by George Sidney Hurd
 
In this final article on the subject of Original Sin, I will be responding to some of the objections presented by those who deny that Adam’s original sin brought physical and spiritual death or alienation from God upon all his prodigy, arguing instead that we were born a “clean slate” (tabula rasa), only to afterwards become corrupted due to external influences.
 
As I explained in the previous articles, What about Original Sin? and Are Babies Vipers in Diapers?, I do not believe that we inherited Adam’s guilt for his original sin, but rather the consequences of Adam’s sin which was physical and spiritual death. This was the understanding of the Early Church Fathers prior to Augustine in the 5th century and continues to be the majority position in the Eastern Orthodox Church to this day. From the beginning it was believed that Adam’s original sin resulted in spiritual death or estrangement from God, which in turn constituted us all sinners from the womb. As Irenaeus said: ‘The alienated are sinners from the womb: they go astray as soon as they are born.’” [i]
 
However, in the 5th century Augustine argued that we not only suffer the consequences of Adam’s sin, but we actually bear his guilt. This was in reaction to Pelagius, a British monk, who insisted that Adam’s sin did not result in us being born with an inner propensity to sin – that the only consequence of Adam’s original sin was to set a bad example. He taught that we could live free from sin by exercising our own free will without the need for divine grace. He taught that Christ’s life and death provided a moral example for us to follow, much like the Moral Example Theory of the atonement held by many Liberals and Progressives today.
 
Augustine added the element of inherited guilt in order to emphasize our need for Christ’s atoning sacrifice and divine grace. However, as I pointed out in the previous articles, while we suffer the consequences of Adam’s sin, we are only held accountable for our own personal sins. Christ’s atoning sacrifice was necessary in order to be justified from our own sins, not from Adam’s sin. The unrepentant will be judged for their own sins, not for Adam’s sin.
 
As I understand it, the doctrine of Original Sin as taught in Scripture is that when Adam, our federal head, sinned, his death became our death. Since he died spiritually in the day that he ate from the tree, we are spiritually stillborn or estranged from God from our mother’s womb. This spiritual death or estrangement from God is what constitutes us sinners and by nature children of wrath (Rom 5:19; Eph 2:1-3). In the remainder of this article I will be considering some objections presented against this position.
 
Scriptures presented against Original Sin
The following is a consideration of the passages presented as evidence that we are born as a “clean slate” without any inner propensity towards sin.
 
1) Ecclesiastes 7:29: “Truly, this only I have found: That God made man upright, but they have sought out many schemes.”
 
This verse is at times presented as evidence that we are all born morally upright without any bent towards sin. However, most scholars agree that this has reference to man’s original creation in the image and likeness of God rather than how we are subsequently formed through procreation in the womb after the fall. While, as I explained in the previous article, babies and little children are born “innocent” (Psa 106:38), they will inevitably acquire guilt, since we are born with a bent towards sin. Our sinful inclination is the result of our estrangement from God from the womb.
 
Just a few verses earlier in verse 20, Solomon said of man: “For there is not a just man on earth who does good and does not sin.”  The simple fact that everyone without exception sins should serve to demonstrate that we are not born morally neutral. Solomon elsewhere indicated that this sinfulness is not merely the result of external influences but rather is an inner inclination to sin. He said:
 
“Folly is bound up in the heart of a child, but the rod of discipline will drive it far from him.” (Prov 22:15)
 
The word rendered “child” (נַ֫עַר) is used to refer to children ranging from infancy to youth. It is the same word that is used to refer to the “baby” Moses (Ex 2:6). Folly or foolishness is said to be a condition of the heart.  Folly in Scripture is not merely silliness or irrationality but refers to sinful destructive behavior (Ps 38:5; 69:5; Pr 24:9). Jesus likewise said that the source of evil is not external but that proceeds from the heart of man (Matt 15:19).
 
David, acutely aware of his inner depravity after his sin with Bethsheba, said:
 
“Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin my mother conceived me” (Ps 51:5).
 
Some have suggested that David here is shifting the blame to his mother, saying he was born as the result of his mother having committed adultery, as if to say that he was just following her bad example. However, throughout the psalm he is not passing the blame, but acknowledging his own sin and depravity before God. He is not confessing his mother’s sins but his own. In the previous verse he said: “Against You, You only, have I sinned, and done this evil in Your sight.” In verse 7 he said: “Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean; Wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow.” Here he sees iniquity as something within him that needed to be purged from him.
 
