Category: Uncategorized

Foundational to the Christian message is that salvation is not something one earns, but is a free gift. It is based not on what we do for God but on what he has done for us through Jesus Christ. Anyone who has ever tried to get on God’s good side by following some code of conduct knows that all such attempts are doomed to failure. We are a condemned race, destined to disappoint our creator, with only one exception, and it is not me.

Grace in the bible is not a character trait or idea. Grace is a person, who “has appeared, bringing salvation to all people.”[1] By his sinless life and sacrificial death for everyone, Jesus did what every other human being could not do. He tasted death for everyone.[2] Having paid that penalty for sin, he was able to offer us the gift of eternal life which God so wanted to give us – out of his heart of grace.[3]

Christ’s death redeemed us from the penalty of death that we owed, and made us right in God’s sight as well. Because of that redemption, we “are justified by his grace as a gift.”[4] From Christ’s fullness “we have all received, grace upon grace.”[5] We owe everything to him – the fact that we are not what we once were, and the fact that we will be something better still in eternity future.

Rules and regulations can never do what Christ did. They are a poor substitute for grace. Even the law of God in the Old Testament had become just a set of rules to live by for the Israelites in Christ’s day. The Gospels tell us that “the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.”[6] The apostle Paul had been a staunch supporter of this law to live by, until he met Christ on the Damascus road. Then things changed. He learned that the law was not God’s plan for the salvation of the world. He found that “if righteousness were through the law, then Christ died for no purpose.”[7]

So his message changed. He taught that salvation “is no longer on the basis of works” (actually it had never been). “Otherwise”, (he reasoned) “grace would no longer be grace.”[8] This message of salvation through the completed work of Christ’s substitutionary death on the cross was called the “gospel of the grace of God”[9] It was also called simply “the word of his grace.”[10]

It was a message of sacrifice – not that God wants us to sacrifice for him, but that he has willingly sacrificed for us. It reminded people of what God had done to freely offer deliverance from sin and death. People were encouraged to think about Christ’s sacrificial life and death. Paul told the Corinthians “you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sake he became poor, so that you by his poverty might become rich.”[11]

This word of grace was not for Paul an excuse to sit back and rest. It was motivation for him to work harder than ever. He once proclaimed that he had worked harder than any of his opponents to get the gospel of grace out to the world that needs it. Ironically, he did so because it was the grace of God working with him.[12] For Paul, grace was not in conflict with hard work.

Yet there is a challenge we find in the New Testament that seems to conflict with this message of grace. These same apostles and evangelists that champion Christ as the grace of God revealed, also challenge their readers to live lives of holiness, righteousness and godliness.

Why? If Christ’s death is all the grace we will ever need (and it is) why are we encouraged to live godly lives as well? If our acts of righteousness are insufficient for our salvation – indeed are as filthy rags in God’s sight,[13] why should we waste our time trying live out impossible godly lives?

Yet, we cannot escape these challenges toward godliness for they are just as prevalent in the New Testament as the messages of grace. Paul tells Timothy to train himself for godliness, because “while bodily training is of some value, godliness is of value in every way, as it holds promise for the present life and also for the life to come.”[14] So, he encourages Timothy to pursue godliness.[15]

Peter encourages every Christian to seek godliness. In light of the evil nature of the last days in which we live, he says “what sort of people ought you to be in lives of holiness and godliness, waiting for and hastening the coming of the day of God?”[16]

How we live as Christians is intended to reflect upon the holiness and godliness of the one we proclaim. That is why Paul instructed Timothy not to allow widows who were too young to become dependent upon the church for their support. Instead, they should go to live with their children or grandchildren. That would give the children or grandchildren a chance to “make some return to their parents.”[17] This would please God, and also be a good witness to the community that Christianity encourages family responsibility.

Paul also encouraged women in worship services not to dress with inordinate jewelry or immodest dress. Instead they should demonstrate “what is proper for women who profess godliness.”[18] Their husbands are encouraged to pray without anger – not to let their worship times be distracted by personal disputes or envy.[19] The reason is the same: godliness points people to Christ, ungodliness in Christians turns people away from Christ.

It is in this context that we read about what Paul calls “the mystery of godliness.”

Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of godliness: He was manifested in the flesh, vindicated by the Spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory.[20]

At first glace, it seems strange that Paul should use such a title. He is not talking about godliness here, but about what he elsewhere calls grace. He is describing the willing sacrificial life of Christ on our behalf. The mystery of godliness is not about what we can do for God, but about what he has done for us. Godliness is what the incarnation was: truth manifested in the flesh.

This is where the gospel of grace and the apostle’s encouragement toward godliness collide. This is the reason that Christians should live out the righteousness that was bought for us at Calvary, at the price of Jesus’ blood.

