
4:8 ...................... 262, 319, 366
Titus
1:2 
310, 319, 327, 438, 440,
457, 464
2:7 ......................................... 449
3:1 ......................................... 370
3:5, 6..................................... 469
3:7 ............ 310, 319, 457, 463
Hebrews
1:2 .................................. 67, 438
1:14 ....................................... 463
2:3 ......................................... 514
2:5 ......................................... 506
2:9 ........................ 75 , 299, 380
2:14 
67, 188, 380, 382,
416, 476, 487
2:14, 15 ........................ 65, 497
2:15 ....................................... 382
4:14 .............................. 361, 395
4:15 ................................. 67 , 507
5:9 
 224, 290, 440, 507
6:2 
224, 290, 440, 441
6:4-8 ..................................... Ill
6:5 ......................................... 506
6:8 
 
 
116
6:17 ....................................... 463
6:18 ............................... 157, 285
7. 
8, 9 .............................. 509
7:16 ....................................... 66
7:24 ....................................... 433
7:25 ....................................... 101
7:27 ....................................... 380
7:28 ....................................... 433
8:7 ......................................... 508
8:13 ....................................... 487
9:11, 12, 26 ........................ 61
9:12 .......... 224, 380. 440, 442
9:14 ................................ 86, 441
9:15 ....................................... 290
9:22 
 61, 84. 88
9:24 
 
 
334
9:25, 26 ................................ 100
9:26 
 380, 
382 . 487
9:27 
 75, 79
9:28 .......... 188, 380. 383, 510
10:1 
 22, 
100, 508
10:4-9 .................................. 100
10:5 
 
 
65
10:5-10 .................................. 90
10:10 .................................... 380
10:10-17 ................................ 61
10:12 ............................. 278, 380
10:14 .................................... 383
10:27 
 301. 
313, 487
10:39 .................................... 313
11:3 ....................................... 438
11:4 ....................... 84, 85, 277
11:5 
.................... 92, 94, 132
11:8-10, 17 ............................ 88
11:8-19 ................................ 260
11:9 ....................................... 462
11:13, 10 ................................ 90
11:16 
 
 
506
11:17, 19................................ 89
11:17-19 ............ 
 
90
11:19 
11:35 
11:35, 
12:2 
. 
12:9 . 
12:14 
12:29 
12:39 
13:14 
13:20
.......... 102, 364, 475
39, 40 .............. 261
......................... 380
......................... 159
 
 
208
 
 
Ill, 116, 313, 487
......................... 490
506
 
 
104, 229,' 440
James
1:12 .......................... 310
1:15 .............. 78, 434, 513
2:5 ............................ 463
2:26 .......................... 428
3:6 ..................... 168 , 298
4:14 .......................... 493
5:19, 20 ..................... 209
5:20 .......................... 425
1 Peter
3 .............................227
4 
 
 
369, 443, 447
4, 5 ......................... 508
5 ............................ 369
7 ............................ 369
9 ............................ 425
10, 11 .................... 123
10-12 ....................... 
92
11 .......................... 369
13 .......................... 369
18-21 ...................... 369
19....................... 64, 86
22 .......................... 424
23 .. 
. 190, 323 , 369, 447 
23, 25 .................... 461
24 ... 60, 88, 188, 381, 487
4 
 323, 447
:7 ............................ 462
3:18 
88, 101, 188, 370, 375,
381, 383
3:18-20 
 373, 374
3:19 
 372, 373, 377
3:21, 22 ...................... 370
4:1 ............................ 381
4:5 
 229, 370
4:7 ............................ 370
4:13 .......................... 370
4:17 .......................... 370
4:17, 19 ...................... 370
4:19 .......................... 425
5:4 
 370, 443
5:8 ............................ 487
2 Peter
1:4 
 370, 461, 487
1:11 ............. 370, 440, 441
1:13. 14 ...................... 340
1:19 .......................... 123
1:19-21 ....................... 370
1:21 .......................... 123
2:1 ............................ 370
2:1, 2 ......................... 487
2:4 .... 50, 270, 291, 383, 408
2:4, 5 ......................... 383
2:6 
 118, 294
2:9 
 294, 370, 385
2:12 
 Ill, 487, 494
2:13 .......................... 370
3:3 ............................ 370
3:3-13 ......................... 94
3:4 
 81, 470
3:5, 6......................... 273
3:5-13 ........... 
 
