Hell For The Wicked.
“The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget God.”—Psalms 9:17.
In the original Scriptures, there are four words translated hell; three are found in the New, and one in the Old Testament. Throughout the Old Testament, the English word hell is translated from the original word sheol, which occurs sixty-four times; though it is rendered grave twenty-nine times, and three times pit. The remaining thirty-two times it is translated hell, but it is the same word in the original throughout the Old Testament.
A brief reference to a few passages of Scripture will exhibit the original and primary meaning of sheol, rendered hell in the passage that stands at the head of this article. In Genesis 37:35, we are informed that the venerable patriarch Jacob said that he would go down to sheol mourning for his son. True, the translators have rendered the word grave in this passage, but it is the same word that is translated hell in the passage under consideration.
Sheol here cannot signify a place of endless suffering. It means simply the grave, or state of the dead, to which this pious man of God would go in sorrow, mourning for his son. In Psalms 16:10, we read as follows: “For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine holy one to see corruption.” The apostle Peter, in the 2d chapter of Acts, refers to this portion of scripture, and applies it to the resurrection of Christ, he being the one who should not be left in hell. Job prayed that he might be hid in sheol for a season, which shows clearly that it was not understood to be a state of suffering after death. The Psalmist says, “My life draweth nigh unto the grave.” Psalms 78:3. He did not mean that he drew nigh unto endless burnings. Again, in Psalms 139:8, we read thus: “If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there; if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there.” Though sheol here is translated hell, yet all admit that it does not teach endless suffering. These scriptures clearly indicate in what sense the ancient Hebrews originally used the term sheol. It had reference primarily to the grave, or rather the state of the dead; though it seems sometimes to have been employed in a figurative sense to denote mental anguish and sorrow, but never to denote eternal punishment. It had no reference to the condition of man after death, as is admitted by many learned orthodox divines.
Dr. George Campbell, a divine of this school, says that “sheol signifies the state of the dead in general, without regard to the goodness or badness of the persons, their happiness or misery.”
Dr. Allen, another eminent divine of the same school, says: “The term sheol itself, does not seem to mean anything more than the state of the dead, in their dark abode.”
Rev. Dr. Whitby says thus: “Sheol throughout the Old Testament, signifies not a place of punishment for the souls of bad men only, but the grave, or place of death.”
Sufficient testimony has been adduced to convince every unprejudiced mind that sheol, translated hell in the passage before us, furnishes no support to the common interpretation which consigns millions of the race to hopeless despair. The context shows that the Psalmist was describing the fearful consequences of sin, and showing that the wicked could not go unpunished, but should receive merited chastisement. The retributive justice of God would follow iniquity, the wicked should be ensnared in their own work, caught in their own net, and be prematurely cut off from the earth. The wicked should be swept away by the overflowing scourge, and be suddenly and unexpectedly hurled down to death. This is evidently the meaning of our text, that the wicked shall be suddenly and unexpectedly turned into hell (sheol) or swept down to destruction.
Dr. Adam Clarke says the “original is very emphatic,” and thinks it means turned headlong into hell, or sheol.
Dr. Noyes, an eminent divine, in his translation of the Psalms, gives the following version: “The wicked shall be driven into hades, yea, all the nations that forget God.”
Dr. Alexander, Professor in the Theological Seminary at Princeton, presents the following translation and comments: “The wicked shall turn back, even to hell, to death or to the grave, all nations forgetful of God. The enemies of God and of his people shall not only be thwarted and repulsed, but driven to destruction, and that not merely individuals, but nations.”
Man cannot sin with impunity; iniquity brings sure and often sudden and swift destruction. The Psalmist stated a general truth, applicable to individuals and nations. The wickedness of the antediluvians was the cause of their being suddenly cut off from the earth. While Noah, the righteous man of God was spared, they were prematurely cut off, suddenly turned into hell, unexpectedly and quickly hurled to destruction, or driven into sheol.