Those who teach that we are born a clean slate say that if we simply leave a child to himself in a healthy environment he will develop into a morally upright adult. However, the Scriptures say the opposite. In Proverbs 29:15 Solomon says: “The rod and rebuke give wisdom, but a child left to himself brings shame to his mother.” A child left to himself does not become righteous but wicked. As David says:
 
“The wicked (LXX ἁμαρτωλός, “sinners”) are estranged from the womb; They go astray as soon as they are born, speaking lies” (Ps 58:3).
 
While David here singles out a subgroup of humanity that were left to themselves without a proper upbringing, all are estranged from God from the womb and begin to sin as soon as they are capable of doing so. As Solomon says, “there is not a just man on earth who does good and does not sin” (Eccl 7:20). The only difference between the wicked and the righteous is that the righteous have come into a relationship with God and deny the sinful desires of their fallen flesh. Left to themselves, they would have likewise acted wickedly, since all are estranged from God from the womb.
 
Those who say that we are born morally neutral often seek to discredit what David says here, pointing out that a baby cannot yet speak when they are born so as to speak lies. However, when someone uses hyperbole, as David does here, it is to emphasize a truth, not to negate it. As I understand it, he is saying that our natural inclination is to go astray as soon as we are born because we are estranged from God from the womb.
 
Therefore, although everything God created was “very good” and He originally made Adam and Eve upright, upon sinning they died, and spiritual death passed upon all his progeny. We all sin, not merely because the world is evil, but because we were all estranged from the womb. The world is only evil because of the evil in men’s hearts.
 
2) Psalm 139:13-14: “For You formed my inward parts; You covered me in my mother's womb. I will praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made.”
 
This passage is often presented as evidence that God’s creation of each person is inherently good, implying no innate sinfulness at birth. However, our propensity towards sin is not due to a defect in our essential nature but rather to our estrangement from God from the womb, the loss of the beatific vision of God that Adam and Eve enjoyed before they fell. As to our essential nature, we bear the image of God. The Son of God was fully human in His incarnation but was never alienated from God and therefore did not have a sinful nature.
 
3) Psalm 22:9-10: “But You are He who took Me out of the womb; You made Me trust while on My mother's breasts. 10 I was cast upon You from birth. From My mother's womb You have been My God.”
 
This psalm, taken in isolation from its context, would seem to indicate that David trusted in God from the womb – something that would not be possible for a normal infant since their mental faculties are not yet sufficiently developed in order to actually trust in God from the womb.
 
The key to understanding this passage is to see it in its context. You may have noticed that the pronouns “Me” and “My” in the NKJV translation which I cite here are capitalized. Psalm 22 in its entirety is messianic. Throughout the psalm, David, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, said things which were prophetic of Christ and not literally applicable to David himself. This psalm continues describing in detail Christ’s crucifixion long before the Romans ever used that form of capitol punishment. Verses 14 through 17 read as follows:
 
“I am poured out like water, and all My bones are out of joint; My heart is like wax; It has melted within Me. 15 My strength is dried up like a potsherd, and My tongue clings to My jaws; You have brought Me to the dust of death. 16 For dogs have surrounded Me; The congregation of the wicked has enclosed Me. They pierced My hands and My feet; 17 I can count all My bones. They look and stare at Me.”
 
While it could be said of Christ hanging on the cross that His hands and feet were pierced and that all His bones were out of joint, the same could not be said of David when he was writing this psalm. The same is true of verses 9 and 10. Christ’s body was directly “prepared” by God from the womb (Heb 10:5). He was miraculously conceived by the Holy Spirit and brought forth by God. Only of the incarnate Christ can it be said that He trusted in God from the womb. David, just as with all the rest of mankind, was estranged from the womb.
 
4) Ezekiel 18:20: “The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not bear the guilt of the father, nor the father bear the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.”
 
This passage is commonly presented as evidence that we do not inherit spiritual death with its resultant propensity to sin from Adam and therefore babies are born morally neutral. However, in the context, God is not speaking of spiritual death at all. Neither is he referring to natural death which is something common to all. All without exception die in Adam (1Cor 15:22). Even babies often die without ever having sinned. What God was referring to in this passage is a premature death as a result of God’s judgment. It is along the same lines as Deuteronomy 24:16 where God said:
 
“Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor shall children be put to death for their fathers; a person shall be put to death for his own sin.”
 
