We now come to the last of the five passages which Dr. Bullinger says are generally relied on and referred to by Traditionists. He says, "There remains the fifth passage, Luke 16:19-3119There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day: 20And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores, 21And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores. 22And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; 23And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. 24And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame. 25But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented. 26And beside 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. 27Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house: 28For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment. 29Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. 30And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent. 31And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead. (Luke 16:19‑31), commonly called `The Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus,' or of 'Dives and Lazarus.' It is absolutely impossible that the Traditional interpretation of this can be correct; because, if it were, it would be directly opposed to all the other teaching of Scripture. And the Lord's words cannot and must not be so interpreted. If it be Bible truth (as it is) that 'the dead know not anything,' how could the Lord have taught, and how can we believe that they do know a very great deal?" (p. 34).
The Lord did certainly teach that the dead in the other world are conscious, and know a great deal. If He taught this, and He did, it is true, whatever Dr. Bullinger may say to the contrary. Dr. Bullinger puts his misinterpretation of "The dead know not anything" against the words of our Lord; and he proceeds to explain away our Lord's words so that they shall not contradict his misinterpretation of Scripture.
Here are the words of our Lord: "And it came to pass that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; and in hell [hades] he lift up his eyes being in torments" (Luke 16:22, 2322And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; 23And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. (Luke 16:22‑23)). Whether we treat this as a parable or not does not alter the meaning. It is given to set forth the truth. If a parable, its solemn teaching is to inform us as to what takes place the other side of death. Revelation alone can draw aside the veil. Our Lord clearly teaches that there are two destinations in the next world, one of happiness and the other of woe.
Our Lord further teaches in the most implicit language that there is consciousness after death. Lazarus dies, and without the very slightest hint that there is any interregnum, any period of time between the two statements, we are told he was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom.
Further, when our Lord spoke these words Abraham had been dead over eighteen centuries. How comes he in the place of bliss, if he had ceased to exist, spirit, soul and body, as Dr. Bullinger teaches? Abraham is alive there, at any rate, for he speaks three times to the rich man. This could not be, if there were no Intermediate State.
Moreover the rich man dies, and is buried, and, without any break in the narrative, lifts up his eyes in Hades being in torment. All this most clearly teaches consciousness after death of the soul apart from the body.
Dr. Bullinger waxes sarcastic as to the inconsistencies of Traditionists in explaining what is literal and what is figurative. He asks how can the soul go on thinking without a brain, and how can the soul of a dead person, whose body with its tongue lies buried in the grave, have a tongue and speak in the other world?
So he asks: "There is the further difficulty as to a man who has been actually buried, could think without a brain, or speak without a tongue. How can the spirit speak, or act apart from the physical organs of the body? This is a difficulty our friends cannot get over: and so they have to invent some theory (which outdoes the Spiritist's invention of an 'Astral body') which has no foundation whatever in fact: and is absolutely destitute of anything worthy of the name 'evidence' of any kind whatsoever" (p. 38).
We do not and cannot tell how the soul in another world can think or speak, but we know that they do because Scripture tell us so. We do not invent any theory, but simply state a fact that Scripture warrants us in so doing. We read of God speaking and listening, and many other things, and He is a Spirit. We do not ask how this could be.
A clear case of consciousness after death is that of the prophet Samuel. His disembodied spirit spoke and knew more than the living Saul did. He prophesied the future to him with clearness of vision.
When King Saul was in dire straits and in deep despair he, also, turned to Spiritism. He had sought to cut off all those who had familiar spirits out of the land. and now when in deep perplexity he turned to demoniac aid.
Disguising himself, he asked a woman with a familiar spirit at Endor to bring up Samuel, so that he might in his sore perplexity consult him. She expected to bring up a personating demon, which is all that spiritists can do, but was affrighted when she saw that God permitted a most unusual thing—the spirit of Samuel himself to appear in the likeness of an old man covered with a mantle. This is the only record in Scripture where a dead person appeared in communication with this earth.