The history of sinful Pharaoh and his wicked hosts furnishes another illustration of our text. They oppressed the people of God, broke their own vows and commands of the Lord, and while engaged in their wickedness were suddenly turned into sheol. The inhabitants of Ninevah, too, were destroyed for their sinfulness, and turned into hell. And such was the fate of the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah, and Capernaum. They all forsook God, transgressed his commands, and the overflowing scourge came upon them, and they, too, were unexpectedly driven into hades. And what, alas! became of Babylon, the Great, the queen of nations, and the glory of the East? Her inhabitants became sinful and corrupt, and were driven to destruction — turned into sheol. That great and mighty city became desolate as a wilderness — a dwelling place for dragons — so that even to this day, the wild Arabian dare not pitch his tent there, neither do shepherds make their fold there. Where, alas! are Tyre and Sidon, and old Jerusalem, in all her magnificence and glory? History tells us that they forgot God, became proud and disobedient, filled up the measure of their iniquity, and were swept down to death.
In the 16th chapter of the Book of Numbers, we have an account of the sudden destruction of “Korah, Dathan and Abiram,” and all that appertained to them. We are informed that they went down quickly into the pit, as the earth opened her mouth and swallowed them up. In this passage, sheol is translated pit. Those referred to went down quickly to death — were suddenly destroyed; and so were the wicked persecutors of Daniel, the righteous prophet of the Lord. We need not seek other biblical illustrations of this passage. Indulgence in sin has a tendency to shorten our days, hence we are exhorted to listen to the voice of instruction and heavenly wisdom, for length of days is in her right hand, and long life will she give unto us.
Under the old dispensation, death was regarded as a punishment for sin, being prematurely cut off from the earth; and hence Moses was commanded to go “up into this mountain Abarim, and die in the mount,” because he sinned against God. (Deut. 32:49, 50.) And when sudden destruction came upon the sinful, and they were swept away in their sins, it was said that they were turned or driven into sheol; they were unexpectedly and prematurely hurled down to death.
But, says the objector, if this is a correct view of the subject, and sheol means the state of the dead, wherein is there any force in the expression, “The wicked shall be turned into sheol?” Do not the righteous go down to death also? True, all must die; but there is a vast difference between dying on the gallows in shame and disgrace for crime, and dying the calm and peaceful death of the righteous. The wicked should be turned into sheol — suddenly hurled to destruction. Such was the fate of Korah and his company, of Sodom and Gomorrah, and Capernaum. There is a vast difference in going out of a man’s house with his blessing upon you, and being quickly turned out. The objection is without force, for some were suddenly cut off in their iniquity, and in the sense of the Hebrew writer, were turned into hell, while the righteous went down to death rejoicing in the God of their salvation.
Out Of The Kingdom.
“Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God.”—1 Corinthians 6:9.
This language of the great apostle of the Gentiles, was addressed to his brethren at Corinth, who had departed somewhat from the teachings of Christ. He clearly exhibits the impropriety of Christians engaging in any suits at law, under the peculiar circumstances in which they were placed; knowing that the prejudices and passions of their opponents were so strongly excited against them, and the divine truths they professed, that a just verdict could not be obtained.
The tribunals of the country were all arrayed against the religion of the great Teacher, and against those who espoused his cause, and sought to be governed by the principles of his religion. “Now therefore,” says Paul, “there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another. Why do ye not take wrong? Why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded?” That is, it would be better to be defrauded once, than to go to law before unjust men and be defrauded again by an unjust verdict. The apostle continues his searching address in the following language:
“Now ye do wrong and defraud, and that your brethren — know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived, neither fornicators, nor idolators, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners shall inherit the kingdom of God.”
The design of the apostle was to exhibit the purity of that kingdom to which he referred. It was not to be defiled by any class of sinners. No unclean thing could inherit it. Only those could enter it who were in possession of Christ’s spirit of humility and love. Those who worked iniquity were not in that kingdom, for it was a kingdom of righteousness, of purity, peace and joy.
Many have failed to apprehend the meaning of the text, by an erroneous interpretation of the phrase — “Kingdom of God.” Many understand this expression to refer exclusively to the immortal state of existence. While this is the more common opinion, it is but just to observe, that learned critics and commentators of different names agree in the opinion, that the phrase, “kingdom of God,” refers to the gospel dispensation, or system of grace and truth which came through Jesus Christ, to be enjoyed in the present life, that kingdom which consists not in meat and drink, but in righteousness, peace and joy in the holy spirit.
Dr. Clarke, the Methodist commentator, considers that the expression, “kingdom of God,” may have reference to the church of Christ here below. Paul did not intend to teach that the different classes of sinners spoken of, never could be saved, that they could never reach the immortal, heavenly kingdom; for he adds immediately, “And such were some of you, but ye are washed; ye are sanctified; but ye are justified, in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the spirit of our God.”