There have always been those who say that what one does “in the flesh” does not really matter. Many have fallen for the deception that was prominent in the movement later to become known as Gnosticism. They valued knowledge (Greek gnosis) above action. Indeed, for some, no action was significant at all. All that mattered was what one believed. Eventually, this deception paved the way for all kinds of immorality, because it was believed that the flesh did not matter because it was not eternal. They were taught that the soul was as immortal as God, so it was all that mattered.

Others went in the opposite direction, and warned that too much contamination with the world would defile that all-important immortal part within. These would forbid people to marry, or forbid eating meat, defining godliness as meaning what one does without.[21] Godliness was defined as keeping one’s immortal soul pure, not allowing this world of matter to contaminate it.

If Jesus is God’s definition of godliness, then his life blasted away that Gnostic definition. He did not keep his life separated from the world. He invested his life in the world. He did not come simply to convert people’s souls – he came to redeem and heal and resurrect their bodies. His goal was not eternity in a disembodied state, he took on flesh never to lose it again. For infinity he will be walking around in a glorified human body – without sin or shame.

So, after establishing that Christ – the mystery of godliness – came to manifest God’s truth in the flesh, Paul tells Timothy to do the same. He is to pursue righteousness not in order to be saved, but to point people to the Saviour.

He is to be a good man, not out of fear of judgment, but out of love for those who do not yet know Christ, the living manifestation of godliness. Godliness is truth manifested in the flesh. When Christians live godly lives in the midst of a fallen and reprobate world, it draws people to Christ.

This is where the Christian message of grace and the encouragement toward godliness should also meet. Our message of grace should never give people the mistaken assumption that since we are saved by grace it does not matter how we live “in the flesh.” It mattered how Christ lived in the flesh – it should matter for us. Our lives should manifest such integrity and lack of sin that people should assume that they are backed by supernatural power. Our connection to God should be so real and honest that others seek us out when they want to know him. That is what it means to manifest the truth in the flesh.

There is always a danger that those seeking to live out this definition of godliness might fall back into legalism and bondage. As a believer grows and experiences God’s grace, he might go through stages where he feels more “hands on” in his own sanctification. But there will also be times when the believer is overwhelmed with his own unworthiness and depravity, and must fall back to the “hands off” position. God is at work in the believer’s life no matter what his subjective feeling is about it. The God of grace is also a God who works within us to accomplish his will.[22]

God wants us to live lives that manifest his truth while our tongues continue to proclaim it. Godliness, then, should never take the place of Christ as our primary message. We are called to live godly lives so that people will listen to us when we proclaim freedom in Christ.

The Gnostics got it wrong, because they had adopted a false theology about human nature: that human souls are as immortal as God. People who followed the Gnostic teachings became more and more enslaved. People who followed the gospel message were set free to live lives of godliness. They could manifest the truth in the flesh.

It remains to see what this generation is going to choose. Will they leave Egypt or remain in bondage? Will they follow Christ – the mystery of godliness – or seek a godliness of their own making?

LORD, teach us how to celebrate your grace with our tongues, and manifest your truth with our hands.

---

[1] Titus 2:11.

[2] Hebrews 2:9.

[3] Ephesians 2:8; Titus 3:7.

[4] Romans 3:24.

[5] John 1:16.

[6] John 1:17.

[7] Galatians 2:21.

[8] Romans 11:6.

[9] Acts 20:24.

[10] Acts 14:33; 20:32.

[11] 2 Corinthians 8:9.

[12] 1 Corinthians 15:10.

[13] Isaiah 64:6 KJV.

[14] 1 Timothy 4:8.

[15] 1 Timothy 6:11.

[16] 2 Peter 3:11-12.

[17] 1 Timothy 5:4.

[18] 1 Timothy 2:10.

[19] 1 Timothy 2:8.

[20] 1 Timothy 3:16.

[21] 1 Timothy 4:3.

[22] Philippians 2:13.

 

“Into your Hands I commit my spirit.”

David’s statement of trust in the midst of trial was so spiritually significant that the Lord Jesus himself quoted it on the cross. Later, Stephen quoted the same text at the moment of his own death by martyrdom. What does it mean to commit one’s spirit into God’s hands. Does this affirm the immortality of the soul?

John Calvin thought so. He was convinced that “man consists of a body and a soul; meaning by soul an immortal though created essence, which is the nobler part.”[1] He concluded that “Christ, in commending his spirit to the Father, and Stephen his to Christ, simply mean that when the soul is freed from the prison-house of the body, God becomes its perpetual keeper.”[2]

Calvin did not come to that conclusion by reading Psalm 31. He rightly commented on David’s statement by saying “Whoever commits himself into God’s hand and to his guardianship, not only constitutes him the arbiter of life and death to him, but also calmly depends on him for protection amidst all his dangers.”[3] David was asserting his trust in God to deliver him, not his confidence in possessing an indestructible spirit.