Samuel spoke to Saul, remonstrated with him for disturbing him, and proceeded to prophesy that on the morrow Saul and his sons would be with him. So we see a spirit could think, speak and act, and be as conscious as Saul himself. How this could be, we know not, seeing Scripture is silent. We "invent" no "theory," in spite of Dr. Bullinger's charge that such is done. We get an unanswerable proof of consciousness after death when Samuel prophesied to Saul: "Tomorrow shalt thou and thy sons be with me" (1 Sam. 28:1919Moreover the Lord will also deliver Israel with thee into the hand of the Philistines: and to morrow shalt thou and thy sons be with me: the Lord also shall deliver the host of Israel into the hand of the Philistines. (1 Samuel 28:19)). "WITH ME" shows that Samuel was conscious, alive and speaking. His words would have had no sense if he had meant the grave. Moreover, in the circumstances it was impossible for Samuel and Saul and his sons to occupy the same grave. The next day Saul and his sons fell on the mountains of Gilboa, some forty-five miles north of Ramah, where Samuel was buried. Then the bodies of Saul and his sons were exposed on the walls of Bethshan, from thence taken to Jabesh, their bodies burned, and their bones buried under an oak there.
How then could Saul and his sons be with Samuel, save as conscious spirits in the other world? In short, they entered into the Intermediate State. And yet Dr. Bullinger would have us believe that Samuel, Saul and his sons ceased to exist, spirit, soul and body, at death.
David too believed in the Intermediate State. When the child begotten in adultery with Bathsheba died, the sorrow-stricken and sorely sinning father cried out in his grief: "While the child was yet alive, I fasted and wept: for I said, Who can tell whether God will be gracious to me, that the child may live? But now he is dead, wherefore should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I SHALL GO TO HIM, BUT HE SHALL NOT RETURN TO ME" (2 Sam. 12:22, 2322And he said, While the child was yet alive, I fasted and wept: for I said, Who can tell whether God will be gracious to me, that the child may live? 23But now he is dead, wherefore should I fast? can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me. (2 Samuel 12:22‑23)). David did not believe that at death his son had ceased to exist, nor did he believe that at death he himself would cease to exist, for he said: "I shall go to him."
Dr. Bullinger makes the astounding statement: "It seems to us perfectly clear that the Lord was not delivering this as a Parable, or as His own direct teaching; but that He was taking the current traditional teachings of the Pharisees, which He was condemning; and, using them against themselves, thus convicting them out of their own mouths" (p. 48).
One really cannot understand any sensible Christian writing such a palpable travesty of the truth. According to Dr. Bullinger Luke 16:19-3119There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day: 20And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores, 21And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores. 22And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; 23And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. 24And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame. 25But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented. 26And beside 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. 27Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house: 28For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment. 29Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. 30And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent. 31And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead. (Luke 16:19‑31) is not the Lord's direct teaching. We would ask a thousand readers as they read this passage, Does it convey to your minds our Lord's direct teaching in parabolic form? The answer would be unanimously in the affirmative.
And why must Dr. Bullinger take such extraordinary ground? He says: "If we 'hear them' [Old and New Testaments], it would be impossible for us to suppose, for a moment, that Christ could be teaching, here, that which is the very opposite to that of the whole word of God. We have the Scriptures of truth: and they reveal to us, in plain, direct, categorical, unmistakable words that 'the dead know not anything'; and that when man's breath goeth forth, 'in that very day his thoughts perish'" (p. 49).
It is really pathetic to see how Dr. Bullinger quotes again, and again, and again, scriptures which he has misinterpreted, and builds upon them a superstructure of mangled and twisted scriptures. If scriptures do not fall into line with his misinterpreted texts, then they must be explained away, in order to maintain his misinterpretations. To do this he dares to explain away the "plain, categorical, unmistakable" words of our Lord, and to tell us they do not set forth His direct teaching, but simply "current, traditional teachings of the Pharisees." If this is not Modernism of a most flagrant type, then we do not know what Modernism is.
Perhaps the high-water mark of profanity is reached in the following: "But, when we read the passage [Luke 16:15-3115And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God. 16The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it. 17And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail. 18Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery. 19There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day: 20And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores, 21And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores. 22And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; 23And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. 24And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame. 25But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented. 26And beside 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. 27Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house: 28For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment. 29Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. 30And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent. 31And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead. (Luke 16:15‑31)] in the light of the whole Word of God, and especially in the light of the context, we see in it the traditions of the Pharisees, 'which were highly esteemed among men,' but were 'abomination in the sight of the Lord' (verse 15)." (p. 50).
So now our Lord's own teaching as to what obtains in the other world, that the spirit is conscious after death, and goes either into happiness or woe, is described as "abomination in the sight of the Lord." We leave the reader to judge in this matter. There can be only one verdict.
We have now examined the way Dr. Bullinger explains away every one of the five scriptures he says are generally relied on and referred to by Traditionists, and found that he has twisted, mangled and misinterpreted every one of them in order to square them with his misinterpretation of Old Testament scriptures. The Old Testament Scriptures are equally inspired with the New, and we find no contradiction between them, but perfect harmony.