The apostle designed to teach simply, that as long as people remained sinful and unrighteous, they could not inherit a righteous kingdom; but when they turned from their unrighteousness, that they could inherit the kingdom of God, for it was a kingdom of righteousness. Thus saints were made out of sinners, the pure out of the unholy and lost, and being washed and cleansed, through the sanctifying power of truth and the grace of God, they were prepared to enter into the enjoyments of the kingdom of righteousness and peace. The kingdom of God refers to the dispensation of grace and truth, which came through Jesus Christ. In this sense, the phrases, “kingdom of God,” and “kingdom of heaven,” are used in the New Testament. Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, and saying, the time is fulfilled and the kingdom of God is at hand. (Mark 1:14, 15.) What one calls the “kingdom of heaven,” another calls the “kingdom of God,” both referring to the same system of divine grace and truth. The unrighteous cannot inherit this spiritual kingdom, for it is a kingdom of purity and love.
Before we can dwell in this kingdom, we must learn to discipline our natures, to control our passions and prove what is that good, acceptable and perfect will of God, repent of our sins, and forsake the error of our ways, for no unholy thing can enter that kingdom. The first condition of access to its enjoyments is righteousness, purity of heart and life. Man needs no supernatural conversion, no miraculous change of nature, to become a subject of this kingdom. He must open his heart to the spiritualizing influence of divine truth and love, and then he is born of God, and inherits the kingdom. No sinner can inherit the kingdom of God, either here or hereafter; but the promise is, that all shall be delivered from sin, the moral creation translated into the glorious liberty of the children of God; every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God, the Father, and so all Israel shall be saved. But the passage under consideration, we conceive, has special application to the spiritual kingdom of the Savior on the earth, the dispensation of grace and truth given to the world through Christ.
Those converted from heathenism to the faith of the gospel, did not fully appreciate at first the nature and requirements of this spiritual kingdom of God. And the apostle found it no easy task to indoctrinate the early converts into the pure faith and holy precepts of the gospel. He taught the necessity of departing from iniquity, after having named the name of Christ, for in no other way could they honor their professions and serve the Master. He taught them distinctly that if unrighteous, they could not be the humble followers of Christ. As long as a man remains unrighteous, he is out of the kingdom, but when he becomes righteous, he enters it. Every righteous man is now in this kingdom, while the moral state of the sinner is such as to preclude him from its enjoyments. He whose motives are pure, whose intentions are upright before God, who seeks for heavenly wisdom, as for a hidden treasure, and desires to promote the happiness of others, is kind, tenderhearted and benevolent, and is swayed continually by the loving spirit of Jesus, is a righteous man. He is governed by moral principle, deals uprightly, walks in his integrity, and exercised by the loving spirit of Christ, he is born of God, for every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God. He walks humbly with God, and inherits on earth Christ’s spiritual kingdom of truth and righteousness.
The Few Saved.
“Lord, are there few that be saved.”—Luke 13:23.
This passage of Scripture is often brought forward to prove that only a portion of mankind will finally reach the heavenly state. It is said that if Christ had taught the doctrine of universal salvation to the disciples, it would be absurd to suppose that they would ask him if few only were saved. This objection to the doctrine of Universalism is urged with great zeal by the advocates of Partialism, and regarded as quite too formidable for Universalists to grapple with.
In a volume written against Universalism, we find the argument stated in the following language:
“Up to this time, it is certain that Jesus had not informed his disciples that all men are to be saved; for it would be an impeachment of their common sense, to suppose that the disciples would have asked the Savior if few were to be saved, had he already taught them that all men shall be saved.”
Now if there is any argument in this objection against Universalism, it applies with equal force against orthodoxy itself! If Christ had taught that only a few would be finally saved — as the objector contends — why did they ask him if few only would be redeemed? If he had clearly instructed them on that point, as Partialism affirms, why should they propound such a query? To apply the argument of the objector to orthodoxy, we should say, “Up to this time it is certain that Jesus had not informed his disciples that a part of mankind only would be saved; for it would be an impeachment of their common sense to suppose that the disciples would have asked the Savior if few were to be saved, had he already taught them such a sentiment.”
