"Fudge believes in the inspiration of the canonical scriptures of the Old and New Testaments without reserve and has researched the whole subject with painstaking care, trying to extricate the pure doctrine of the Bible from the accretions of later centuries. Fudge’s clear-headedness and fair-mindedness are apparent throughout. He rejects the notion that humans have immortality without new birth, they ‘gain’ immortality by becoming partakers of the nature of the God ‘who alone has immortality.’ The terror of the fires of hell is that they burn up all that is unfit for heaven. God’s world in the end will have no place where sinners live on unreconciled to their maker; all will be light and glory. I believe that this book will help many to worship God more wholeheartedly and to proclaim the gospel more confidently.” (Forward to Second Edition by John Wenham, Oxford, England 1994) “Introduction...- As Evangelicals, we profess commitment to a high view of Scripture. Translating that commitment into our daily work is easier said than done, especially when, as here, we start our journey tangled in centuries of Catholic and Protestant traditions. For many Christians those traditions are reinforced by denominational or ecclesiastical confessions and by institutional statements of faith. How we work through these competing interests will depend on, demonstrate, and/or determine the sincerity of our profession and the mettle of our commitment.” (Edward William Fudge, pg xxiv)
“The more deeply on digs into the Scriptures for understanding regarding final punishment, the clearer it becomes why many godly pastors and teachers are taking out their Bibles and restudying matters that they formerly took for granted. For example, Scripture makes it clear that God will resurrect (or transform) the redeemed unto immortality and incorruption, but Scripture never hints that the wicked will be raised either immortal or incorruptible. Instead, the Bible indicates that the wicked will be banished from God’s presence and expelled into the lake of fire, to experience the second death.
Jesus warns of everlasting punishment in the age to come, and he also explains the nature of that punishment, as do Paul and John among others. It is the second death, the wages of sin. It is everlasting destruction, at the hands of God who is able to destroy both body and soul. To undergo this punishment is to perish—eternally and entirely, fully and forever—and to forfeit eternal life, the gift of God that throughout the New Testament always stands as the blessed alternative to death, destruction and perishing.
These details... from both Testaments, provide a clearer view of the biblical hell than does the majority tradition of unending conscious torment. They represent an understanding of the divine character more fully in accord with the revelation of God revealed in scripture and in Jesus Christ, including both his goodness and his severity. They furnish a place to stand with confidence, a position grounded firmly in Scripture, an incentive to forego timidity based on uncertainty, a boldness to declare the whole counsel of God on this important subject.” (page 3)
Excerpts from Chapter 2 “Back to the Bibles: The Protestant Principle”
“Ecclesiastical Tradition Not Infallible... proper appreciation for the thinking and conclusions of those who precede us does not free us simply to rest on insight of those who went before, nor does it require us to accept as final whatever the church has taught in the past.” (Page 9)
“The most authentic heirs to the Reformation are not those who close their eyes and cling with all their might to a particular creed or confession of faith. They are those who, in the words of Reformed theologian John R. Frank, maintain ‘without reservation that no single human perspective, be it that of an individual or a particular community or a theological tradition, is adequate to do full justice to the faith of God’s revelation in Christ.... For evangelicals of today to affirm uncritically what evangelicals thought and did in the past is to be trapped by a tradition. It does not matter whether the tradition in question is evangelical or not. The key point is that it is a tradition... at least in principal, we must recognize that our distinguished forbearers may require gentile and godly correction—in precisely the same way as future generations may wish, with equal gentleness and godliness to correct us in our beliefs and practices. This is painful insight; it is however, an essential biblical insight.’ (McGrath, ‘The Importance of Tradition’)..." (Page 10)