Yet Calvin could not resist taking David’s words out of their context, and teaching that Christ and Stephen asserted something not about theology but about anthropology. His belief in Plato’s doctrine of the immortality of the soul was so strong that it led Calvin to forget his rules of exegesis.

Christ quoted from Psalm 31:5 while dying on the cross. He said “Father, into your hands I commit my spirit!”[4] In doing so, he was expressing the exact same sentiment that David had expressed when he had used those words. He was not saying that his body was going to die, but that the real him was going to fly to heaven to be safe in his Father’s hands. He was saying that he trusted his Father to rescue him.

His Father did rescue him. He was raised from the dead three days later. His spirit had not gone to heaven to be with his Father at death. He told Mary “Do not cling to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father.”[5] Christ went to the grave. He had committed his spirit – that is, his life – into the hands of the one person who could redeem it.

Stephen’s quote of Psalm 31:5 was also true to its context. Stephen knew that he was going to die. The prison-house was not his alive body, but death itself. But he also had confidence that his death would not be the end. God would rescue him from the prison-house of death in the same way that he had rescued Jesus – by a resurrection. Luke records, “as they were stoning Stephen, he called out, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.””[6] I heard a preacher at a funeral of a friend of mine say that Stephen did not sleep in the grave because God received his spirit. The preacher had quoted this verse. Later, I had to remind my students (who also heard this sermon) that the preacher forgot about the next verse! Luke continued “And falling to his knees he cried out with a loud voice, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.” And when he had said this, he fell asleep.”[7] Stephen’s committing his spirit to Christ was not a rejection of the reality of death. It was an expression of confidence that death would not be permanent.

Calvin’s commentary on Psalm 31 also quoted Paul’s reflection on death. He says “What David here declares concerning his temporal life, Paul transfers to eternal salvation.”[8] He was referring to where Paul says “I am not ashamed, because I know whom I have believed, and am convinced that he is able to guard what I have entrusted to him for that day.”[9] What Calvin did not point out is that Paul’s words in 2 Timothy are not words of someone who denies death. Paul’s words imply that his death would come, but he has entrusted himself to God who can rescue him from that death. Paul’s trust was not in his possessing an immortal soul, but in his possessing a resurrecting God.

That is the sentiment expressed in Psalm 31:5 by David, and reflected in the words of Jesus on the cross, and those of Stephen at his death. It is not that God has made a part of our being that will never die. It is that God has promised to restore his own by a complete resurrection. It is not about something inherent within us. It is about the faithfulness of God.

---

[1] John Calvin, The Institutes of the Christian Religion, Vol. 1. (Forgotten Books), 190.

[2] John Calvin, The Institutes of the Christian Religion, Vol. 1. (Forgotten Books), 190.

[3] John Calvin, Calvin’s Bible Commentaries: Psalms, Part I. (Forgotten Books), 429.

[4] Luke 23:46 ESV.

[5] John 20:17 ESV (emphasis mine).

[6] Acts 7:59 ESV.

[7] Acts 7:60 ESV (emphasis mine).

[8] John Calvin, Calvin’s Bible Commentaries: Psalms, Part I. (Forgotten Books), 431.

[9] 2 Timothy 1:12 NIV.

 

Perhaps the earliest clear reference to the coming resurrection in the Bible is found in the book of Job. When contemplating the fact that he is mortal, he places all his hope in a coming Redeemer:

“As for me, I know that my Redeemer lives, And at the last He will take His stand on the earth. Even after my skin is destroyed, Yet from my flesh I shall see God.”[1]

The meaning seems obvious, but perhaps I am reading too much Christian teaching into this text. Wharton insists that “the traditional Christian conception of Christ as the ‘Redeemer’ of Job 19:25 simply won’t do.”[2] He feels that assuming Job anticipates Christ’s redemption reads too much later theology into Job’s words. Instead, he argues that Job looks forward to being vindicated.

Yet Job’s words seem to say so much more here. He argues not that he is going to be vindicated in this life, but that he is going to see God in the next life. He expresses a hope not in survival after death, but in a complete restoration to bodily life. In short, he is predicting a resurrection. If that sounds too Christian to be acceptable, perhaps commentators need to come to grips with the fact that the Christian gospel is God’s plan for humanity from the beginning.

P. S. Johnston argues that Job may be referring to “vindication in the non-material world.”[3] But, again, all one has to do is look at the text to see that Job’s hope was in a real resurrection, not some shadowy existence in a bodiless afterlife.

