The following is a mixture of excerpts and summaries of portions of Chapter One: The Plain Language of the Bible.  In much of Biblical Judgment there are detailed studies of various themes, passages and words that combine to indicate the ultimate fate of the lost, and we will do some of that in this chapter, but it will all begin with the very plain language of what happens to the unsaved in judgment.  In the full chapter, a number of verses are addressed.  Here we will look at just three.

For God so loved the world that He gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him shall not perish, but have everlasting life.  John 3:16

This is probably the most well known verse in the Bible.  Even those who know very little about the Bible or the Christian faith have quite often learned this verse somewhere along the way.  This is a cherished verse for Christians because it sums up our salvation in just a few words.  But it is a cherished verse by me and I'm sure other non-traditionalists even more so because it most plainly lays out the only two ultimate fates for any human soul.  In fact it defines what we non-traditionalists believe and why we are sometimes called conditionalists.  According to this verse, eternal life is conditional and dependant upon believing in the Son. It is so easy to miss the obvious because it is such a familiar verse.  But let's look at what it says.  It says that we either perish or we have eternal life.  How easy it would have been here and throughout scripture for those whom God endowed with truth to make clear the concept of eternal agony in hell if that were in fact the fate of the lost.  But God, never veiling any warning of punishment, here clearly makes known that the punishment for unbelief is to perish.  We know that this perishing is not referring to the physical body because all of our bodies will one day perish.  And that leaves only the soul that this verse could be referring to.  Yes, every soul that God created will either experience everlasting life or will perish.  This concept is contrary to the theories of those who hold the traditional view of hell, who believe that every soul is created eternal, and that it is just a matter of where you will spend your eternity.   This verse, like so many others in scripture that we will examine, seems to be a most obvious warning in the most plain, understandable language. But the traditionalist, because of belief in an everlasting state of conscious torment for souls, is forced to redefine the word "perish" to mean a constant state of perishing that never ends, or even eternal torture.  But even a simple understanding of the English word “perish” is that something perishing will eventually come to an end.  The process of perishing, in any application, is finite, but the ultimate effect, that it perished, is permanent, everlasting, eternal. (This is why the destruction of unbelievers is said to be an “eternal punishment” in other places in the Bible)  In fact, there is no precedent in life or in Scripture that something perishing or dying could do so without end.  But let's look a little deeper and see what the word really means.  The English word “perish” is being translated from the Greek word “apollumi”, and the Strong's Concordance primarily defines it as "to destroy fully".   There is no indication that we should redefine the word when it exists in such a foundational doctrinal verse of scripture.  Like so many texts and words the traditionalist uses to try to support the case for a traditional hell, the doctrine, assumed true, is used to redefine words, instead of letting the actual meaning of words create sound doctrine.  Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament defines apollumi as " to destroy i.e. to put out of the way entirely, to be blotted out, to vanish away, to abolish, put an end to, ruin" and Moulton and Milligan's The Vocabulary of the Greek New Testament has the word as meaning "of destroying life".

The exact same word is translated "destroy" in the King James Version referring to what the multitude wanted done with Jesus when they requested that Barrabus be set free(Matt 27:20).  They wanted Jesus gone, abolished; not in a constant state of perishing or misery.  His very existence was convicting to them.  Thayer's claims that sometimes the word means "to be consigned to eternal misery", and offers a few examples from Paul's writings, none of which mention anything at all about "eternal" or "misery".  Here are the references given by Thayer’s if you would like to look them up: 1 Co i:18, 2 Co ii:15, 2 Co iv: 3, 2 Th ii:10.  I honestly do not see how Thayer’s is coming up with the claims that they do here.  I can only assume that this meaning of eternal misery has been attached through the writings and teachings of theologians after the New Testament was written.  It does not appear to be in Scripture at all.