Excerpts from Chapter 3 “Souls: Immortal or Otherwise”
“Since at least the fourth century, most Christians have been taught that every human being will live forever. ‘You have an immortal soul,’ the revivalist’s message often put it, ‘and it will spend eternity either in heaven or hell. Quite often, the sermon featured the Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus. In time we will discover that the doctrine of immortal souls was the womb from which the traditional Christian teaching of unending conscious torment was born... The immortality of the human soul was a principal doctrine of the Greek philosopher, Plato (429-347 BC), who was roughly a contemporary of Malachi in the Old Testament...” (Page 19)
“Early Corrective Voices... J. N. Darby expresses his conviction that the idea of the immortality of the soul ‘ is not in general a gospel topic; that it comes, on the contrary, from the Platonist; and that it was just when the coming of Christ was denied in the church, or at least began to be denied in the church, or at least began to be lost sight of, that the doctrine of the immortality of the soul came in to replace that of the resurrection.’(Darby, ‘Hopes of the Church’, page 111).” (Page 24)
“A Modern Chorus—... George R. Beasley–Murray followed through on the stroke Darby initiated. Philosophical arguments in favor of man’s survival of death ‘usually proceed without reference’ to Jesus’ resurrection, he observes, and therefore ‘cannot strictly be termed Christian.’ In the end they are therefore ‘ irrelevant, for the resurrection is itself a sufficient revelation both of the fact and the nature of immortality.’ The kind of... preaching which dissolves Jesus’ resurrection into an example of every man’s immortality is unworthy of the gospel, Beasley declares, and such an argument ‘bears little relation to the New Testament.’ (Beasley-Mrray, ‘Christ is Alive’, page 153)
N. T. Wright likewise distinguishes between the philosophy of Plato and the teachings of Paul. ‘Platonist believe that all humans have an immortal element within them, normally referred to as the SOUL ... In the New Testament, however, immortality is something that God only possesses by nature and that he then shares, as a gift of grace rather than as an innate possession, with his people.’ (Wright, ‘Surprised By Hope’, page 160-161) (1 Timothy 6:16)
Joel Green summarizes it succinctly, stating that ‘the capacity for AFTERLIFE is not a property of humankind, but is a divine gift, divinely enacted.’ (Green, ‘Body Soul and Human Life’ pg 180)
The relation between the doctrine of the soul’s immortality and the doctrine of final punishment is real. If every soul lives forever, there are only two possibilities concerning those who go to hell. Either they will endure unending conscience torment, or else they will be restored to God’s favor and delivered from hell. Advocates of unending conscience torment cling tenaciously to their doctrine, for they truly believe that the Bible teaches the indestructibility of every human being. But this is an opinion that no longer goes unchallenged.” (Page 25)
Excerpts from Chapter 3 “Souls: Immortal or Otherwise” (continued)
Some Key Biblical Words “Man is described as a ‘soul’ (Hebrew nephesh; Greek psyche) something over 150 times in the Old Testament and about sixteen times in the New. The Old Testament displays nephesh in such a rainbow of shades that English translators have rendered it forty-five different ways! (Arkinson, ‘Life and Immortality’) God forms man of the dust, breathes into him ‘breath of life,’ and he becomes a ‘living soul.’ We use the same kind of language when we say that a man or animal is a conscience being and also has conscience being. (Ibid)The Old Testament applies the same terms to both man and animals. This is true of NEPHESH / soul-life (Gen 9:5), RUACH / spirit-breath (Gen 6:17) and NESHAMAH / spirit (Gen 7:22) ‘Soul’ is the most comprehensive term for man in his wholeness, and its meanings range from ‘neck,’ ‘life,’ ’self,’ and ‘person’ to what seems the opposite of life, ‘corpse’ (Num 19:13) (Heller. ‘The Resurrection of Man’, pages 220-221)