The text of Job 19:25-26 affirms three things:

1. Job knew his redeemer was alive.

The word he used for redeemer was go’el. This word is the same used for a kinsman redeemer. In Ruth, it referred to a person living who had the answer to Ruth’s problem. Boaz was the one who made all the difference for Ruth and Naomi. If it were not for Boaz, Ruth’s story would have ended quite differently. Without rescue, there would have been no David, and no Jesus.

But that does not mean that Job assumed that his redeemer was a human being like him. His trust was in God. His hope was that from his flesh he would see God. The real person who would make a real difference for Job is God himself.

What Job affirms is that his own ability to stay alive is not the critical issue. What matters is that the Redeemer lives. Job had graduated from being like his miserable comforters. They were the “hands on” kind of people. They insisted that if there was a problem, there had to be something they could do about it. Job was learning that sometimes you have to take your hands off the situation and trust God. His confidence was not in his own ability to fix things, but in someone other than himself. He knew that he had a Redeemer, and it was not himself. Lahaye says that “regardless of the fate that would befall Job in the near future, he possessed confidence that God remained alive and well, and in perfect control of all creation.”[4]

2. Job Knew that God would take action in the future.

His confidence that the Redeemer would take his stand on the earth at the last was an eschatological belief. He was able to look beyond his present personal struggles and see that God had a plan. He knew that God was going to personally work out his plan for planet earth by visiting the planet.

The idea that God would take his stand is consistent with the concept of incarnation, but goes beyond it. It suggests not just Christ’s first coming, but also his second. The Psalms often use the term in prayers to God to arise and save his people.[5] The psalmists were not primarily thinking soteriology (salvation from sin) but eschatology (ultimate deliverance from evil. Job’s hope was in a God who delivers both spiritually and ultimately.

3. Job knew that he would be alive to see that ultimate restoration.

Job did not doubt the reality of death, he doubted its permanence. He knew that he was mortal. He knew that should the Redeemer delay his return to earth, it would mean his death. It would mean that his skin and flesh would decompose and return to the dust. He entertained no delusion that death was a gateway to a better life. Death was death – the destruction of the flesh, and total unconsciousness.

Instead of deluding himself with fanciful notions that he could live forever, Job aligned himself with his inevitable demise. But he was able to look beyond that dark time of unconsciousness to a time of new resurrected life. His confidence was that not only is God going to take his stand in the future, but that he (Job) would be standing right there observing it. His confidence was in a resurrection.

Notice how specifically Job describes his hope. He says “from my flesh I shall see God.” He does not say “as a spiritual entity I shall see God”. He anticipates his own, newly resurrected eyes will see God restore his creation. He even goes on to emphasize this hope by saying “whom I shall see for myself, and my eyes shall behold, and not another.”[6] His confidence is not in life for someone else, but in restored life for himself.

If I had no other text in the Bible to affirm my confidence in the resurrection, Job 19:25 would suffice. In this text, I see the reality that no matter what happens to me today, my Redeemer will be alive. I may not survive the troubles of this day, but my Redeemer will. My hope is in him. My confidence is not in something I can do, but in something he will do. My God is going to arise, and save his people ultimately. And when he does, I will be there witnessing it with my own resurrected eyes. Job and I will be standing there, with our eyes and mouths wide open, in awe of what our God is doing. This is our hope.

---

[1] Romans 19:25-26 NASB.

[2] James A Wharton, Job (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1999), 89.

[3] P.S. Johnston, “Afterlife” in Dictionary of the Old Testament. (Nottingham, England: InterVarsity Press, 2008), 6.

[4] Tim Lahaye, Exploring Bible Prophecy from Genesis to Revelation: Clarifying the Meaning (Eugene Oregon: Harvest House Publishers, 2011), 101.

[5] Psalm 3:8; 7:7; 9:20; 10:12; 17:3, etc.

[6] Job 19:27 ESV.

1 Timothy 6:16 is one of the foundational verses for conditionalists. In it, we see a theological principle that we are not ready to relinquish in favor of popular teachings. It is the principle that God is the only being in the universe who has immortality. His immortality is exclusive. In that respect, he is different from all other beings.

“The only One who has immortality, dwelling in unapproachable light; no one has seen or can see Him, to Him be honor and eternal might. Amen” (HCSB).

The verse is the second part of a doxology: a pause to praise the God of whom the author is writing. In its context, Paul is encouraging Timothy to keep pursuing eternal life to which he was called, but has not yet attained. It is a promise from the only one capable of making that promise: God, who alone possesses that thing that Paul urges Timothy to pursue.

Comparing 1 Timothy 1:17 to 6:15-16 has led some scholars to suggest that Paul did not originate this text. He may have been quoting an already existing liturgy. That would explain how Paul quotes the text as if it is already known by Timothy and his companions at Ephesus. The principles found in those texts would have already been accepted as part of the Christian message.