This civil law prohibited killing an entire family for the offense of one individual. In Ezekiel 18 God is addressing the inhabitants of Jerusalem against whom He had pronounced judgment for their persistent sins and idolatries, saying that all except for a remnant of them would be slain by the Babylonian invaders (Ezek 14 21-22). Instead of repenting, they accused God of injustice by putting them to death for the sins of their fathers, repeating a colloquial proverb which said: “The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge?”  (Ezek 18:2).
 
This proverb was a misapplication of what God meant when He said that He would visit the iniquity of the fathers upon the children and the children's children to the third and the fourth generation (Ex 34:7). As Jesus indicated in Matthew 23:29-32, this was only true if one followed in the footsteps of their fathers.
 
It is in this context that God said in verse 20, “The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not bear the guilt of the father, nor the father bear the guilt of the son.” He is not referring to a natural death nor a spiritual death, but rather being killed prematurely at the hands of their enemies in judgment for their own persistence in unrepentant sin.
 
5) Romans 2:14: “for when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves.”
 
This verse is sometimes presented as evidence that we are not born with a corrupted nature but morally neutral and capable of keeping the law. However, Paul here is setting up a hypothetical situation in order to make a point. He also said in verse 7 that those who continue in doing good will receive eternal life. In the previous verse he said that the doers of the law will be justified.
 
Did he actually mean to say that there are some who keep the law by nature and therefore will obtain eternal life by their own good works? Certainly not! In the first three chapters of Romans, he is presenting his case much as would a prosecuting attorney, first showing what the law required, in order to afterwards drive home his indictment against all mankind. In 3:9 he says:
 
“What then? Are we (Jews) better than they (Gentiles)? Not at all. For we have previously charged both Jews and Greeks that they are all under sin” (Rom 3:9).
 
Far from the Gentiles fulfilling the law by nature, Paul says in Ephesians 2:3 that, apart from justification and regeneration, all are “by nature children of wrath.”  In the following verses, before presenting free justification through faith in Christ, Paul cites numerous Old Testament passages to make his point. This is in part what he concludes:
 
“There is none righteous, no, not one… There is none who seeks after God… There is none who does good, no, not one.”
19 Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. 20 Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin. (Rom 3:10-20)
 
Therefore, it is clear that when Paul spoke of Gentiles doing “by nature” the things in the law, he was speaking hypothetically, since he concludes his arguments by saying that there has never been a single Gentile nor a Jew who does by nature the things in the law. And why is that the case? Paul later explains that it is due to “the law of sin in our members” (Rom 7:23).
 
6) Romans 7:9: “I was alive once without the law, but when the commandment came, sin revived (ἀναζάω, “to become alive again”) and I died.”
 
Some have cited this passage as evidence that we are born spiritually alive and morally neutral, only to afterwards sin and die spiritually. Others cite this as evidence that, although we are born with a sinful nature, we are innocent until we reach the age of accountability when we are able to comprehend God’s commandments.
 
However, in the first place, this interpretation of the passage requires that they deny that we are spiritually dead or estranged from God from the womb and therefore by nature prone to sin even before we actually commit our first sin (Ps 58:3; Ps 51:5; Eph 2:3). In the second place, Paul does not simply say that he sinned when the commandment came but rather that sin “came back to life.” This means that he was under sin’s power prior to the moment he refers to as “when the commandment came.”
 
What does Paul mean when he says that he was once alive without the law? In what sense did sin come back to life when the commandment came? In order to understand what is being referred to, it is necessary to see it in context. In the first five chapters of Romans, Paul is primarily focused on justification through faith in Christ. In chapters six through eight he focuses on the sanctification of those who have been justified.
 
In Romans 7:1-6 Paul says that we died to the law that we might be united to Christ, walking in newness of life in union with Him, having been delivered from the law that we might serve in the newness of the Spirit and not in the oldness of the letter.
 
Throughout the rest of the chapter, he shows from his own experience the futility of trying to serve God in the oldness of the letter after having been freed from the old husband, the law, and united to Christ, being made alive in Him.
 