‘The soul is not only the upholder of certain states; it’s the full soul-substance with special qualities and powers.’ (Pederson, ‘Israel’) It ‘is man himself views as a living creature’ (Ladd, ‘ New Testament Truth’, page 37) Wolff breaks down the Old Testament view of man in his wholeness according to primary terms. Soul speaks of ‘needy man, ’flesh’ is ‘man in his infirmity,’ spirit points to ‘man as he is empowered,’ and heart signifies ‘reasonable man’ (Wolfe, Anthropology of the Old Testament, Table of Contents) Nikolainen summarized the Old Testament anthropology like this:
Man is an indivisible whole. Seen from different points of view, he is by turns body, flesh and blood, soul, spirit, and heart. Each of these portrays a specific human characteristic, but they are not parts into which man may be divided. ‘Body’ is man as a concrete being; ‘flesh and blood’ is man as creature distinguished from the Creator; ‘soul’ is the living human individual; ‘spirit’ is man as having his source from God. Man is in every cell the work of God (body), he is in all circumstances the property of God (soul), he is absolutely dependent on God (spirit), and in all his activity he is either obedient to God or disobedient (heart). The God-relationship is not merely the life of the ‘highest part’ of man. The whole man ‘from top to bottom’ exists only by relation to God. (Nikolainen ‘Man in Light of the Gospel)
All these details lead to a single conclusion: ‘When death occurs, then it is the soul that is deprived of life. Death cannot strike the body or any other part of the soul without striking the entirety of the soul... It is deliberately said that the soul dies (Judges 16:30; Num 23:10; et al.), that it is destroyed or consumed (Ezekiel 22:25, 27), and that it is extinguished (Job 11:20).’ (Pederson, ‘Israel’) This is the consistent witness of the Old Testament.” (Pages 26-27)
Excerpts from Chapter 3 “Souls: Immortal or Otherwise” (continued)
“Postmortum Survival— the Gift of God. The New Testament does not take a different view of the matter. Paul uses ‘soul’ (psyche) only thirteen times, usually with reference to the natural life of man. The adjectival form of his word designates the unspiritual or carnal man as opposed to the spiritual man (1 Cor 2:14-15), or the natural body of this present life in contrast to the spiritual body of the life to come (1 Cor 15:44).Every biblical expression of hope of life after death, of vindication beyond the present life, or of communion with God beyond the grave is grounded on the faithfulness of the living God, who has shown himself true in life and who certainly will not forsake his own people in death. David expects to ‘dwell in the house of the LORD forever’ for the very same reason he anticipates ‘goodness and love all the days’ of his earthly life. (Ps 23:6) That reason is the fidelity he has always seen in God who keeps covenant. It is not any death-proof substance he discovers in his own self. Like Jesus (Luke 23:46), Stephen (Acts7:59), and Paul (2 Tim1:12), the Christian believer’s hope is the faithfulness of his Creator (1 Pet 4:19), who is able to raise the dead (Rom 4:17; 1 Pet 1:21).
Bruce R. Reichenbach probes into man’s nature in ‘Is Man the Phoenix?’ He find’s Adam’s race, like Mr. Kutz in Joseph Conrad’s novel, ‘Heart of Darkness,’ to be made of dirt. He concludes that ‘the doctrine that man as a person does not die... is apparently contrary to Scripture... There is no hint that the only thing spoken about is the destruction of the physical organism, and that the real person, the soul, does not die but lives on.’ (Reichenbach, ‘Is Man the Phoenix?’, page 54) Donald G Bloesch underscores this conclusion. ‘There is no inherit immortality of the soul. The person who dies, even the one who dies in Christ, undergoes the death of both body and soul.’ (Bloesch, ‘Essentials of Evangelical Theology’, Page 2:188)
There is no hint that the only thing spoken about is the destruction of the physical organism, and that the real person, the soul, does not die but lives on.’ (Reichenbach, ‘Is Man the Phoenix?’, page 54) Donald G Bloesch underscores this conclusion. ‘There is no inherit immortality of the soul. The person who dies, even the one who dies in Christ, undergoes the death of both body and soul.’ (Bloesch, ‘Essentials of Evangelical Theology’, Page 2:188)
