gracEmail
Edward Fudge
THE 'INTERMEDIATE STATE'
A brother who has read The Fire that Consumes inquired about the state of believers after the moment of death and before the resurrection at the Last Day, the period sometimes called "the intermediate state."
* * *
If one begins thinking at the point of biblical anthropology, it seems to me one easily concludes that there is no conscious "intermediate state." In the Creation story, God makes a mud man (body) into which he breathes "breath of life" (spirit/breath) and the creature becomes a "living soul". Genesis uses the same expressions "breath of life" and "living souls" when talking about animals as well as humans.
There is no hint in Genesis (or most of the rest of the Bible) that people have a "soul" which is the "real" person and which automatically survives the death of the body. That is a notion which came from the pagan Greek philosophers, chiefly Plato, and which infiltrated early Christianity a century or two after Christ. For the biblical writers, the human creature is inherently mortal, and is totally dependent on God for existence at all times. One who has this biblical understanding would not automatically assume that there is any conscious intermediate state, but rather would think that "when you die, you're dead." That is not the end, however, because God will raise the dead -- some for eternal life, some for condemnation and the second death.
There are a few Pauline texts, such as 2 Cor. 5:1-8 and Phil. 1:21-24, which seem to suggest that the believer, in union with Christ and possessed of his Spirit, might have some peaceful (if inactive) awareness of God's safekeeping during the interim. (I do not think the Luke 16 parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man determines the outcome of this discussion, as I explain elsewhere in detail.
It seems very likely to me -- although I might be wrong -- that the practical effect is the same either way and that the differences just might be phenomenological rather than essential or existential. Even if there is no conscious intermediate state, it would seem to appear to the deceased believer that the instant after death ushers in the presence of Christ, since the Resurrection would be the next moment of awareness. From this standpoint, only those still living on earth are aware of time passing after their loved ones die.
gracEmail
Edward Fudge
ARE THE DEAD CONSCIOUS?
A gracEmail subscriber writes," I read your book The Fire That Consumes and I believe your position is scriptural that the dead are unconscious between death and Resurrection. I do have some questions, however, about several passages."
* * *
My major concern in The Fire That Consumes was to investigate thoroughly all biblical teaching about the final state of the lost. Because those who believe that the lost will totally perish and be destroyed eternally in hell are divided as to whether the dead are conscious or awake before the Resurrection, I tried to avoid that subject in TFTC. Discussion there about our natural mortality does point toward an unconscious "intermediate" state, however, and other Bible students may think of the same questions this reader raises. Those questions -- and my brief answers -- follow.
Q: "Was dead Samuel asleep in 1 Samuel 28? What does the word 'disquiet' mean? What did Samuel mean when he said that Saul and his sons would be 'with him' the next day?"
ANSWER: I find the explanation reasonable that this incident involved a demonic deception or a delusion and that Samuel did not really "come back" at all. If he did, all these comments would fit "sleeping" as well as the traditional view. Samuel had been "asleep" and was "disquieted" or disturbed from his "sleep," and Saul and sons would be with him (although "asleep") the next day.
Q: "The famous 'thief on the cross' -- where would he and Jesus be when 'in Paradise' (Lk. 23:43)? Was Jesus 'asleep' for three days?"
ANSWER: "Paradise" was a word meaning "Garden" (as in Eden) borrowed from the Persian, and Jesus was speaking to this man in terms he would understand. This was hardly the occasion for a theological discourse on fine points. I believe Jesus was "asleep" between his death and resurrection. It is also possible, by the way, to translate Jesus' statement, as: "Truly I tell you today, you will be with me in Paradise," since the original Greek had no punctuation.
Q. "What about Moses and Elijah at Jesus' transfiguration (Lk. 9:30)?"
ANSWER: Matthew calls this a "vision" (Matt. 17:9). Elijah had not died, but ascended to heaven in a whirlwind (2 Kings 2:11). I see no problem in saying that Moses had been "asleep" and God "waked" him temporarily for this momentous occasion.
Q: "In Matthew 22:32, Jesus says that God is God of the 'living' not the 'dead.' How can this be reconciled with Paul's comments that dead Christians are 'asleep'?"
ANSWER: If we read the preceding verse, we see that Jesus is not saying that the dead are conscious now. He is showing the necessity of resurrection, because God is the God of the "living" and the dead clearly are not alive! This is a good example of a passage which, by repeated and prolonged misuse, is commonly thought to teach the exact opposite of its original intended meaning.