Paul asserts four things about God here:

1. God’s Power is Eternal.

The phrase kratos aionion (just before the “Amen”) asserts that God’s battery never runs out. He never needs to be recharged. What a contrast this is to what Paul says about himself. He tells Timothy that when he was facing his lion’s den “the Lord stood by me and strengthened me, so that through me the message might be fully proclaimed and all the Gentiles might hear it.”[1]

But Paul said that now that his work was done, he was about to die. His battery was running out.

“For I am already being poured out as a drink offering, and the time of my departure has come. I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith. Henceforth there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, will award to me on that Day, and not only to me but also to all who have loved his appearing.”[2]

He speaks of an ending of his life, and a new beginning, at the resurrection when Christ appears. These are not the words of someone convinced that he has eternal life already. They are the words of one who realizes that God alone possesses unending power and life.

2. God’s Authority is Eternal.

He is to be honored for eternity. He is the King of kings and Lord of lords (6:15). That suggests, that everyone who has authority now derives that authority from him. It also suggests that the same is true of anyone who will ever be in authority. All honor will go to him. But all honor does not presently go to him. Perhaps that is why the adjective aionios (eternal) does not apply to the noun time’ (honor) in this verse. But someday, God’s chosen king will return. Then the kingdoms of this world will “become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he shall reign forever and ever” (Rev. 11:15). So, from the standpoint of eternity, his authority is the only one that will last forever.

3. God is different from the other “gods.”

The “gods” of the first century Roman empire are idols made of stone or wood or metal. Those idols sometimes represent spirit beings, but have limitations that the God of the Bible does not have. They can be seen. God cannot. They can be approached by anyone with the ability to fashion them, or the means to procure them. The God whom Paul praises in this doxology does not dwell inside an image. His dwelling is in unapproachable light (fos aprositon). God is not a good luck charm to be manipulated by humans for their own desires and prosperity. He is distant.

Paul is not saying that God never approaches us. The gospel tells us that God came near in the person of Jesus Christ, and chose to make his dwelling among us (John 1:14). The Holy Spirit dwells inside believers, who are his temple (1 Cor. 3:16; 6:19). The author of Hebrews tells us that by prayer we can “with confidence draw near to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need” (Hebrews 4:16).

So, what Paul affirms in 1 Timothy 6:16 applies to God’s nature. There is a fundamental difference between the Christian God and the pagan Gods. The pagan gods are things to be manipulated. They can be used to bring a person good luck or prevent bad luck. But the God of the Bible will not be put to the test. His power can never be used for anything other than accomplishing his will at his prompting.

4. God’s Life is Immortal.

In the Bible, this word athanasia is never used as an attribute of anyone else but God this side of the resurrection at Christ’s second coming. It is never used to describe a human soul or spirit. Yet it has come to be popular and “orthodox” to make all kinds of concessions to God’s exclusive immortality. Matthew Henry, for example, says that God “only is immortal in himself, and has immortality as he is the fountain of it, for the immortality of angels and spirits derived from him.”[3] So the hypothetical “box” in which we might put all immortal beings is actually not exclusive at all. It contains not only God, but all of those sentient creatures created by him, both human and angelic. Perhaps we should be grateful that cats and dogs did not make the grade.

Lately evangelical scholars see the dilemma in accepting what Paul said about God in 1 Tim. 6:16. Their conclusions, however, are ultimately the same as Matthew Henry’s. Peterson, for example, states the “orthodox” position quite well in his recent debate with Fudge. He said that “Plato held to the soul’s natural or inherent immortality. By contrast, evangelical Christians hold that God alone is inherently immortal (1 Tim. 6:16) and that he confers immortality to all human beings.”[4] But once the “and that he confers” is added to the equation, the dilemma begins. 1 Tim.6:16 says nothing about God conferring his exclusive attribute to all human beings. Either that attribute is exclusive or it is not. Conditionalists see no clear contrast between the view of Plato and that of our brother evangelicals who hold Peterson’s view.

The onus is ours, however, as conditionalists, to back up this bold claim that God’s immortality is exclusive. Ours is the minority position. That is why a study of the terms used in the Bible to imply immortality is helpful. The study shows that the concept of immortality does not apply to angels and human beings by default. This adds justification for our being obstinate enough to hold to the exclusive immortality of God in spite of its being an unpopular doctrine.

The noun athanasia only appears three times in the canonical Bible. It makes no appearance in the entire Old Testament. Besides 1 Tim. 6:16, it only appears in 1 Corinthians 15:53-54.

For this perishable body must put on the imperishable, and this mortal body must put on immortality. When the perishable puts on the imperishable, and the mortal puts on immortality, then shall come to pass the saying that is written: “Death is swallowed up in victory.”