Anthony Hoekema says that ‘we cannot point to any inherent quality in man or any aspect of man which makes him indestructible.’ (Hoekema, ‘The Bible and the Future’, Page 90) F. F. Bruce warns that ‘our traditional thinking about the NEVER-DYING SOUL, which owes so much to our Roman heritage, makes it difficult for us to appreciate Paul’s point of view.’ (Bruce, ‘Paul on Immortality’, Page 469) Helmut Thielicke tells us that Paul speaks of no ‘immortal substance which would victoriously break through our mortal fate.’ Our hope is altogether in God, he continues. And ‘God has given us the hope that is on the other side of the great fissure he continues to be Lord and does not allow his history to be ruptured, that he is for us a God of life and resurrection, that he remains the Creator ex nihilo—and his initial installment of this hope is the Spirit (2 Cor. 5:5)’ (Thielicke, ‘Death and Life’, Page 133)
The late apologist and theologian, Edward John Carnell, cut simultaneously through the humanist’s optimism, the scholastic’s tradition, the philosopher’s wisdom, and the religious man’s self-righteousness to focus on man before God—man as creature, man as sinner. He stood on the solid rock of biblical faith, surrounded by the best of orthodoxy’s heritage, when he concluded: ‘Instead if teaching that man is of such infinitely incontestable value, that God, to be worthy of his name, must preserve him immortally, the Christian follows Paul’s judgment that there is none righteous, no not one (Rom 3:10). Man, then, deserves death, not life. The Christian cannot appeal to the rationality of the universe, for all rationality is from God. He cannot claim an independent rule of goodness and justice to assure him of life, for all goodness and justice flow from God. In short, the Christian knows that man, a vile, wretched, filthy sinner, will receive immortal life solely and only by God’s grace; man neither deserves immortality nor is worthy of it...” (Carnell, ‘An Introduction to Christian Apologetics’, pages 344-345).” (Pages 28-29)
Excerpts from Chapter 4 “Aionios: Duration, Quality or Both?”
THE EVANGELIST CONDUCTED FIFTY citywide campaigns featuring his trademark sermon, ‘What Is Hell Like?’ Thousands were baptized, and three times as many rededicated their lives to Christ. (Allen, ‘Fire In My Bones’, page 220) But one day the evangelist, Dr. Jimmy Allen read a century-old book that shook his thinking and impacted him to the core. Says Allen: ‘It seems that the last time I preached on hell was twenty five years ago. As I considered my history as a revivalist, I sometimes wish I had never presented the sermon. I certainly frightened many children. Further, I have become known as A HELL-FIRE AND DAMNATION PREACHER.’
Allen had not capitulated to modernism, liberalism, or relativism. ‘I still believe in hell,’ he states. ‘I can use the language of the New Testament in reference to hell. However, there are some things I have said about hell in the past that I can no longer repeat.’ Allen had read a booklet published in 1879 by Moses E Lard, in which Lard explored the scriptural use of the Hebrew and Greek adjectives translated as ‘eternal.’ Neither Lard nor Allen accepted... annihilationism... However, both men concluded that in the New Testament the word ‘eternal’ carries a qualitative meaning of the age to come, but that it is impossible to know whether it also means ‘endless.’” (Page 33)
“Everlasting Things That Last Forever, and Some That Do Not— Roger Nicole observes that fifty-one times in the New Testament, AIONIOS applies to the ‘eternal felicity’ of the redeemed, and there is conceded by all that no limitation of time applies.’ (Nicole, ‘The Punishment of the Wicked’, Page 14) On the other hand, Emmanuel Petavel insists that at least seventy times in the Bible, this world signifies ‘objects of a temporary and limited nature,’ so that it signifies only ‘an indeterminate duration of which the maximum is fixed by the intrinsic nature of the persons or things.’ (Petavel, Page 574) The word means ‘forever,’ but within the limits of the possibility inherent in the person or thing itself. When God is said to be ‘eternal,’ that is truly ‘eternal,’ that is truly ‘forever.’ When the mountains are said to be ‘everlasting,’ that means that they last ever so long—so long as they can last.