415
3:6 ............................ 371
3:5, 6 
 274, 372, 492
3:6, 7, 9 ..................... 371
3:7 ....... Ill, 272, 273, 274
3:7-13 ....................... 139
3:7, 16 ....................... 487
3:10 
 
 
274, 395, 399
3:10. 12 ...................... 415
3:10-13 ......... 264, 371. 441
3:11, 12 ................ 399, 487
3:12 ........................... 274
3:13 .. 141, 217, 274, 372, 
506
3:16 
 325, 372, 374
3:25 ........................... 371
1 John
1:1, 2 .................. 385 
, 461
1:1-3 ......................... 209
1:2 ............................ 457
1:5 ............................. 192
1:7 ........................ 61, 383
2:2 ............................. 383
2:17 ........................... 502
2:25 
 386, 457, 464
3:2 ........ 328, 336, 362 , 478
3:6 ............................. 62
3:8 '♦..................... 188 . 487
3:14 
 386, 387
3:15 
 458, 487
3:16 .......................... 188
5:10-12 ....................... 461
5:11 .................... 345, 458
5:11, 12 ....................... 463
5:11-13 
 209, 462
5:12 ............. 192 , 458, 487
5:13 .......................... 458
5:20 .......................... 457
Jude
6 .......................... 50, 408
7 .... Ill, 290, 294, 410, 442
9 
 
 
94, 260, 482
12 ............................. 487
14 ......................... 92 
, 480
14, 15.......................... 132
21 ....................... 310, 457
25 ........................ 438, 439
Revelation
1 ............................. 390
5 ............................. 61
6 ............................. 436
7 ............................ 484
8. 
17...................... 390
10 ................. 
 
 
399
10-20 ....................... 390
17 ........................... 328
17, 18 
 300, 405
18 
231, 298, 376, 381
7 
60, 202, 273, 274, 349, 
404, 417
2:10 .................... 404, 417
2:10, 11 ....................... 513
2:11 
203, 306, 404, 405, 408
2:23 ........................... 487
3:5 ...................... 417, 487
4:9, 10 ........................ 436
5:9 
 381, 383
5:12 ........................... 381
5:13, 14 ....................... 436
6:8 .......................298, 300
6:9 ............................. 425
6:14-17 ....................... 405
7:9 ............................. 417
1132
CONDITIONALIST FAITH
7 :12 ............. 
-........ 436
7:14 _________ 381, 383, 463
7:17 ........................- 417
9:5 _________ 
-...... 411
9:6 ........ 
 
490
9:17 .... 
 
 
 
351
10:6 ..... 
 
 
436
11:10 ......................... 411
11:11 
 417, 429
11:15 ................... 436, 487
11:18 ..404, 405 , 487, 490, 
494
12-14________ 
 
217
12:1-12 ....................... 94
12:2 ........ 
 
411
12:4 .... 
 
50
12:6-9 ....................... 393
12:7 ......... 
 
94
12:7-9 ........ 
 
51, 52
12:7-10 ....................... 50
12:7-12 ........ 
 
 
 
414
12:9 .......................... 405
12:12 ......................... 405
13:8 .... 61, 69, 185, 381, 417
13:15 .............. 
 
 
426
14 
 
 
 
223, 224
14:3 ...... 
 
 
 
 
94
14:6 ...... 
 
 
290
14:8 ...... 
 
 
405
14:9-11 ............... 406
14:10 ...... 
 