It is in this context that Paul says that when the commandment came after having been made alive, sin came alive again in him and he died. He was experiencing his new life in Christ until he took his eyes off of Christ, his new husband, and put them on the commandment: “You shall not covet” (v. 7). When he took his eyes off of Jesus, the source of his new life, and put them on the commandment, “You shall not covet,”  it produced in him all sorts of evil desires (v. 8). The rest of the chapter describes his struggle trying to keep the law in his flesh.
 
That Paul is describing his struggle as a born again believer is evident throughout the entire chapter. In chapter three he said of the unregenerate that there is none who is good, no not one. There is none who seeks after God (Rom 3:10-18). Yet, in chapter 7:21-23 Paul describes himself as one who delights in the law of God in his inner man and wills to do good but isn’t able to because of the law of sin in his members. This struggle is not descriptive of someone who hasn’t been given a new heart through regeneration.
 
Therefore, understood in context, Romans 7:6 is descriptive of the defeat a believer experiences when they take their eyes off of Jesus, seeking to fulfill the demands of their old husband, the law, in the power of their flesh. Paul closes the chapter putting his eyes once again on Jesus. Properly understood, it says nothing whatsoever concerning our spiritual state at birth.
 
Having considered the primary passages presented against Original Sin by those who argue that we are born morally neutral, we see that they do not support the clean slate doctrine when seen in context. They often affirm the opposite – that we come into this world estranged from the womb and by nature children of wrath.
 

[i] Irenaeus Against Heresies Book 3:5:1

​by George Sidney Hurd
 
As I sought to demonstrate in the previous article, What about Original Sin?, while we all suffer the consequences of Adam’s original sin, which include both physical and spiritual death, we did not inherit Adam’s guilt.
 
Prior to Augustine in the 5th century, it was generally held by Church Fathers like Irenaeus, Origen and Gregory of Nyssa that Adam’s original sin resulted in mankind being alienated from the life of God and therefore having a corrupt human nature with a proclivity towards sin.
 
However, in Augustine’s opposition to Pelagianism, he added original guilt to the previously held doctrine of original sin and said that all who die without having put faith in Christ are eternally damned because they bear the guilt of Adam’s sin. According to Augustine’s belief in original guilt, even aborted infants and babies will be subjected to eternal punishment for Adam’s sin. He writes, “If infants are damned, it is just, for they are born in sin.” [1] However, this fails to consider the fact that the penalty for Adam’s sin was death, not eternal torment (Gen 2:17). Also, since Christ conquered death for all of Adam’s race, all will be made alive in Him, including infants, thereby reversing the original curse of death upon the entirety of Adam’s race (2Tim 1:10; Heb 2:14-15; 1Cor 15:22,54-55; Rom 5:18). Those who do not die in Christ will be judged according to their own deeds, not according to Adam’s original sin (Ezek 18:20; Rom 2:6; Rev 20:12).
 
Adding eternal torment to the penalty for Adam’s sin, and then holding everyone liable for it, created a moral dilemma that the Church has had to grapple with down through the centuries. Will aborted infants and babies who die be eternally damned even though they never personally committed a sin? Since Augustine believed that water baptism was the sole means for the remission of original sin, he taught that those who were aborted or died in infancy without having been baptized would be punished forever for Adam’s original sin. He sought to alleviate the grief of bereaved parents, saying that they were “condemned to the mildest punishment” (damnatus mitissima poena).
 
Largely due to the high infant mortality rate, in the 12th and 13th centuries midieval theologians like Peter Abelard, Peter Lombard, and Thomas Aquinas put forward the idea of limbo for unbaptized infants who died before having committed any personal sin. They presented it as a state of natural happiness, although deprived of the beatific vision. While this offered more consolation to bereaved parents, it was purely speculative and was never officially adopted by the church of Rome. By the 20th century, most within the Catholic Church had abandoned the idea of limbo for unbaptized infants altogether, appealing rather to the mercy of God for their salvation.
 
Among the Protestants of the Reformation and Post-Reformation period it was generally held, especially among the Calvinists, that all non-elect babies who died went to hell. Jonathan Edwards is often credited with characterizing babies and little children as young vipers. On one occasion he said:
 
"Innocent as children seem to be to us...they are not so in God’s sight but are young vipers—and are infinitely more hateful than vipers—and are in a most miserable condition, as well as grown persons." [2]
 
Most Evangelicals today would say that a child who dies before the “age of accountability” will go to heaven when he dies. However, some Calvinists like the Reverand Voddie Baucham, still maintain that all except for the elect go to an eternal hell. This would logically include infants and little children. Baucham is known for referring to babies as “vipers in diapers.” Here is link to a 1 ½ minute clip where he refers to infants as Vipers in Diapers. However, while rejecting the age of accountability argument, he avoids making dogmatic statements concerning the eternal destiny of non-elect infants by appealing to divine mystery. In this manner many Calvinists avoid having to express the logical conclusion of their beliefs on this subject in our increasingly sensitive modern culture.
 