We have before us a pamphlet written by Dr. Bullinger, entitled "SHEOL" & "HADES:" Their Meaning and Usage in the Word of God. (Second Edition)
We agree with Dr. Bullinger in stating that the Hebrew word, Sheol, in the Old Testament is synonymous with the Greek word, Hades, in the New Testament; that is, they have one and the same meaning.
It would be well to state what we believe is the true meaning of Sheol or Hades. It does not refer to a place, but to a condition, and a condition ONLY. It stands in opposition to death, which also is a condition, and a condition ONLY.
Death is the condition of the body apart from the soul, the body in which life is extinct, and which fast goes to corruption. Sheol or Hades is the condition of the soul apart from the body, which condition is either one of bliss or torment, as taught in Luke 16:19-3119There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day: 20And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores, 21And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores. 22And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; 23And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. 24And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame. 25But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented. 26And beside 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. 27Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house: 28For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment. 29Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. 30And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent. 31And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead. (Luke 16:19‑31). We read in Rev. 20:13, 1413And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. 14And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. (Revelation 20:13‑14): "And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell [sheol, or hades] delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. And death and hell [sheol, or hades] were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death."
The true meaning of Sheol or Hades harmonizes with this description of the second resurrection when the wicked dead shall be raised. Death and Hades are cast into the lake of fire. Death, the condition of the body apart from the soul, and Hades, the condition of the soul apart from the body, come to an end, and when the separated bodies and souls are reunited in the moment of resurrection, and the individuals, who, in the death state represented these two conditions, are cast into the lake of fire.
It does not do to say that Sheol or Hades means the grave on the one hand, or a place in the unseen world on the other, for then we should have a place and a condition cast into a place, which would be nonsensical. How could "death and hell," or death and the grave, as Dr. Bullinger would teach, be cast into the lake of fire?
Now let us see what Dr. Bullinger says Sheol means. He begins by telling us that Sheol occurs 65 times in all in the Old Testament, translated "grave" 31 times, "hell" 31 times, "pit" 3 times. Then he tells us that in four passages where the word is "hell" in the text, "grave" is given as the marginal reading.
Then he tells us: "In the MARGIN 'the grave' is put 4 times for 'hell,' thus neutralizing 4 passages, by reducing the total of 'hell' renderings to 27, and correspondingly raising the total of the 'grave' renderings to 35 instances out of 65" (Sheol and Hades, p. 6).
But why cannot we work it the other way about equally logically, and say the "hell" renderings number 35 instances out of 65? We can only charge Dr. Bullinger with manipulating figures to suit his own theory.
Then he concludes: "The grave, therefore, stands out on the face of the above list as the best and commonest meaning" (Sheol and Hades, p. 6).
It is really pitiable to see a Christian man throwing dust, in the eyes of his readers in this fashion. He goes on to say: "As to the rendering 'hell,' it does not represent Sheol; because, both by Dictionary definition and by colloquial usage, 'hell' means the place of future punishment" (Sheol & Hades, p. 7).
So divine terms are to be settled by the Dictionary and the speech of "the man in the street."
He then proceeds: "Sheol has no such meaning; but denotes the present condition of death. 'The grave' is, therefore, a far more suitable translation, because it visibly suggests to us what is invisible to the mind, viz., the state of death" (Sheol & Hades, p. 7).
We should have thought that a dead body in its coffin was a visible enough representation of the condition of death. But at any rate Dr. Bullinger admits that Sheol denotes the present condition of death. Then he thinks that "the grave" is the best translation, which means, according to him, a condition, is best described by a place. Is this logical? We think it is confusion.
One can understand how in the Old Testament, before Christ had abolished (annulled) death, and brought life and immortality (incorruptibility) to light through the gospel (2 Tim. 1:1010But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel: (2 Timothy 1:10)), they understood well what the condition of death was when they saw their dead with life extinct, and corruption set in. But as for the soul they had very little light as to what happened to it at death. One is not surprised that many look at Sheol or Hades as a place, rather than a condition. But it is in the full light of Scripture most evidently the counterpart of death, one affecting the body, the other the soul, and both conditions, and conditions ONLY. So in no case can Sheol or Hades mean the grave.
We ask the question why Dr. Bullinger did not mention a Hebrew word, Queber, which means the grave, and is found over 60 times in the Old Testament, and is generally translated, "grave" or "sepulcher." It means the grave or its equivalent in every case. Why is nothing said about this? Is this honest? If he brought it in, it would upset his argument, we fear.