Petavel points out that Scripture frequently uses AION, AIONIOS and their Hebrew counterparts (OLAM in various forms) of things that have come to an end. The sprinkling of the blood at the Passover was an ‘everlasting ‘ ordinance (Exod 12:24). So were the Aaronic priesthood (Exod 29:9; 40:15’ Lev 3:17), Caleb’s inheritance (Josh 14:9), Solomon’s temple (1 Kings 8:12-13), the period of a slave’s life (Deut 15:17), Gehazi’s leoprosy (2Kings 5:27)—and practically every other ordinance, rite, or institution of the Old Testament System. These things did not last ‘forever’ in the sense of ‘time extended without limitation.’ They did last beyond the vision of those who first heard them called ‘everlasting,’ and no time limit was then set at all.
According to this view, held by Petavel, Froom, and others, this is the meaning of ‘eternal’ in the Bible. It speaks of unlimited time within the limits determined by the thing it modifies....” (Page 35)
Excerpts from Chapter 5 “Sheol / Hades: Gravedom?”
“JON E BRAUN WRITES: ‘I’ve seen pompous claims by some that... Sheol is the expectation of the wicked and the righteous alike.’ (Gaster, ‘Abode of the Dead’, page I:788)But are those to whom Braun objects making ‘pompous claims’? Or is Braun the one speaking here without accurate knowledge? One can be very certain, yet totally wrong, as I was reminded in a law school class many years ago. The professor asked a question and no one responded. When I could stand the silence no longer, I confidently answered the question. To my chagrin, the professor replied: ‘ Well, Mr. Fudge—frequently mistaken, but never in doubt.
Let us consider the ‘pompous claims’ to which Baum objects. Do Good and bad alike go to Sheol, as viewed by the Old Testament? The mainline ‘Interpreters Dictionary of the Bible’ flatly states: ‘Nowhere in the OT is the abode of the dead regarded as a place of punishment or torment.’ (Gaster, ‘Abode of the Dead’, page I:788) ... Most of the time, says David J Powys, sheol has neutral connotations as ‘the PLACE of ALL dead,’ although he acknowledges eight occurrences ‘when it is construed as a place of condemnation.’ (Powys, ‘Hell’, page 83)
Anyone with a concordance can verify these statement for himself. Faithful Jacob expected to go ‘down to Sheol’ when he died (Gen 37:35; 42:38; 44:29, 31). Righteous Job longed to hide in Sheol until God’s anger passed him by (Job 14:13). David, the man after God’s own heart, viewed Sheol as his resting place, though he trust in God to redeem him from its grasp (Ps 49:15). Even Jesus Christ, the Holy One of Go, went to Sheol (Greek: hades) upon his death (Ps 16:10; Acts 2:24-31). There is simply no basis for making Sheol an exclusive place of punishment for he wicked.” (Pg 44)
“The Old Testament uses the word sheol sixty-five times. The KJV translators followed their own conception of things and made it either ‘hell’ (thirty one times), ’the grave’ (thirty one times) or ‘the pit’ (three times)/ The ASV and ESV simply translate it as ‘Sheol.’ The NIV usually translate sheol as ‘grave,’ though at least once ‘the realm of death’ (Deut 32:22). ...” (Page 45)
“Job... describes ‘gravedom’ as the place of no return... the land of gloom and deep shadow... the land of deepest night, of deep shadow and disorder, where even the light is darkness’ (Job 10:21-22) David calls it ‘the place of darkness’ and ‘the land of oblivion’ (Ps 88:12). It is ‘the land of dust, forgetfulness, silence, monotony, loneliness and sleep.’ (Johnson, ‘Shades of Sheol’, 85)
Although individuals are sometimes pictured as carrying on conversations in Sheol or engaging in other such lifelike pursuits (Isaiah 14:9-18). They are not whole persons but mere shades, personified for dramatic purposes. The state of the deceased cannot be called ‘life’ in any meaningful sense. It is ‘such a pale and pitiful reflection of human existence that it is no longer any reality, and it is only a metaphorical expression of non-being’ (Martin-Achard, ‘From Death to Life’, page 17)" (Page 46)
"Life in Relation to God-- Because the Old Testament defines man’s life by his relation to God, Sheol is evil. It removes man from his place on earth, where he lived and rejoiced in God’s fellowship and praised him for his goodness (Isa 38:11, 18-19) Yet Sheol is not beyond God’s sight or reach or power (Job 26:6; Amos 9:2). Righteous men and women reportedly express confidence that God will restore them from Sheol to enjoy life in his fellowship once more (1 Sam 2:6; Ps 16:9-11; 68:20).