Although the notion that the dead are "asleep" rather than "awake" seems to me most agreeable with the overall biblical witness, there are a few New Testament texts which might suggest otherwise of believers who die. This is certainly not a salvation issue, nor one about which Christians ought to allow their varying views to interfere with their fellowship and unity in Christ. On many such subjects, we ought charitably to allow room for others -- however we perceive matters -- to be "wrong."
gracEmail
Edward Fudge
THE RICH MAN & LAZARUS (1)
A gracEmail subscriber has heard the story of the Rich Man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31) used to teach that when the wicked die they immediately begin to suffer conscious torment, and that after the Resurrection they will suffer that conscious torment forever. Why do I not teach these two things?
* * *
It is a fundamental principle of biblical interpretation that any text should be read in light of its context, and nowhere is that more true than in the case of this story told by Jesus. Notice the verses which set the stage for this parable.
1. The text says that when Jesus had finished his teaching on riches and stewardship, "the Pharisees, who were lovers of money, . . . were scoffing at Him" (v. 14). The rich man and his brothers in the parable also were lovers of money. By his behavior regarding Lazarus, the rich man scoffed at all the Old Testament teaching about care of the poor and the proper use of wealth.
2. Jesus warns the Pharisees that they justify themselves in the sight of men, but that God knows their hearts. What men esteem highly is detestable in God's sight (v. 15). In the parable following, the rich man was highly esteemed in man's eyes (traditional Jewish piety regarded wealth as a sign of God's favor) and Lazarus was despised. But both men die, in the parable, and God's estimation of them prevails as the tables are turned.
3. Jesus stresses the urgency of the times. These are critical days, he emphasizes, and people need to heed God's word while they can (v. 16-17). This, of course, is the focal point of the parable. The rich man did not listen to God's word while he had opportunity, and his brothers who survive him make the same mistake. He learns by experience the folly of such a course, after it is too late.
4. The saying about divorce seems out of place here in verse 18. Some think it was a "floating" saying that became attached to this text erroneously. I find it fascinating, however, that Jesus/Luke follow the same topical order found in Deuteronomy 23:21--24:22, one of the texts in "Moses" which the Rich Man's family regularly ignored (v. 29, 31). There, as here, the order of topics is (a) Selfishness, (b) Divorce, and (c) Rich and Poor.
gracEmail
Edward Fudge
THE RICH MAN & LAZARUS (2)
A gracEmail subscriber has heard the story of the Rich Man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31) used to teach that when the wicked die they immediately begin to suffer conscious torment, and that after the Resurrection they will suffer that conscious torment forever. Why do I not teach these two things?
* * *
Some argue that this story cannot be a parable because Jesus says "there was a certain rich man" and "a certain poor man." However, Jesus also introduces the story of the Unrighteous Judge by saying "there was in a certain city a judge," yet Luke tells us that story is a parable (Lk. 18:1-2). Similarly, the story of the Pharisee and the Publican begins with "two men went up into the temple to pray," and that story, too, is a parable (Lk. 18:9-10). Not only is the story of the Rich Man and Lazarus a parable, scholars of first-century Jewish literature have found it in a dozen forms. Jesus simply borrows a well-known tale and changes the details to make his own points.
Some insist that every detail in this story must be literal, for "Jesus would not mislead by teaching what is not real." These well-meaning interpreters confuse form with substance and mistake incidentals for the point. Parables usually contain one or two intended truths, communicated by an imaginary story. No one really believes that Jesus endorsed all the details here. A drop of water on the tongue would not stop the pains of fiery torture! We need not take this parable literally in order to take it seriously.
This story has long been misused to teach about the final punishment of the wicked in hell. Yet all the scenes in this story occur before the Judgment -- while earthly life goes on, while Moses and the Prophets are the "last word" for the story's all-Jewish characters. Whatever this parable portrays, it is not final punishment. Others use this story to teach about an intermediate state between death and resurrection, although the context (see the previous gracEmail) has nothing to do with that subject at all. Even scholars who believe that hell will involve unending conscious torture are now beginning to admit both these points.
This is a powerful parable to which we should listen, in context, for its own truths. Only God's estimation of us finally matters, not that of other humans. It is perilous to ignore God's Word and to trust in the praise of other people. Now is the time to respond to God's Word, including what it says about caring for the poor.
For more on after death, click here.