Apollumi appears eighty-six times in the Bible, and it is usually translated into English as “destroy” or “perish”, and sometimes refers to something being “lost”, but regarding the translations into the word “lost”, aside from one single usage in a parable when it is used to refer to a jewel that a woman lost, it always refers to lost sheep, and a sheep who was lost, if not found, would surely perish.  When Jesus in Matthew 15:24 said that He was here to go to the lost sheep of Israel, He meant that if He didn’t “find” them, they would of course eventually perish, and the analogy involving sheep is used because a sheep lost from the fold and from its shepherd is at the “mercy” of wolves who are not merciful to sheep, and also would be exposed to other dangers that it could not overcome on its own.  A lost sheep, though alive at the moment, was as good as dead.  So the argument could not be made that just because the sheep still existed, in theory, that something could be described as “apollumi” and still remain for eternity.  A lost sheep is as good as dead.  If not found, it will die.  And the same is true for the soul.  An unsaved soul is still a living soul, but it is also a dead soul in the sense that it is ultimately headed for death.  The lost soul will outlive the flesh to be sure.  But there is a date set by God, after Christ’ 1000 year reign on earth, when every unbeliever will stand before God to be judged, and will then be cast into the lake of fire.  John the revelator, under the inspiration of God, calls this the “second death”.  The first thing that died was the body.  And now the soul will suffer the same fate.  Only by the unfounded presumption that there will be unending misery for lost humanity can the traditionalist support a definition of “apollumi” that means anything other than “to destroy fully” in regard to souls.  In Matthew 10:28 Jesus tells us not to fear man who can only kill the body, but to fear God who can destroy both body and soul in Hell (Gehenna in Greek).  This is another great verse supporting the non-traditional position and we will also address the word "hell" and its true meaning and examine the whole verse a little later.  But for now, let's look at the words "kill", "destroy" and "body" in this verse.  The word "destroy" again is the same word translated "perish" in John 3:16.  If it meant eternal misery, it seems that Jesus would not have used it to describe what God would do to the soul and to the body because the word soma translated as “body” here at the end of the verse is the same word Jesus used at the beginning of the verse referring to that which "man" can kill.  Interestingly, there is however a slight difference in the Greek words Jesus chose to describe how man can "kill" the body and how God can "destroy" body and soul.  The Strong's Concordance defines this word being translated "kill" as a "slaying".  This is significant because a slain body could still exist in the presence of the slayer for a time, but a body, or soul for that matter, fully destroyed (apollumi, abolished) is gone, lost, and out of existence as defined by Strong's, Thayer's, and Moulton and Milligan.  And further support for this is found in the fact that the multitude that wanted to crucify Jesus was not just calling for Him to be killed in the sense of slaying.  The word translated “slain” was not used there.  They wanted Him slain no doubt, but He was a burden and an offense to them, and they wanted Him utterly out of existence, so the arguably stronger word “apollumi” is used.  And the same word is used after Jesus healed on the Sabbath in Matthew 12:14 : “Then the Pharisees went out and held council against Him, as to how they might destroy(apollumi) Him” - not just slay or kill Him.   It is quite possible that sensing the conviction He put them under, they were, almost subconsciously, knowing who He really was, desiring the government to do the impossible: not only slay this person but, in vain hope, put the very King of Kings and Lord of Lords out of existence as if it could relieve their guilt.  And isn’t this what so many false religions are still trying to do?  Ironically, His death is exactly what will relieve our guilt, but not because death could keep Him, as they hoped, but because He lives and our hope is in Him who keeps us.

Here in John 3:16 we have clear evidence that God will ultimately destroy fully those souls who do not attain eternal life.  However, if the traditionalist has determined in his or her mind that perpetual, conscious soul suffering is the fate of the unsaved, then every verse that contains obvious words to the contrary must be redefined by them, and we'll see this trend as we continue our study.  But if we want to uphold a correct understanding of Scripture, we cannot allow the fallacy of saying, "Because the traditional view of hell is a fact, “perish” must mean ongoing suffering."  We must demand proof, outside of the redefined terms, that the traditional view of hell is indeed a fact, but I believe it will never be shown. 

 Psalm 73:27  For behold, those who are far from you shall perish; you put an end to everyone who is unfaithful to you.