The ESV translators, normally sticklers to word-for-word accuracy, betray their theological bias here by supplying the word body twice in verse 53, even though there is no Greek equivalent in the original. Paul actually agrees with what he stated in 1 Tim. 6:16. Since God alone is immortal, something will have to change in order for human beings, who are perishable and mortal, to become immortal. That change will take place at the resurrection. There is no indication in the text itself that human mortality pertains only to our bodies. That is a concept that is assumed by the proponents of natural or inherent immortality, and denied by conditionalists, who propose that immortality is only potential. 1 Cor. 15 and 1 Tim. 6:16 both serve as evidence for the potential immortality position. While 1 Cor. 15 shows that immortality (athanasia) is not currently a present possession (even for the saved), 1 Tim. 6:16 identifies the one being who is the exception to that rule, and presently has athanasia.

The Apocrypha provides seven more instances of the term. While we cannot rely on the Apocrypha as a standard for proof of a doctrine, we can consult it in order to establish how certain terms were used, which is a reflection of their understood meaning. Were we, for example, to find numerous references to athanasia as a natural human attribute it might show that intertestamental Jews viewed humans as naturally immortal beings.

4 Maccabees 8-18 contains an account describing the torture of seven young men and their mother by the Tyrant (Antiochus IV). Instances of the term athanasia occur in two places. In 4 Maccabees 14:4-5 the writer says that “none of the seven youths proved coward or shrank from death, but all of them, as though running the course toward immortality, hastened to death by torture” (RSV). From this we can infer that intertestamental Jews did have the concept of immortality, but saw it as something to be earned through diligent faithfulness to God. It was certainly not an attribute taken for granted as the natural possession of all human beings.

The second occurrence of athanasia refers to the mother, who, “as though having a mind like adamant and giving rebirth for immortality to the whole number of her sons, she implored them and urged them on to death for the sake of religion” (4 Maccabees 16:13). The mother is pictured as encouraging her sons to stay true to their faith in God with such zeal that it is like she was giving birth to them all over again, this time for immortality instead of mortality (as it was in the first instance of her giving birth to them). Again, there is no innate, inherent immortality described here. Immortality is something to be gained by a martyr’s death for the seven sons. Their mother, who gave them natural birth, did not in so doing impart to them immortality.

All the other instances of the term athanasia occur in The Wisdom of Solomon. Notice this revealing statement about the destiny of the righteous:

Wisdom 3:1-4 RSV

But the souls of the righteous are in the hand of God, and no torment will ever touch them. In the eyes of the foolish they seemed to have died, and their departure was thought to be an affliction, and their going from us to be their destruction; but they are at peace. For though in the sight of men they were punished, their hope is full of immortality.

As in 4 Maccabees, athanasia is seen as potential for humans, because the righteous will be resurrected, but athanasia is not an inherent attribute.

Wisdom 4:1-7 RSV

… in the memory of virtue is immortality, because it is known both by God and by men. When it is present, men imitate it, and they long for it when it has gone; and throughout all time it marches crowned in triumph, victor in the contest for prizes that are undefiled. But the prolific brood of the ungodly will be of no use, and none of their illegitimate seedlings will strike a deep root or take a firm hold. For even if they put forth boughs for a while, standing insecurely they will be shaken by the wind, and by the violence of the winds they will be uprooted. The branches will be broken off before they come to maturity, and their fruit will be useless, not ripe enough to eat, and good for nothing. For children born of unlawful unions are witnesses of evil against their parents when God examines them. But the righteous man, though he die early, will be at rest.

Here is no denial of the reality of death, but a glimpse beyond it, to a resurrected virtuous person, known both by God and by men. The ungodly, though they might produce a prolific brood, will be uprooted. Notice, again, that there is no mention of athanasia as a common trait held by all humans. A resurrection unto immortality is only the hope of the righteous.

Wisdom 8:13-17 RSV

Because of {wisdom} I shall have immortality, and leave an everlasting remembrance to those who come after me. I shall govern peoples, and nations will be subject to me; dread monarchs will be afraid of me when they hear of me; among the people I shall show myself capable, and courageous in war. When I enter my house, I shall find rest with her, for companionship with her has no bitterness, and life with her has no pain, but gladness and joy. When I considered these things inwardly, and thought upon them in my mind, that in kinship with wisdom there is immortality…

Wisdom, as defined by the wisdom literature of the Bible and related works like The Wisdom of Solomon is the ability to make correct moral choices which lead to God’s favour. In the Bible, those correct moral choices usually led to a long healthy life, but by the time The Wisdom of Solomon was written, one’s eternal destiny was also seen as a consequence of living wisely. It is the route to eventual athanasia. It is a narrow path that does not include everyone on the planet. It is not innate, nor is the immortality it produces.