The disciples, it is said, would not have sought information upon a subject in which they had been clearly instructed by their Master, and yet it is affirmed, they ask him whether a few only will finally reach heaven, when this had been the main burden of his teachings concerning human destiny! Orthodoxy asserts that Christ taught no other doctrine; that he and his disciples believed that only a few would finally. be saved. If so, why should the disciples ask him such a question? “It would be an impeachment of their common sense,” to ask him if few were to be saved, had he already distinctly taught them such a sentiment.
The passage has no reference, we conceive, to the immortal state of existence; but has special application to the Savior’s kingdom of truth and righteousness which he came to establish in the earth, and to those fearful judgments coming upon those who rejected that kingdom. By the similitude of the “mustard seed,” and the “leaven hid in three measures of meal,” Jesus set forth the progressive work of his heavenly kingdom, indicating great and glorious results from his system of religion, which should continue to extend till all should feel its divine influence and power.
The preceding verse informs us that Jesus journeyed toward Jerusalem, still teaching as he passed along. This is supposed to be his last journey to the holy city; and it is natural to suppose that his mind must have been occupied, not only with the greatness of his mission, but he must have considered the fate that awaited him, and the righteous retribution coming upon those who rejected his religion.
The passage we are considering and the succeeding context, shows clearly that Jesus had made some reference to the desolation coming upon the house of Israel, and that ill-fated city to which he journeyed. The disciples saw the hostility of the people to the Savior and his kingdom, and feeling the need of more light and instruction concerning the success of his mission, and the fate and number of those who should be visited with swift destruction, one says, “Lord, are there few that be saved?” Lord, you tell us of the greatness and extent of your kingdom; behold, how few followers you now have! How can your religion triumph as you teach? You see how small a number accept your doctrine and enter your kingdom. Shall only a few be saved — saved from blindness, sin and unbelief, and from the judgments coming on those who reject your teachings and kingdom?
The reply of our Lord indicated the nature of the salvation referred to: “Strive to enter in at the strait gate: for many will seek to enter in and shall not be able.” As much as to say: “Closely adhere to me; follow my instructions; obey my teachings and confide in my word; my truth shall sweep on, conquering unto conquest; but you should make practical my religion, remain firm to my cause, steadfast in the truth, for only such as endure unto the end shall be saved from the fearful woes coming upon this generation.” Comparatively few would enter his kingdom, before severe national judgments should come upon those who rejected him. Then they would seek to enter in, but should not be able. Having filled up the measure of their iniquity, they should suffer righteous retribution for their sins. Those few who gave heed to the instructions of Christ, were saved from sin and error, and the retribution which came upon the disobedient and sinful. The important truth taught, is fidelity to Christ and his heavenly kingdom, under all circumstances in life.
The Rich Man And Lazarus.
“In hell he lifted up his eyes, being in torments.”—Luke 16:23.
That we may more readily apprehend the meaning of the Savior, and appreciate the important truths which he designed to present in this parable, which we now propose to examine, it is necessary to understand the circumstances under which it was uttered, and consider the preceding context, which has an important bearing upon the parable, and which will essentially aid us in our present investigation.
This parable is found in connection with a series of illustrations that composed one unbroken discourse of our Lord, and was addressed to the same audience, and for a specific purpose. At the commencement of the preceding chapter, we learn the character of the audience addressed. “Then drew near unto him all the publicans and sinners, for to hear him. And the Pharisees and Scribes murmured, saying: This man receiveth sinners, and eateth with them.” Luke 15:1, 2.
Gathered about the Savior were publicans and sinners, who exhibited a willingness to be instructed by the great Teacher, many of whom embraced his religion; and also were present, haughty, aristocratic Scribes and Pharisees, who were puffed up with a conceit of their own spiritual attainments and religious excellencies. They regarded themselves as the special favorites of God, and sought every opportunity to accuse Jesus and his followers with impiety, and teaching doctrines which were immoral in their tendency and influence. They murmured against the Savior for communing with publicans and sinners, upon whom they looked only with contempt. Jesus, knowing well the character of the people whom he addressed, adapted his instructions to their circumstances and wants — first, by the parable of the lost sheep, which is doubtless familiar to the minds of all our readers.
A good shepherd who had lost a sheep, would make diligent search for it till it was found, and instead of finding fault with a shepherd who should seek the lost sheep, every such effort would receive the hearty commendation of all. There would be rejoicing even, that his efforts had been crowned with success. .