 
408, 411
14:10, 11 .................... 411
14:11 .. 409, 410, 411, 436, 
443
14:13 
 
 
79, 80
14:14 ......................... 186
14:14-19 
 224, 225
14:15, 16.................... 401
14:19 ................... 225, 401
15:4 ....................-..... 401
15:7 ............ 
 
 
436
16:1 .......................... 401
16:3 
 423, 490
16:17 .................... 401
17 ............................. 354
17:1 ................. 401
17:3 .......................... 349
17:8 .................... 406, 417
17:8, 11 
 401, 487
17:11 ............ 
 
 
406
17:16 ............ 
 
 
401
17-19 ....................... 217
18:2 .......................... 487
18:7 ........ 
 
 
 
401, 411
18:8 .................... 412, 487
18:9, 10...................... 401
18:15 ......................... 401
18:18.................... 401, 411
18:21 ........... 401, 412, 487
19:2, 3 ....................... 406
19:3 ............. 401, 411, 436
19:8 ............................ 63
19:11 ......................... 401
19:11-15 .................... 408
19:15 ......................... 401
19:16 ......................... 476
19:17, 18 .....................119
19:20 .... 168, 401, 406, 497
19:21 .................... 401
20 
 
 
218
20. 21 ......................... 301
20-22 ......................... 391
20:1-3 ....................... 414
20:1-3, 7 .................... 143
20:3, 7 ....................... 52
20:4 .......................... 425
20:4, 5 ....................... 120
20:5 
103, 143, 393 , 475,
511
20:5, 6 
75, 102, 103, 142,
317, 475
20:5, 6, 14, 15.............. 80
20:5-15 
 
 
516
20:6 
76, 111, 203, 408, 475,
513
20:6, 14 .............. 490, 512
20:6, 14, 15 ................ 441
20:7-9 ......................... 52
20:7-10 ...................... 415
20:9 ....... 116, 301, 401, 404
20:9, 10 ................ 
 
143
20:9, 10, 15 ....................... Ill
20: l6 ..... 52, 
401, 406, 408,
411, 416, 436, 442
20:10, 14.............................. 412
20:10-14 .............................. 385
20:10, 14, 15 
 168, 371
20:11-15 
 513, 514
20:12 
401, 417
20:12, 15 ........................ 
404
20:13 
 300, 511
20:13, 14 
 259, 298
20:13-15 .............................. 406
20:14 
75, 264, 300, 313.
343, 410, 416, 442, 476, 497
20:14, 15 .......... Ill, 404, 496
20:15 .... 401, 408 , 410, 417, 
442
21 ....................... 141, 273, 415
21, 22 139, 264, 441, 517
21:1 ....... 139, 217, 274, 402,
506
21:4 141, 
142, 274, 302
325, 
402, 
410, 416, 442,
443, 497
21:5 ........... 
 
 
402
21:6 
 404, 417
21:8 .... 80, 111, 371, 404,
406. 408, 
409. 410, 412,
441, 487, 490, 512, 514
21:12-15 ................................ 475
21:27 
 403, 404, 417
22 
141, 273, 415, 498, 506
22:1 
 
 
 
 
... 417
22:1, 2 .............. 273, 352, 404
22:2 
 60, 
349, 417
22:2. 14 
 274, 404
22:3 ................... 410, 416, 497
22:5 ....................................... 436
22:12 
 
 
262
22:14 
 416, 417
22:17 ................. 404, 416, 417
22:18, 19 .............................. 389
22:19 
 404, 417
Apocrypha
1 Enoch 22:9-13 ............... 257
Erubin 19 ............................ 257
4 Ezra 4:41 
....................... 257
4 Ezra 7:85-87, 91-95 
257
4 Ezra 7:86 
 
 
257
Kethuboth 104 ................. 257
Kiddushin 72 
................... 257
4 Maccabees 13:17 .......... 257
Wisdom of Sol. 3:1 ........ 257