God’s people have experienced his joy and faithfulness already on the earth. The joy they have tasted makes them want to live with him forever. (Martin, ‘Life after Death’, page 141) His faithfulness they already have experienced gives then confidence that they will. Job’s poignant expression of hope surely touches deeply anyone who reads it: ‘If someone dies, will they live again? All the days of my hard service I will wait for my renewal [or release] to come. You will call and I will answer you; you will long for the creature your hands have made.' (Job 14:14-15)." (Page 46-47)
“Summary—The Old Testament’s concept of Sheol belongs to its larger view of humankind before God. This perspective, framed in the light of the light of creation [from dust], determines the Hebrew's attitude towards both life and death—and hope beyond that. Sheol is the common fate of all mortals. It is not a place of punishment.
Throughout most of the Old Testament, the wicked have no reason to expect to leave Sheol [in the end]. However, the righteous do have such hope, for they know and trust in the living God. Nothing is hid from his eyes, and no power can withstand his deliverance. His people lie down in peace, fully expecting to live again. That hope is stated explicitly only a few times [in the New Testament], but it pervades the entire Old Testament.” (Page 49)
Excerpts from Chapter 6 “Divine Justice: When?”
Most books about hell contain very little information from the Old Testament simply because their authors are looking for a certain image of hell, a place of eternal torment. The Old Testament provides no details about such a place, sending these authors back from their narrow search empty-handed and somewhat apologetic. We looked, they honestly reported, but we could find nothing. (Block, The Old Testament on Hell, page 44)This does not mean that the Old Testament has nothing to contribute on the topic of hell. It provides important information, but we must ask the proper information to access it. If we look for signs that say ‘hell, ’ or search for the traditionalist version or vision of hell, we find nothing. But if we move through the Old Testament with a different question, we will soon discover so much material that we will need to make more than one trip to haul it all home.
What Can the Old Testament Tell Us?The question that opens the doors to biblical meaning is more general: WHAT DATA DOES THE OLD TESTAMENT CONTAIN ABOUT THE END OF THE WICKED? In this chapter and the two chapters that follow, we will journey through the Old Testament Scriptures with that question clearly before us. But first we need to meet an earlier explorer of the Old Testament, whose past discoveries can encourage us as we begin.
No one has mined the Old Testament for information about the end of the wicked more than LeRoy Edwin Froom, author of a cyclopedia two-volume study titled ‘The Conditional Faith of Our Fathers’, Froom finds fifty different Hebrew verbs that describe the final fate of the wicked—and all signify different aspects of destruction. Froom, ‘Conditionalist Faith, Pg. I:106) Such verbs are buttressed, he says, by figurative or proverbial expressions that also speak ‘everywhere and always’ 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.’ (Ibid, 107)
Froom combines both lists to present some seventy English expressions that describe the end of sinners... Our goal in these three chapters is not to repeat Froom, but to build on his efforts, improve on his methods, and progress beyond his results. I will be sensitive to observe three different genres of texts—poetic, historical, and prophetic, and to read each text in its context, not read meaning into the texts, and not extract meanings from the texts that are not there.” (Pages 51-52)