Jesus evidently designed by this illustration to rebuke the Pharisees for murmuring at him in his efforts to seek and save the lost publicans and sinners. The Pharisees contended, that they themselves were not lost, but that the publicans and sinners were in this condition, and, consequently, that these were the very individuals whom Jesus came to seek; and hence, instead of murmuring as they did, they should have rejoiced that the lost was sought after and found. The same sentiment is taught in the succeeding parable, with a similar application. When the woman found the lost piece of silver, those around her rejoiced in her successful efforts. So there was joy among the angels of God when the erring child of humanity turned from his waywardness and set his feet towards the heavenly Zion. And if the Scribes and Pharisees were in sympathy with the angelic hosts, then they would rejoice that the lost was found. But they exhibited no joyful emotions that the wanderer returned to the fold of Christ, clearly indicating that they were not animated with the angelic spirit. The successful mission of the Savior is clearly taught in these parables. The lost sheep and lost piece of silver were sought after till they were found. This is as distinctly taught as that they were lost.
By these illustrations, thus skillfully arranged and wisely adapted to the occasion, did Jesus exhibit the preciousness of humanity, lost in sin and error, and thus justify his course in seeking the redemption of man, though never so debased by sin. All were precious in the Father’s sight, and, hence, all were embraced in his divine and holy mission. He came especially to seek and save that which was lost; and the Scribes and Pharisees ought to have rejoiced in the success of his efforts. But instead of this, they murmured against him, because he received sinners and ate with them.
Continuing his discourse, the Savior introduces the parable of the prodigal son, which is full of doctrinal and practical instruction, and which is doubtless familiar to the reader. Considered in connection with the preceding illustrations, its meaning is so obvious that extended remarks upon it are uncalled for. The publicans and sinners had expressed a willingness to listen to the great Teacher, and accept his instructions—to believe on the Son of God, and enter into life. They expressed a desire to return from their prodigality, to arise and go to their Father’s house, where there was bread enough and to spare. They were in a famishing condition, dead in trespasses and sin; but returning from their prodigality, they are spoken of as one who was dead, and is alive again — who was lost and is found. The intelligent reader cannot fail to see in the conduct of the “elder son,” a vivid portraiture of the proud and self-righteous Pharisee, who is always ready to complain when blessings are meted out to other souls!
Although the fifteenth chapter closes with this parable, yet the subject is continued, as we shall see, as we proceed. Jesus unquestionably intended to frame these illustrations so that the people addressed should feel the full force of the truths he designed to convey, and the keenness of the reproof they contained. He thus held up before them a mirror in which they might see themselves. Hence, he introduces the parable of the rich man and his unfaithful steward. The conduct of the Scribes and Pharisees is undoubtedly here referred to. As expounders of the law of Moses, they had been unfaithful and unjust. They labored to serve God and mammon, to administer the law professedly for sacred purposes, but actually to secure their own selfish ends. They perverted the law, misdirected the people in their gifts, wrongfully appropriated to their own use what should have been given into the treasury of the Lord. In this way they made void the law of God through their traditions, and attempted to serve God and mammon. The Scribes and Pharisees professed to be stewards of God, and yet taught the people to transgress God’s commandments; and Jesus reproved them for their hypocrisy and deceit. They perceived his purpose, understood the similitude as applicable to themselves, and then they no longer concealed their excited emotions, but showed signs of anger by deriding him. At the fourteenth verse, we read as follows: “And the Pharisees also who were covetous, heard all these things, and they derided him.” They were conscious of guilt, and having their conduct exposed, they became deeply enraged. Then Jesus turns to them, and says, pointedly: “Ye are they which justify yourselves before men, but God knoweth your hearts; for that which is highly esteemed among men, is an abomination in the sight of God.” The Scribes and Pharisees justified themselves in their wicked perversion of the law, in making it conducive to their own selfish ends; when, in fact, they were relieved from all obligations to the law after Christ came and superceded the law of rites and ceremonies by his own blessed religion. In still adhering to the law after it was abrogated, by the introduction of the gospel into the world, Jesus showed them, by another parable, that the attachment was illegal, and that they were like a man who should marry a woman who was put away from her husband. And this was the condition of the Pharisees; for they still adhered to the law — were wedded to it, after it was put away, by the introduction of the new and better covenant.
