Thursday, March 7, 2002
Thomas Thrasher's Comments
on Al's Last Post and Hades
As usual, I want to begin this article by reviewing a few of my friend's
statements.
With respect to my request that Al supply us with a list of the "few
troubling passages" to which he alluded, he remarked, "No debater worth his
'salt' would ever provide his opponent with a list of what that opponent
might perceive to be 'weak points.' That would be ludicrous." I don't think
it is "ludicrous" if our desire is to ascertain TRUTH on this subject! My
desire was merely to be sure that these passages (to which he alluded, but
which he refused to divulge) are not omitted from this discussion. However,
it is quite possible that some of them may be omitted, since Al wrote, "In
the course of this debate we will have the opportunity to discuss SOME of
these together" (emphasis mine).
Al says, "It is obvious that Thomas and I differ over the subject matter of
our debate ... we shall each present our position to the best of our
individual abilities, and then we shall need to leave the matter in the
hands of the readers." With this I concur.
Al clarifies his position with reference to Edward Fudge and The Fire That
Consumes: "Thomas has also read far too much into my statement about
perceiving Fudge's conclusions to be 'basically right.' Thus, it is rare
that I will declare absolute agreement with any particular author or book.
About the best I will do is to declare I 'basically agree' with the overall
conclusions of a specific work. That does not necessarily imply that I am
aware of specific errors, it's just that I personally do not proclaim
unequivocal or unreserved agreement with anyone ... and that includes
brother Fudge." He adds, "I am not a 'Fudgite,' nor am I a disciple of
'Fudgism.'" I accept Al's explanation. Therefore, I do not plan to mention
Edward or his book again in this debate, unless Al brings them up.
THE CONCEPT OF "DEATH"
Al says, "The two of us, therefore, need to define 'death.' Thomas provided
us with his reasoning from several passages of Scripture, and then stated:
'My conclusion is that "death" is a SEPARATION, not an EXTINCTION.' My
opponent has admittedly assumed that my own definition of 'death' is:
'extinction' or 'annihilation' or 'cessation of existence.'" I am puzzled
by Al's statement. Is he denying that he believes "death" is extinction,
annihilation, or cessation of existence? Increasing my uncertainty about
his position, Al states: "Actually, I would agree with Thomas' view that
'death' is a 'separation.'"
In order to avoid misunderstanding him on such a crucial matter (what
"death" is), I ask him simply: What is "death"?
I made my position clear in my third article: Death is separation, not
extinction! I anticipate Al's unequivocal response to the question.
My friend comments, "....merely acknowledging that a 'separation' exists does
not truly define 'death.' One must further seek to determine what happens
to that which has experienced this separation. What is the RESULT, or
resultant state?" This I have done! I showed that "death" refers to
different types of "separation," citing Bible verses supporting each point.
As most directly relates to the issue of this discussion, I said,
"Likewise, 'the second death' (Revelation 20:14) is an ETERNAL SEPARATION
from God. In the judgment Jesus will say to those on the left hand, 'Depart
from me, ye cursed, into the eternal fire' (Matthew 25:41)." The Bible
tells us "what happens to that which has experienced this separation" is
that they are "cursed" and told to "depart ... into the eternal fire!"
Al says, "There is a perception among many who embrace the so-called
'Traditionalist' position that 'death' does not truly exist." Perhaps so,
although I doubt it. Anyway, MY position is that "death" does exist, but
that "death" is not cessation of existence! He also quotes a portion of a
poem entitled "There Is No Death," and comments, "Death is not cessation or
extinction of life, according to this view, but an enhancement of it ... at
least for the righteous 'dead.'" Once more, my friend seems to equate
"death" with "non-existence!" This is one of the very points he must PROVE
by the Bible. Al, where does the word of God say "death" is "non-existence"
or "cessation of existence" or "annihilation" or "extinction"???
My opponent says that "one of the major differences between Thomas and me"
is that "I [Al] believe that when a person is DEAD, then that person (body
and being/soul) has been completely separated/severed from LIFE. Death,
therefore, is a cessation of life for the entire person, not just a part of
him." Again, is that "death" a complete separation from EXISTENCE? Does
"that person" still exist after death? Al evidently says, "No." The Bible
says, "Yes" (cf. Acts 2:27, 31; Luke 16:22-23; 23:43).