Here we have an Old Testament account that claims the same fate for the unsaved that the New Testament verse of John 3:16 did, that they perish and come to an end.  In this psalm, Asaph has been confessing that he was jealous over the prosperity of the wicked.  And he says that his feet had almost slipped because although he had made great efforts to maintain a pure heart, he was becoming extremely discouraged with the well-being of the lost in comparison to his troubles.  But God didn’t leave him in that place.  In verse seventeen he tells us that it was when he entered into the Sanctuary of God that he came to a realization of the ultimate fate of the wicked who now so often seem to have no problems.  The 1901 American Standard Version renders it, he “considered their latter end” and the English Standard version has “then I discerned their end”.  So what was it about entering God’s sanctuary that taught him what the end of the wicked would be and that they in fact have an end?  Was it just being in the presence of the temple?  Not likely.  Could it have been a special revelation from God?  It is possible but still not likely.  The most probable reason he came to an understanding of the unsaved’s end was simply that the scriptures were opened.  God’s Word revealed truth to him.  So we can know a couple of things from this claim of his.  First we can know that the fate of the wicked is taught clearly enough in the Old Testament writings, prior to his, to understand it fully, and that the New Testament only confirms what has already been taught.  And we can know what the end of the wicked is, but let’s not misinterpret the word “end” to mean “final destination”.  The fact that the wicked have an end as opposed to a continual existence somewhere is the most significant thing we can gain here.  The translations vary but all have the same meaning.  This particular rendering that we began with is from the English Standard Version, and several other versions also tell us in the latter half of the verse that the unsaved, faithless come to an “end”.  Some versions translate their fate as “destruction” which by any common understanding of the word, would mean the same thing.  It is the Hebrew word “tsamath” that is being translated, and Strong’s defines it as to extirpate, consume, cut off, or vanish.  All of these sound like they describe someone or something that comes to an end.  So, does the traditional version of Hell hold up to this scripture?  I cannot see how we could claim that it does.  Clearly, while the traditionalist believes the unsaved come to a horrible fate, they maintain that they have no end, and that their souls are eternal and that their torment is perpetual.  But here we see that they do in fact have an end according to God’s Word.  But this is not the only verse that maintains this.  There are countless others, and several more inside this very psalm.  Verse 18 says God makes the wicked fall down to ruin or destruction, and the Hebrew word used there is “mashshu'ah” which means desolation and destruction.  Verse 19 says they are brought into “shammah” in a moment, which is defined as waste and desolation, among other things.  Verse 19 also says that they will be “utterly consumed” which is a combination of Hebrew words, one of which is “suph” and Strong’s defines it as terminate, consume, have an end, and perish, and the other word is “tamam” and is defined by Strong’s, among other things, as accomplish, cease, consume, have done, come to an end, be all gone, be spent, and be wasted.  There is nothing here in this psalm to indicate eternal torment for these souls who do not know the Living God.

Some may try to claim that all of these descriptions of the wicked are referring only to their physical frame, but I do not think we can logically or scripturally reconcile that.  We must first consider that we all die physically, and Asaph is obviously making a clear distinction between himself, a faithful believer, and the unfaithful unbelievers.  Also, it would go against his own premise of the entire first half of the psalm.  There he is describing the great ease and length of life that many healthy and wealthy unbelievers enjoy.

Clearly, when Asaph says “end” he means “end of being”.  And doesn’t that just make sense?  If the punishment for uncovered sin is perpetual and unending, then the sin hasn’t and cannot and will not ever truly be paid for, which is contrary to the Word of God, because that essentially maintains that God will not bring the wicked to an end as He promises to in multiple places in Scripture, and it implies that He will not finish paying the wage for sin.  It is God, by the way, who pays the wage, not us.  We perform the work of sin, and God pays the wage which we know is death, unless we have covered ourselves from His wrath through faith in the One God.  Death, and more specifically, the Second Death which we are talking about here is a cessation of life, not just missing out on a blessed life in God’s eternal presence as the traditionalist maintains.   That is why “life” and “eternal life” are used interchangeably when speaking of the blessing that God offers.  There is no form of life for humans, even an awful one in an eternal hell, after final judgment.

 

 

Mat 7:13 and 14  Go in through the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and many are the ones entering in through it.  For narrow is the gate, and constricted is the way that leads away into life, and few are the ones finding it.

Much like John 3:16, here, back in the New Testament, we have the very Words of Jesus, and very plain understandable words at that.  There are two paths and two gates, one each of which every human soul will walk along and enter through.  One path leads to life and one to “destruction”, which is the Greek word apoleia (a very similar Greek word to apollumi which we already looked at).  It has among its definitions: die, destruction, ruin, loss, waste, and perish.  Again we have clear language concerning the ultimate fates of lost and saved souls with no indications that we should presume a state of eternal suffering.  And as I’ve asked before, how easy and appropriate would it have been for the Lord, here and in multiple other places, to warn of eternal suffering if that in fact is the result of unbelief?

 

 

This was a small sample of Chapter One.  The full chapter discusses many more verses, even some that reveal that the Hebrew words used to describe the final fate of the lost in some verses actually mean “to become a non-entity”.  What could be more plain than that?