With this examination of the preceding context, we are now prepared to appreciate more readily and clearly the parable of the rich man and Lazarus. Through all this discourse of our Lord, the Pharisees had been put upon trial, their conduct examined, the motives of their hearts laid open, and, on being found guilty, full of hypocrisy and deceit, he proceeds to point out the merited retribution which awaited them for their sins.
Jesus speaks of the prosperity of the Scribes and Pharisees by saying, that the rich man was clad in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day. But prosperity had not led them to God; they became proud and haughty, and disobeyed the commands of heaven. They trampled upon the requisitions of the Most High, and were unfaithful stewards of God’s law. Their condition was similar to that of Israel, spoken of in the 32d chapter of Deuteronomy. Jeshurun, who here represents Israel, forsook God who made him, and lightly esteemed the Rock of his salvation. Israel became a froward generation — children in whom there was no faith, and after filling up the measure of their iniquity, the Lord is represented as saying that a fire was kindled in his anger which should burn to the lowest hell, and consume the earth with her increase, and set on fire the foundations of her mountains. This referred simply to the temporal ruin and judgments coming upon the sinful and disobedient. Their severe chastisement is spoken of under the following highly figurative language: “I will heap mischiefs upon them; I will spend arrows upon them. They shall be burnt with hunger, and devoured with burning heart, and with bitter destruction,” etc.
This account of Israel gives a very vivid and faithful portraiture of the condition of the Scribes and Pharisees, whom the Savior addressed in the series of parables we have considered. They, too, grew proud and haughty, and forsook the God that made them, and lightly esteemed the Rock of their salvation. They were unfaithful to their high trusts, and abandoned the service of God; taught, for doctrines, the commandments of men, and made void the law of God through their traditions. They were soon to be punished for their sins. A fire was about to be kindled that should burn them to the lowest hell. They were to be burnt with hunger, and devoured with burning heat. The poor, despised publicans and sinners were represented by the “beggar” in the parable, and the Scribes and Pharisees by the “rich man.”
The condition of these two classes of individuals was greatly changed. The publicans and sinners exhibited a willingness to listen to the divine teachings of Jesus, to turn from the error of their ways and enter into the kingdom of God. (Matt. 21:32; Luke 3:12.) Some of this class believed on Jesus; and being thus exalted, morally raised from their spiritually dead condition, they are represented in the parable as being carried by angels into Abraham’s bosom. In becoming Christians, they lost their national citizenship, were no longer Jews nor Greeks, Barbarian, nor Sythian, bond nor free, but were all one in Christ. Being Christ’s, they were of Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise. (Gal. 3:28, 29).
To be in “Abraham’s bosom” was a figurative expression, indicating simply, that those referred to were of the faith of Abraham. This language shows conclusively, that the account is not to be understood literally; the absolute impossibility of such a construction of the language, argues conclusively that it is figurative and parabolic. One man was not in the literal bosom of another! But this we must believe on the supposition that the account is a literal statement of facts and not a parable. But the language is figurative. To be in “Abraham’s bosom,” was to be in possession of the faith which animated the bosom of Abraham, the faith which found a lodgment in his heart; for Paul teaches, that “They which be of faith, are blessed with faithful Abraham.” Gal. 3:9.
The rich man also died and was buried — a fact not stated of the “beggar” — “and in hell, he lifted up his eyes, being in torment.” The word rendered hell here is hades, and corresponds to sheol of the Old Testament. Dr. George Campbell, a learned Presbyterian divine, tells us that, in his judgment, it ought NEVER, in scripture, to be rendered hell, at least in the sense in which that word is universally understood among Christians. Dr. Campbell gives us the meaning of sheol, and defines hades in the following language:
“As to the word hades, which occurs in eleven places of the New Testament, and is rendered hell in all except one, where it is translated grave, it is quite common in classical authors, and frequently used by the Seventy in the translation of the Old Testament. In my judgment, it ought never in Scripture to be rendered hell, at least, in the sense wherein that word is now universally understood by Christians. In the Old Testament, the corresponding word is sheol, which signifies the state of the dead in general, without regard to the goodness or badness of the persons, their happiness or misery. In translating that word, the Seventy have almost invariably used hades. The state is always represented under those figures which suggest something dreadful, dark, and silent, about which the most prying eye, and listening ear, can acquire no information. The term hades is well adapted to express this idea. To this, the word hell in its primitive signification perfectly corresponds; for, at first, it denoted only what was sacred or concealed. This word is found with little variation of form, and precisely in the same meaning, in all the Teutonic dialects. * * * * *
It is very plain, that neither in the Septuagint version of the Old Testament, nor in the New, does the word hades convey the meaning which the present English word hell, in the Christian usage, always conveys to our minds.” — Diss. vi., pp. 180–1.