Al says, "Thomas embraces a dualistic view of the nature of man --- man
being made up of distinct living parts, one of which is subject to death,
the other of which is not." The second part of the statement is false! Al
knows that I discussed physical death (that certainly involves the body,
James 2:26) and spiritual death (that involves the soul, Ephesians 2:1;
Isaiah 59:2). With respect to the first part of his statement (that I
embrace a dualistic view of the nature of man), it seems to me that the
Bible is very clear on this truth (2 Corinthians 12:2-3; Luke 16:22-23;
Ecclesiastes 12:7; Acts 2:27-31; etc.). Al claims, "the body is separated
from the breath. When body and breath are separated ... Life for this
person is extinguished." Just "body" and "breath," according to Al! I
invite our readers to study the Bible passages cited above.
Al contends that "death is basically understood as the termination of life
on earth. Most frequently it indicates the end of an individual's
existence." Therefore, he admits that DEATH is not always
the end of one's existence! One can be dead, but still exist.
Al comments, "To become SEPARATED from one's purpose in life, and from
one's God, is truly to be 'DEAD' even though still PHYSICALLY ANIMATED."
Please take note of the admission that one can be "truly dead" yet
"physically animated!" Therefore, DEATH is not cessation of existence or
extinction!
Concerning spiritual death, Al says, "It is truly a 'DEATH,' a CESSATION OF
UNION with Him. Such carries only one ultimate prospect: ETERNAL DEATH"
(emphasis mine).
"Eternal death" does not require EXTINCTION/ceasing to exist, as my
opponent contends! He even acknowledges that these meanings "cannot always
be clearly distinguished ... since spiritual death merges into eternal
death" (A Greek-English Lexicon of the NT and Other Early Christian
Literature, p. 351).
Al quotes 1 John 5:12, "He who has the Son has the life; he who does not
have the Son of God does not have the life"; however, he seems to think
this means "He who has the Son EXISTS; he who does not have the Son of God
DOES NOT EXIST"! The apostle did not say that!
Al states: "Jesus told the church in Sardis, 'You have a name that you are
alive, but you are DEAD' (Revelation 3:1). They had SEPARATED themselves
from a relationship with and service to their Lord, and that is truly a
'DEATH' experience, a loss of life" (emphasis mine). Again, a SEPARATION,
not an EXTINCTION!
Al wants us to notice carefully four passages: Ephesians 2:1-2; Colossians
2:13; Luke 15:24; Matthew 8:22. Before looking at these verses, remember
that Al said, "I believe that when a person is DEAD, then that person (body
and being/soul) has been completely separated/severed from LIFE. Death,
therefore, is a cessation of life for the entire person, not just a part of
him."
On "eternal death," Al provided this quotation: "Those who remain in
spiritual death throughout their lives and do not believe on the Son of
God, die in their sins (John 8:21, 24) ... and in the Day of Judgment will
be consigned to a state of eternal separation from God, called in Scripture
the second death (Revelation 21:8)" (The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia
of the Bible, Volume 2, p. 71). My brother, how does this help your
position? Notice:
My opponent says, "I believe the biblical view is that the second death is
a termination of life itself" [He did not prove by the Bible that it is
termination of EXISTENCE]. "In the lake of fire the raised unredeemed will
be ultimately and completely destroyed, deprived of life, and will cease to
be." [He did not PROVE by the Bible that they "cease to be"!]
Al says, "Yes, Thomas, I believe 'death' is a SEPARATION. But the result --
the effect -- of such a separation is not an enhanced life, it is a
forfeited life!" However, Al, what you need to PROVE by the Scriptures is
that "it is a forfeited EXISTENCE"! I would like to know the verse that
PROVES "death" is cessation of EXISTENCE, extinction, or annihilation.
THE GREEK WORD AIONIOS
Al admits, "Yes, most translations do indeed translate this word 'eternal.'