Now we come to Hades in the New Testament. The word occurs eleven times in the New Testament. Dr. Bullinger gives his readers a list of these, but, mark well, in every case he gives the quotation with the Greek word, Hades. Why? The reason seems obvious. We are slow to accuse Dr. Bullinger of want of good faith. We can only excuse him by saying that he is so obsessed with his own theories that he is rendered blind to the most obvious things. Please note carefully, out of these eleven times the word Hades is translated "Hell," it is only ONCE translated by the word, "Grave" (See 1 Cor. 15:5555O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory? (1 Corinthians 15:55)).
When it is a question of Sheol, and he found according to his calculation that it was rendered 54 percent by the word, "grave," 41 1/2 percent by the word, "Hell"; and 4 1/2 percent by the word, "pit," Dr. Bullinger concludes, "The grave, therefore, stands out on the face of the above list as the best and commonest rendering" (Sheol & Hades, p. 6).
Why then does he not say, seeing Hades is translated "hell" ten times out of eleven, and only once the "grave," that it should be translated "Hell" as the best and commonest rendering? In this case the percentage is not a mere 54, but over 90 percent. Why is Dr. Bullinger not consistent? It is hard to suppress one's indignation at dishonest manipulation of figures to suit himself.
Then, again, why does he not mention the ordinary word for "grave" in the New Testament? Mnemeion (and its cognate word, Mneema) is translated grave,.sepulcher, tomb 49 times. Why is this not mentioned?
Dr. Bullinger writes: "In our examination of 'Sheol' we showed that THE grave (not A grave) was the only rendering which accurately represents the Hebrew word Sheol. As Hades is used by the Holy Spirit as the New Testament substitute for the Old Testament Sheol it follows that the same meaning must be given to Hades in the New Testament" (Sheol & Hades, pp. 17, 18). So because the Translators of the Bible give "grave" as the equivalent of the Hebrew word, Sheol, in the majority of cases, Dr. Bullinger thinks he is justified in saying that Sheol means the "grave." Yet when the same Translators give "hell" as the meaning of the Greek word Hades (the equivalent of Sheol), no less than ten times out of eleven, Dr. Bullinger ignores this, and fastens on THE ONE SOLITARY EXCEPTION, where the word is translated "grave," and says that the Old Testament usage must govern the New Testament word. Is this logical? Is it honest? We leave our readers to judge.
Further, Dr. Bullinger in the quotation just given tells us that the "grave" is "the ONLY rendering which accurately represents the Hebrew word Sheol." And yet in the same pamphlet, and only ten pages earlier, he writes: "Sheol... denotes the present condition of death. The ' grave' is, therefore, a far more suitable translation, because it visibly suggests to us what is invisible to the mind, viz., the state of death" (Sheol & Hades, p. 7). So he describes a condition by a place, and tells us this is the ONLY rendering. Verily, "the legs of the lame are not equal." And in such a solemn matter as this, it is really most unpardonable. One cannot believe a Christian scholar, such as Dr. Bullinger was, did not know better. He was surely building with wood, hay and stubble.
Commenting on 1 Cor. 15:5555O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory? (1 Corinthians 15:55) we read: "O Hades, where is thy victory? This is translated in the Authorized Version 'O grave,' which is conclusive as to the meaning to be put upon the word Hades" (Sheol & Hades, p. 22).
Why conclusive? Dr. Bullinger surely knew that ten times out of eleven instances in which the word Hades occurs in the New Testament, it is translated by the word "hell," and only ONCE the "grave" (1 Cor. 15:5555O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory? (1 Corinthians 15:55)). Should this not be conclusive? But this would not suit his theory, so he prefers to juggle with words, and throw dust in the eyes of his readers. So Hades translated "grave" once, is conclusive, as placed against ten cases where it is translated "hell." We should be ashamed to be guilty of such shameless sophistry.
The fact is, there is no one word in the English language the equivalent of Sheol or Hades, so that to translate it "grave," or "pit," or "hell," cannot be correct.
And further, in the Revised Version (1 Cor. 15:5555O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory? (1 Corinthians 15:55)) we read, "O death, [not "grave," as in the Authorized Version] where is thy victory? O death, where is thy sting?" Why does Dr. Bullinger not say that this is conclusive? Then he states: "In the Revised Version, and in the American Revised Version, every one of these passages is rendered uniformly 'Hades' without any alternative rendering in the margin" (Sheol & Hades, p. 17).