That is, in his judgment, it ought NEVER to be used to signify endless misery. It never was used in this sense among the ancients, never referred to punishment in the future world as human creeds teach.
The Savior used it in the parable before us in a figurative sense, to set forth the merited retribution of the Pharisees, who were to be brought into a low and degraded condition, just as it is used in the 10th chapter of Luke: “And thou, Capernaum, which art exalted to heaven, shalt be brought down to hell” (hades.) All that was intended here by the people being exalted to heaven was, that they enjoyed high and exalted privileges, and they were said to be thrust down to hell when those privileges were taken from them, and they were brought into a low and degraded condition. Such was the moral condition and fate of the Pharisees. Once the depositories of God’s truth, in the enjoyment of exalted privileges, but in their haughtiness, they forsook the God that made them, and lightly esteemed the Rock of their salvation. They rebelled against God; and after they filled up the measure of their iniquity, a most fearful destruction overtook them, which brought them into a low state of degradation and misery. So severe was the retribution, that they are represented as saying: “I am tormented in this flame.” This was not a literal flame of fire; it was highly figurative language, employed to set forth the severe punishment about to come upon the Scribes and Pharisees. We have already seen that Moses employed similar phraseology to set forth the fearful punishments to come upon Israel, where it is said that the people should be burnt with hunger, and devoured with burning heat.
Jesus knew well that the great city of the Pharisees was soon to be visited with famine, pestilence and war; that the overflowing scourge should be upon it, and that there should be a time of trouble such as had not been from the beginning of the world, nor ever should be again. He knew the terrible desolation soon to come upon the people, that they would be cut off by famine and be burnt with hunger, as Israel had previously been. “They shalt be burnt with hunger, and devoured with burning heat, and with bitter destruction: I will also send the teeth of beasts upon them, with the poison of serpents of the dust.” Deut. 32:24. Hence they are represented as being tormented in this flame, and, like Capernaum, brought down to hades, in a low state of degradation and suffering. Those who received Christ and obeyed his instructions, escaped that flame — were not “burnt with hunger;” while those who gave no heed to his teachings lifted up their eyes in its torments. They rejected the Lord’s anointed, and put him to an open shame, and consequently, they suffered merited retribution. They lifted up their eyes in torment, being burnt with hunger, and devoured with burning heat. But Abraham said: “Son, remember that thou in thy life time receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.”
On the supposition that this passage refers to the immortal world, and is a literal account as many believe, then it teaches that the inhabitants of heaven and hell are sufficiently near each other to converse together! The redeemed in heaven, then, see the misery of the damned in hell! And would not such an awful sight render the redeemed unhappy? On earth, imperfect as man is, such a sight would fill him with horror. No man, with a tender and sympathetic nature, could stand by unmoved and see his kindred rolling upon a bed of burning coals. And is there less compassion, less sympathy, less pity in heaven? Does heaven so harden the heart that the mother can be happy there and witness the endless torment of her child, and shout glory to God as she witnesses the misery of her offspring in hell? Would not the mother’s heart heave with agonized emotions as she saw her child wrapped in sheet of flame and hear the wails of her offspring? Could it be a heaven of happiness and joy to her? Abraham in heaven, it is said, saw the rich man in hell “lifting up his eyes in torment,” and conversed with him.
But this language has no reference to the future world, we apprehend. Once the Pharisees enjoyed exalted privileges, and received many “good things,” and the publicans and sinners “evil things;” but now their conditions are represented as being changed according to their merits. The parable continues thus: “And besides all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed; so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us that would come from thence.” If this refers to the future world, as the sacrificial theology affirms, then it shows that there are some in heaven who would go to hell, were they not prevented by the “great gulf;” for the language is: “They that would go from hence to you cannot,” plainly implying that they would go if they could do so! And why should not those in heaven seek to rescue their friends in hell? But the subject has no reference to the immortal state of existence. The Savior was speaking of the destruction about to come upon Jerusalem, the great city of the Scribes and Pharisees. When that city was besieged by the Romans, a wide, deep trench was made all around it, to prevent any one passing to and from the city. The wicked Pharisees, who were hemmed in by the enemy, could not pass out; and those without the city, who would grant relief to their friends within, could not then do it; all ingress and egress was cut off — no passing to and from the place, for an impassable gulf was there.