Three Erroneous Beliefs concerning Infant Salvation
 
There are three erroneous beliefs in addition to Augustine’s doctrine of original guilt which over time became a part of mainstream Christian theology, creating additional obstacles to infant salvation. They are:  1) All possibility of salvation ends at death; 2) The penalty for finite sins is infinite; 3) Infant water baptism is necessary for the forgiveness of sins.
 
1) All possibility of salvation ends at death
 
The belief that salvation is impossible after one’s heart stops beating is so prevalent that we just assume that it is true. However, nowhere is this found in Scripture. The only verse presented in support of this doctrine is Hebrews 9:27 which simply says: “And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment.” However, this verse only states what both Traditionalists and Universalists agree upon - that men must face judgment upon dying. Those who deny that salvation is possible beyond the grave must ignore the multiple passages of Scripture indicating the final restoration of all; that every knee will bow and every tongue confess Jesus Christ as Lord, and that in the final dispensation of the fullness of the times all in heaven and earth will have been reunited in Christ, resulting in God being all in all upon entering into eternity (Phil 2:10-11; Eph 1:10; 1Cor 15:28). I consider the Scriptural basis for the belief in salvation after death in my article, Hope for the Dead, so I will not enter into more detail here.
 
2) The penalty for finite sins is infinite
 
The penalty for Adam’s original sin which fell upon us all, including infants who never personally sinned, is death (Gen 2:17; Rom 5:12; 6:23). If Christ had not tasted death for everyone, having died a substitutionary death for all mankind, then death would have been a permanent condition (Heb 2:9; 2Cor 5:14; Heb 2:14-15). However, having died for all, destroying Satan’s power over death, all who die in Adam will be made alive in Christ, the last Adam (1Cor 15:22; Rom 5:18). No one, including infants, will remain eternally in a state of death (Rev 21:4).
 
Christ not only defeated death for us on the cross, but He also bore the just penalty due to us for our own personal sins (1Peter 2:24-25; Heb 9:28; Isa 53 4-6,11). Those who believe on Him are justified from their sins (Rom 5:1). There is no condemnatory judgment awaiting those who are in Christ Jesus (Rom 8:1).
 
Neither is the penalty for personal sins infinite. Each will be judged “according to their works” and will receive their “part” or “portion” in the purifying lake of fire. No one will be punished endlessly. Some will receive “many lashes” while others will receive “few lashes” (Luke 12:47-48). Some will enter the kingdom before others (Matt 21:31). Some will be first to enter the kingdom of heaven, while others will be last (Luke 13:30), but in time all will have confessed Jesus Christ as Lord, being reunited in Christ (Phil 2:10-11; Eph 1:10).
 
However, since infants and little children “have no knowledge of good and evil” (Deut 1:39), and do not yet “know to refuse the evil and choose the good” (Isa 7:16), they will not be judged for their sins but go directly to heaven when they die. This is seen, for example, in the Old Testament when David’s son born through his adulterous union with Bethsheba died. He said: “I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me” (2 Sam 12:23). Even though David knew that his son had died as a consequence of his sin (2 Sam 12:14), there was no question in his mind as to whether or not he would be reunited with his son in paradise.
 
That infants and small children who die go to heaven is also made clear in Matthew 19:14 where Jesus said: "Let the little children come to Me, and do not forbid them; for of such is the kingdom of heaven." Then in Matthew 18:3 He said: “unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.” Children have the simple receptivity and trust that we must have in order to enter the kingdom of heaven. It wasn’t until Augustine’s popularization of the belief in eternal torment, combined with the doctrine of inherited guilt, that the salvation of infants and small children was even brought into question.
 
3) Infant water baptism is necessary for the forgiveness of sins.
 