Wisdom 15:1-3 RSV

But thou, our God, art kind and true, patient, and ruling all things in mercy. For even if we sin we are thine, knowing thy power; but we will not sin, because we know that we are accounted thine. For to know thee is complete righteousness, and to know thy power is the root of immortality.

In the New Testament we found that athanasia was an exclusive attribute of God, but a hope for humanity. In this final reference to athanasia in the Apocrypha, we see a relationship with God as the only means of obtaining to that hope.

Athanatos

In the Apocrypha, there are a few instances of the corresponding adjective that we would translate immortal as well. Although this word does not appear in the New Testament, it is helpful to see how it was used.

It is said of Eleazar that “in no way did he turn the rudder of religion until he sailed into the haven of immortal victory” (4 Maccabees 7:3). The most that can be inferred from this metaphorical statement is that Eleazar is counted among those who finished the course of faith, and awaits a resurrection unto immortality. It does not imply that Eleazar was already immortal by nature. It is said of the aforementioned seven young men that “just as the hands and feet are moved in harmony with the guidance of the mind, so those holy youths, as though moved by an immortal spirit of devotion, agreed to go to death for its sake” (4 Maccabees 14:6). All this implies about these youths is that although their devotion was undying, they were not. You cannot prove that people are immortal from a passage that records their deaths.

Later, the author of 4 Maccabees does state that these “sons of Abraham with their victorious mother are gathered together into the chorus of the fathers, and have received pure and immortal souls from God” (4 Maccabees 18:23). There is a hint of some kind of rewarded state here, but perhaps the reward is merely the certainty of a resurrection unto immortality. At any rate, 1 Corinthians 15 states that the resurrection is when the reward will be realized. If some intertestamental Jews imagined a conscious intermediate state, they were mistaken.

One use of athanatos is found which draws a distinction between God’s

righteousness (which is said to be immortal) and secular man’s covenant with death.

Wisdom 1:12-16 (RSV)

Do not invite death by the error of your life, nor bring on destruction by the works of your hands; because God did not make death, and he does not delight in the death of the living. For he created all things that they might exist, and the generative forces of the world are wholesome, and there is no destructive poison in them; and the dominion of Hades is not on earth. For righteousness is immortal. But ungodly men by their words and deeds summoned death; considering him a friend, they pined away, and they made a covenant with him, because they are fit to belong to his party.

Here again, there is no mention of a man, or even a part of man, which is immortal by nature. In fact, immortality belongs to the righteous One. Human beings are mortal.

Athanatos is also found in The Wisdom of Sirach:

For we cannot have everything, human beings are not immortal. What is brighter than the sun? And yet it fades. Flesh and blood think of nothing but evil. He surveys the armies of the lofty sky, and all of us are only dust and ashes (Sirach 17:30-32 New Jerusalem Bible).

Here is perhaps the clearest expression of human mortality in the Apocrypha. It says that men do not have the attribute that Paul said only God has. He will always last, but we are “dust and ashes.” The statement is in perfect agreement with the New Testament.

Afthartos

Another adjective – sometimes translated “immortal” in versions of the New Testament – emphasizes the unfailing, imperishable, or incorruptible nature of the noun it modifies. If this adjective were found applied to beings other than God, it would serve as evidence that the NT authors assumed that these beings possessed immortality. In Romans 1:23 Paul explained that idolatrous humanity “exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.” Notice that only God is placed in the “beings having immortality” box. Man and animals are comfortably placed in the “all others” box.

In 1 Tim. 1:17 Paul ascribes “honour and glory for ever and ever” “unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God.” If the term immortal applies to all other created beings (or at least the higher ones: angels and humans) one wonders why Paul would bother mentioning the attribute. But if the attribute is exclusive to God alone (as Paul later states in chapter 6), his mentioning it here makes perfect sense.

Some might argue that the term “immortal” is appropriate to describe men’s

spirits or souls, but not their bodies. As such it might be appropriate to speak of God being immortal in an absolute sense. He has no body to corrupt or perish. This logic only applies if the principles of Platonic anthropology are true. Plato argued that the soul of man is immortal because it is simple, and cannot be divided into composite parts. The notion of human immortality is the result of combining this principle from pagan philosophy with biblical theology. One question conditionalists ask is “can the Bible be left alone to answer the question of human mortality, or must we borrow from pagan theology to do it?”

All other references to afthartos in the New Testament[5] use the term to describe the hope of believers after the resurrection, or some kind of character trait that is imperishable in the sense that it does not fade away with time. There is not one single use of the term applied to human nature itself, body or soul. If this attribute is such an essential part of human identity, one would expect this adjective to be used repeatedly throughout the New Testament in reference to human nature itself.