Reference is made to this “great gulf” in the 19th chapter of Luke at the 41st verse and onward, in the following language:
“And when he (Jesus) was come near, he beheld the city, and wept over it, saying: If thou hadst known, even thou, at least, in this thy day, the things which belong unto thy peace; but now they are hid from thine eyes. For the days shall come upon thee, that thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every side, and shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation.”
This trench which kept the people in on every side, was evidently the impassable gulf referred to. No relief could be obtained from friends without the city, not even water to cool their parched tongues. The people were tormented with famine, being burnt with hunger, so that Josephus tells us that the inhabitants seemed like ghosts in the streets, and the mother, famishing for food, ate her own babe. This was the flame in which they lifted up their eyes, being in torment.
The parable continues, representing the rich man as offering a petition to Father Abraham in behalf of his five brethren, that they might not be involved in the same ruin and misery. The brethren referred to were the national brethren of the Scribes and Pharisees, who had not been overwhelmed in the terrible calamities which came upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and who had not felt the burning of hunger. The prayer certainly was a most benevolent one. The reply was: “They have Moses and the prophets, let them hear them.” That is, let them listen to what Moses and the prophets have said concerning the judgments of God on the disobedient and sinful, and take warning. But Moses had said nothing in regard to a place of torment in the future world. This is admitted by eminently learned divines of the orthodox church. We quote the following orthodox divines upon this point, to show that a state of future punishment was not held up as a motive to the people under the Mosaic economy:
MILMAN. — “The sanction on which the Hebrew law was founded is extraordinary. The lawgiver (Moses) maintains a profound silence on that fundamental article, if not of political, at least, of religious legislation — rewards and punishments in another life. He substituted temporal chastisements and temporal blessings. On the violation of the constitution, followed inevitably blighted harvests, famine, pestilence, defeat, captivity; on its maintenance, abundance, health, fruitfulness, victory, independence. How wonderfully the event verified the prediction of the inspired legislator! how invariably apostacy led to adversity — repentance and reformation to prosperity.”
BISHOP WARBURTON. — “In the Jewish republic, both the rewards and punishments promised by heaven were temporal only. Such as health, long life, peace, plenty, and dominion, etc. Diseases, premature death, war, famine, want, subjections, and captivity, etc. And in no one place of the Mosaic Institutes is there the least mention, or any intelligible hint of the rewards and punishments of another life.”
When Solomon restored the integrity of religion, he addressed a long prayer to the God of Israel, consisting of one solemn petition for the continuance of the old covenant, made by the ministry of Moses. He gives us an exact account of all its parts, and explains at large the sanctions of the Jewish law and religion. And here, as in the writings of Moses, we find nothing but temporal rewards and punishments.”
PALEY. — “This (Mosaic) dispensation dealt in temporal rewards and punishments. In the 28th chapter of Deuteronomy you find Moses, with prodigious solemnity, pronounce the blessings and cursings which awaited the children of Israel under the dispensation to which they were called. And you will observe, that these blessings consisted altogether of worldly benefits, and these curses of worldly punishments.”
Jahn, whose excellent work is a text-book in the Andover Theological Seminary, says:
“We have not authority, therefore, decidedly to say, that any other motives were held out to the ancient Hebrews to pursue the good and avoid the evil, than those which were derived from the rewards and punishments of this life.”
If, as these divines contend, no other motives were held out by Moses but the rewards and punishments of this life, he certainly did not teach endless punishment for the sins of this life. But Moses had spoken of temporal calamities, of severe national judgments which were to come upon the disobedient and sinful in this life, and of the people being burnt with hunger, as we have seen. And hence the propriety of directing the people to consult the writings of Moses and the prophets.
They will not credit Moses, but if one should go unto them from the dead they will repent; or, if one were raised from the dead they would believe. But of this even there was no certainty. Jesus had presented the highest evidence to them that he was the Son of God, the Messiah of the prophets, even raised the dead, and they believed not. Let them take warning from Moses whom they profess to receive as authority. We regard this to be the correct exposition of this portion of the Word of God. To our mind it appears natural, reasonable and scriptural.