Augustine taught that all infants who died without having been baptized in order to cleanse them from the guilt of Adam’s original sin would spend eternity in hell.  However, in the New Testament, infant baptism is nowhere mentioned, as would be expected if their salvation depended upon it. Some argue that, while it is not explicitly enjoined, it can be inferred from passages where it states that the whole household of some who believed were baptized.
 
However, most often the New Testament references to households logically exclude infants. For example, in Acts 16:31-34 all of Cornelius’ household believed and were baptized. Infants within the household would obviously have been excluded since they lack the cognitive ability necessary in order to understand and believe the gospel (cf. John 4:53). Likewise, in Acts 10:2 it says of Cornelius that he “feared God with all his household.” In 11:14 when it is said that Peter would tell them words by which Cornelius and his household would be saved and the Spirit fell on them as he spoke, it obviously would not have included infants, since they would not have been able to understand the gospel message so as to believe and be saved, receiving the Spirit. In fact, of the 26 times in the New Testament that reference is made to someone’s household, infants are almost always logically excluded.
 
Saying that all unbaptized infants are condemned creates an insurmountable moral challenge, considering that at least 99.9 percent of all the aborted babies and those who died in infancy were never baptized. While, as I hope to establish, we are all born with an innate propensity to sin, infants are free of guilt because they have never sinned.
 
In the New Testament, baptism was only to take place upon believing (Mark 16:16; Acts 8:36-37). Baptism isn’t a condition of salvation in addition to faith but is an outward representation of our baptism into the body of Christ (Rom 6:2-4 cf. 1Cor 12:13). I discuss the subject of water baptism in more detail in my book, Is Water Baptism Necessary for Salvation?
 
The first mention of the practice of baptism for infants is found a 3rd century treatise entitled, The Apostolic Tradition by Hippolytus of Rome. [3] However, many scholars believe that the treatise was actually written by a different author at a later date in order to give credence to the practice. While the treatise mentions the baptism of children too young to speak, it does not elaborate as to the reasoning behind the practice.
 
Once we understand that there is postmortem salvation since all will finally confess Jesus Christ as Lord and be restored; that the penalty for sins is just rather than infinite; and that the requirement of infant baptism for the remission of original guilt is a man-made tradition not found in Scripture, we can find comfort in the assurance that all who die as infants and little children are welcomed into heaven upon dying.
 
Are babies sinful by nature?
 
This brings us to the main subject of this article concerning the nature we are born with. Are babies born a “clean slate,” only becoming sinners due to external influences, or are we born “vipers in diapers.” It is my conviction that both extremes are in error. While external influences clearly play a role in our formation, that doesn’t explain the innate proclivity we all have towards sin. It fails to consider what made external influences evil to begin with. On the other hand, to say that we are intrinsically evil by nature like vipers in diapers fails to consider the fact that we were created in the image and likeness of God. To say that we are intrinsically sinful as to our essential nature makes it difficult to explain how Christ could have been truly human in His incarnation without being a sinner.
 
Paul said in Romans 5:19: “For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners…” What does it mean to be made or constituted a sinner? We understand that a fornicator is someone who has an inner compulsion to fornicate. Likewise, someone is not a liar for telling a lie, but someone who compulsively lies. In the same way, we are all sinners because all of us sin due to an inner compulsion as a consequence of Adam’s original sin. Paul referred to this as “the law of sin which is in our members” (Rom 7:23).
 
As I understand it, our proclivity towards sin is the result of the spiritual death that occurred on the day that Adam sinned which has passed down to us. Spiritual death is spiritual separation from God. Although in Him we live and move and have our being, ontologically speaking, Adam and Eve immediately lost the beatific vision of God in communion with Him and were cast from the Garden of Eden. Our communion with God is a Spirit-to-spirit communion. We were originally created as spiritual beings in a body of flesh. However, when we died spiritually we became “flesh” (Gen 6:3). Destitute from the presence of God who is spirit, we went from being predominately spiritual beings, to carnal beings, no longer communing with God, but rather seeking gratification through the desires of our fallen flesh.
 