God’s Identity

Often when God is identified in the Bible, this exclusive attribute is part of his title, identifying him as different from all other beings. He is the Living God.[6] He is the eternal God.[7] He is the immortal God.[8] He is the everlasting God.[9] His name and attributes endure forever.[10] By contrast, humans are God’s creatures. As such they are dying.[11] They are mortal.[12] They are perishable.[13] They fade away like the color on a leaf.[14] They return to the dust from which they were made.[15]

God is different. He is exclusively immortal. This, as well as his other exclusive attributes – like holiness and omnipotence – make it appropriate for us to worship him exclusively. Conditional immortality is – at the heart of the issue – a doctrine which seeks to preserve what the Bible says about God.

---

[1] 2 Timothy 4:17.

[2] 2 Timothy 4:6-8.

[3] Matthew Henry – The Matthew Henry Commentary on the Bible (1 Tim. 6:16).

[4] Robert A Peterson, in Two Views of Hell: A Biblical and Theological Dialogue. (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2000), 88.

[5] 1 Cor. 9:25; 15:52; 1 Pet. 1:4, 23; 3:4

[6] Deut. 5:26; Josh. 3:10; 1 Sam. 17:26, 36; 2 Kgs 19:4, 16; Psa. 42:2; 84:2; Isa. 37:4, 17; Jer. 10:10; 23:36; Dan. 6:20, 26; Hos. 1:10; Matt. 16:16; 26:63; Acts 14:15; Rom. 9:26; 2 Cor. 3:3; 6:16; 1 Tim. 3:15; 4:10; Heb. 3:12; 9:14;10:31; 12:22; Rev. 7:2.

[7] Deut. 33:27; Rom. 16:26.

[8] Rom. 1:23.

[9] Gen. 21:33; Isa. 40:28.

[10] 1 Chr. 16:34, 41; 2 Chr. 5:13; 7:3, 6; 20:21; Ezra 3:11; Psa. 100:5; 106:1; 107:1; 111:3, 10; 112:3, 9; 117:2;118:1ff, 29; 119:160; 135:13; 136:1ff; 138:8; Eccl. 3:14; Jer. 33:11; 2 Cor. 9:9.

[11] Gen. 35:18; 2 Chr. 16:13; 24:22; Job 24:12; Luke 8:42; John 11:37; Heb. 11:21.

[12] Job 4:17; Rom. 1:23; 6:12; 8:11; 1 Cor. 15:53f; 2 Cor. 4:11; 5:4; Heb. 7:8.

[13] 1 Cor. 15:42, 50, 53f; 1 Pet. 1:23.

[14] Psa. 37:2; Isa. 64:6; Jam. 1:11.

[15] Gen. 3:19; Job 10:9; 34:15; Psa. 90:3; Eccl. 3:20.

Russell from Maine writes:

“I too have been doing daily devotions from Romans the past couple weeks.

Yesterday morning I was doing my devotional from Romans 14, which I believe you will be getting to in a few days.  I read the chapter from the New Living Translation and then from the New King James translation. I was struck by the way the NLT dealt with verse 8. It says in the NLT

“While we live, we live to please the Lord. And when we die, we go to be with the Lord. So in life and in death, we belong to the Lord.”

The above translation of the NLT is quite different from the NKJV which says:

” …if we die, we die to the Lord.”

And the NIV

“. and if we die, we die for the Lord.”

And the ESV:

“. and if we die, we die to the Lord.”

My question for you, would you say this phrase “we go to be with the Lord”  a biased translation of what the Greek actually says? It sure looks that way.

Have a great day my friend.

 

Russell,

Thanks for the excellent observation. It is most certainly an example of sectarian bias in translation. The Greek text does not imply what the NLT implies. In fact, in their first revision of the NLT text (2004) the translators corrected the verse. It now reads:

“If we live, it’s to honor the Lord. And if we die, it’s to honor the Lord. So whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord.”

This revision is consistent with how the text has been interpreted throughout the centuries, as is evidenced by this quote from John Calvin:

“(The apostles) were delivered (from prison in Jerusalem – Acts 5:19) so they could continue their strenuous efforts in preaching the Gospel and courageously challenging their enemies, even if they had to bravely face death. … because they knew they had to live and die to the Lord, they did not abandon his commandment.”[1]

Actually there is no preposition in the text. The dative definite articles are all one has to go on, so most modern translations follow those versions you quoted and simply render the phrase “live to the Lord… die to the Lord” or “live for the Lord… die for the Lord.”

The point that Paul was making gave no reassurance about the intermediate state except that he affirmed that at death the believer’s status does not change. The dative definite article can also be rendered “in” resulting in the translation: “live in the Lord… die in the Lord.”  Either way, Paul’s overall point is that we believers have a responsibility to withhold from judging other believers because we are not their Lord. He will judge us all when he returns.