As I pointed out in my last post, this term has both qualitative and
quantitative significance and application." Al, what Bible verse have you
given that PROVES the "qualitative" aspect? He has not proved BY THE BIBLE
that "aionios" ("eternal") refers to quality as well as quantity. He
continues to assert this. Al, do you think that if you say it enough, the
audience will think you have proved it? What Bible verse PROVES your point?
I've not seen it yet!
Al quotes Romans 6:23 -- the "wages of sin is DEATH"! That is exactly right!
The wages of sin is SEPARATION from God, not EXTINCTION! He also says, "And
that death is everlasting." Yes, the SEPARATION is everlasting! "There is
no future reversal ... It is forever!"
Al asserts, "What Thomas has done is essentially to declare the PROCESS to
be everlasting, rather than the RESULT." Not so, my friend! The RESULT is
eternal SEPARATION from God. He then says, "In other words, the result
promised by God is never actually achieved." Untrue! The "result" (eternal
separation from God) will be achieved!
Al misrepresents my position, saying, "Thus, the unredeemed also experience
an everlasting LIFE." He is once more equating EXISTENCE and LIFE, which is
false! The unredeemed exist in a state of separation from God. This
SEPARATION is a death! Al repeatedly assumes that EXISTENCE is LIFE, and
that EXTINCTION is DEATH; however, these are false definitions unsupported
by the word of God.
Hebrews 9:12 mentions "eternal redemption." Al comments, "It is thus
redemption itself, not the redeeming process, that continues without end."
Note that he recognizes that "eternal" means "without end," just as he
ought to recognize that the death/separation of the wicked is "without end"!
Al continues to cloud and confuse the issue by saying, "It is judgment, not
judging. It is destruction, not destroying. It is death, not dying. It is
punishment, not punishing." However, I checked Webster's New World
Dictionary (Third College Edition) for definitions of these words. Here is
what I found in the #1 definition of each term (emphasis mine):
Although Al says it is "not," the dictionary says it "is"!
AL'S CONCLUDING THOUGHTS
I expressed my honest opinion that "apart from reliance upon a multitude of
denominational authors (who have scarcely a notion of the true scheme of
redemption or of God's kingdom) and a few brethren to whom such writers
offer some sort of attractive appeal, the Bible makes it very clear the
meaning of aionios ..." I listed every NT occurrence of this word as
translated in the KJV and ASV, most as "eternal" or "everlasting." Al does
not refute the evidence as to the meaning of the word aionios in the NT!
Al's belief that some "denominational authors" (those "outside our
heritage") "probably perceive" "the true scheme of redemption" and "God's
kingdom" "better than we do" is disappointing, though not unexpected. I
place little confidence in the comments of "scholars" who fail to
comprehend such matters as the conditions of salvation and the differences
between the Old and New covenants.
Al considered my statement ("Let us persevere in warning the unregenerate
and unfaithful about their existence throughout eternity, rather than
proclaiming a false hope of their eventual EXTINCTION!") to be premature.
However, I will not retract that admonition in view of his misdefining of
words and the absence of Bible proof for his "eternal extinction" theory.
HADES
The Greek word Hades (Strong's #86) is defined "prop. unseen, i.e.
'Hades' or the place (state) of departed souls" (Strong's Greek Lexicon,
page 8). Listed below are all of the occurrences of this word in the NT
(quotations from NKJV):
In Acts 2:24-32 the apostle Peter clearly points out the "dual nature" of
Jesus:
Jesus' body was buried, but His soul went to Hades. He didn't "cease to
exist" when He died. Al, do you believe that Jesus' death upon the cross
was the "cessation of life for the ENTIRE PERSON, not just a part of him"???
In Luke 16:19-31, both Lazarus and the rich man died (their souls/spirits
left their bodies, James 2:26). However, they continued to exist in Hades
(verse 23, 26). The "dual nature" of each person is readily discerned by
reading the Bible. Verse 31 shows they were "dead" (physically), because
Abraham said (by the way, he still existed although he had "died" centuries
earlier), "neither will they be persuaded though one rise from the dead"!
I urge our readers to accept what the word of God teaches, not what any
man's opinion may be. I look forward to my brother's next effort.
"spiritual death" is a "cessation of union with Him"
THEN
"eternal death" can be an eternal "cessation of union with Him"