Adam and Eve were complete and spiritually fulfilled as to their essential being, having been created in the image and likeness of God in order to enjoy communion with God. They knew nothing of sinful inclinations. However, when they sinned and lost the beatific vision in communion with God, it left a void which could never be satisfied outside of God Himself. As the 17th century theologian and philosopher Blaise Pascal eloquently said:
 
“What else does this craving, and this helplessness, proclaim but that there was once in man a true happiness, of which all that now remains is the empty print and trace? This he tries in vain to fill with everything around him, seeking in things that are not there the help he cannot find in those that are, though none can help, since this infinite abyss can be filled only with an infinite and immutable object; in other words, by God himself.” [4]
 
Our sinful desires are the result of this “infinite abyss” in our souls that only God can fill. Our physical flesh is not intrinsically evil, as the Gnostics taught. In the beginning God created us “very good” (Gen 1:31). Our flesh became sinful due to the privation of the beatific vision of God and the loss of communion with Him. Through regeneration we become reunited with God, and to the degree that we walk in the Spirit, we experience freedom from the desires of the flesh. That is why Paul said: “Walk in the Spirit, and you shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh” (Gal 5:16).
 
However, although we have been made alive unto God, maintaining intimate communion with Him in this fallen world requires a continued vigilance and dependence upon God. That is why Paul said to the regenerate believers in Galatia: “If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit” (Gal 5:25). In Christ we have been made alive unto God. As long as we walk in the Spirit, being filled with the Spirit, fleshly desires have no appeal to us.
 
In my teenage years I became hopelessly addicted to drugs and was a compulsive delinquent. That all changed the moment I had my transforming encounter with the Lord in 1969. The reality of His presence was so wonderfully fulfilling that the addictions and destructive behavior I previously wasn’t able to overcome no longer had any appeal to me. This is what the Church Fathers referred to as the beatific vision. Paul described it as a transformation which takes place as we “with unveiled face behold as in a mirror the glory of the Lord” (2Cor 3:18).
 
I wish that could have been my uninterrupted experience until the present, but after a couple of years I had what I would describe as a desert experience where I didn’t sense the presence of the Lord as in the beginning, and I began to struggle again with temptations. I had another similar experience in 1982 which I can only describe as an open heaven experience that continued for about three months. Looking back, I believe that it was an oasis the Lord granted to give me the strength to undergo an even more difficult and prolonged time in severe trials.
 
What I learned from those experiences is that our propensity to sin that some refer to as the sin nature is absent when one has the beatific vision in intimate communion with God. It is the sense of alienation from God that creates the “infinite abyss” which we try in vain to fill with anything within our reach. Even though we are a new creation in Christ, as long as we remain in this body we will have the law of sin in our members which can only be overcome by the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus (Rom 8:2). In the final dispensation of the fulness of the times when all will have been reunited in Christ and God is all in all, we will possess glorified spiritual bodies and, even though our will shall be freer than ever before, sin will be a logical impossibility due to the uninterrupted beatific vision of God (Eph 1:10; 1Cor 15:28; Rev 21:4-5, cf. Isa 25:6-8).
 
Babies have a Sinful Inclination from the Womb
 
As I understand it, babies are born innocent (Psa 106:38). While we all sinned in Adam and therefore all die in him, we are not born guilty of Adam’s sin as Augustine taught. Babies and small children who do not yet know to discern between good and evil are not morally culpable (Isa 7:15-16). However, while Scripture calls them innocent in the sense that they lack personal guilt, we are all born with a propensity to sin which the Early Church Fathers referred to as a “corrupted nature.”
 
This propensity to sin is not something intrinsic to our nature that is sexually transmitted as Augustine taught. It is not something genetic such as a virus. Rather, as I pointed out previously, this proclivity towards sin is the result of the “infinite abyss” we have in our soul as the result of being spiritually stillborn in Adam. We are born spiritually dead towards God and incomplete since we were created to enjoy communion with God.
 
Christ, on the other hand, was truly human just as Adam was. He was presented with the same external temptations that we are, yet He did not have our proclivity towards sin since there was never any spiritual separation between the human and the divine. A sinful nature is not an essential element of true humanity. In John 1:14, it says that the Word “became flesh” and dwelt among us, but Paul makes it clear that the incarnate Christ’s flesh wasn’t sinful as ours is, clarifying that He came “in the likeness of sinful flesh” (Rom 8:3). He came as the Last Adam to restore the human race and recapitulate all of humanity in Himself.
 
I believe that it is due to this alienation from the life of God, this privation of the beatific vision in communion with God, that results in all of us being born with this proclivity towards sin. It is in this sense that I believe we should understand Davids words in Psalm 51:5 where he says: “Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin my mother conceived me.” This is also the way I believe the Early Fathers understood David’s words. Irenaeus, alluding to Psalm 58:3 says:
 
“As also David says, ‘The alienated are sinners from the womb: they go astray as soon as they are born.’" [5]
 
It is this alienation from the life of God that results in us having this proclivity towards sin from the womb. We can only say that we are a “clean slate” in the sense that we are born innocent without guilt. I believe that it is because of this alienation that Paul says we are “by nature children of wrath” (Eph 2:3). It is our inevitable persistence in personal willful sin that makes us objects of God’s wrath (Rom 1:18; 2:5-6). I believe that Paul is saying that, due to our fallen alienated nature, we are children of wrath even before we commit our first sin. We do not sin because of external influences, as the Pelagians claim, although external influences do contribute to sinful conduct. Rather, we sin because, being alienated from God, it is in our nature to sin. I believe that the saying is true: “We are not sinners because we sin – we sin because we are sinners.”
 
Conclusion
 
There is much more that could be said on this subject, and I by no means claim infallibility. While I believe that the doctrine of original sin as taught by the pre-Augustinian Fathers is biblical, I find no justification for Augustine having added the element of inherited guilt, holding that unbaptized infants would be eternally condemned for Adam’s original sin. I believe that a proper understanding of the Scriptures requires postmortem salvation, removing another manmade obstacle for the salvation of infants and little children. Another unbiblical obstacle for the salvation of little ones who die is the requirement of infant baptism to remove inherited guilt.
 
I believe that Scripture as well as common observation demonstrate that, being alienated from the life of God from the womb, we are sinners by nature and not simply the product of our environment. That being said, we do not sin because of something genetically transmitted through sexual intercourse, as Augustine taught. Rather we sin due to the infinite abyss in our soul as the result of our estrangement from God from the womb.
 
The fact that we are not born guilty due to Adam’s original sin removes the dilemma as to how Christ could have been born truly human without inherited guilt. He was truly human, yet He was not estranged from God from the womb as we are, and therefore He did not have a sin nature.
 
The Roman Catholic Church debated for centuries as to how Christ could have been truly human without being guilty of Adam’s original sin. In the 14th century John Duns Scotus promoted the theory of Mary’s Immaculate Conception (that Mary was miraculously conceived without original sin) in an attempt to resolve this problem, and in 1854, Pope Pius IX formally decreed the Immaculate Conception to be an official dogma of the Roman Catholic Church. However, not only does the Bible nowhere say that Mary was immaculately conceived, but she refers to the Lord as “her Savior” in Luke 1:47. This confession makes it clear that she considered herself to be a sinner in need of the Savior.
 
All of these attempts to explain how Christ could have been truly human without inheriting Adam’s guilt and a corrupted nature were absent among the Church Fathers prior to Augustine’s doctrine of inherited guilt in the 5th century. I believe that it is because they believed that our corrupted nature, with its proclivity to sin, is solely due to our estrangement from God, and Christ was never estranged from God. The only time Christ felt estranged from the Father was during those dark moments on the cross when He was made to be sin for us that we might become the righteousness of God in Him (2Cor 5:21). During those moments He felt estranged from the beatific vision and cried out saying: “My God, My God, why have you forsaken Me?”


[1] Augustine, On Free Will III.23

[2] Jonathan Edwards, The Littlest Demons. https://www.laphamsquarterly.org/youth/more-hateful-vipers
 

[3] Hippolytus of Rome, Apostolic Tradition Chapter 21, Section 4.
 

[4] Blaise Pascal, Pensées, Fragment 148
 

[5] Irenaeus Against Heresies Book 3:5:1

Arriving at an understanding of original sin based upon Romans 5:12-19
 
by George Sidney Hurd
 
Especially in recent years, there has been much controversy concerning the doctrine of original sin. While most Christians would agree that sin and death had their origin in Adam, there has been much disagreement as to whether sin and death come to us because of Adam’s original sin, or because each of us subsequently sin. If all sinned in Adam, does that mean that we inherited his guilt, or did we simply inherit the consequences of Adam’s disobedience? Are we sinners from conception, or are babies a clean slate, only to subsequently become sinners due to external influences?
 
I believe and hope to demonstrate that the answers to these questions and more can be found in a straightforward understanding of what Paul sets forth in Romans 5:12-19 where the entire human race that fell in Adam is seen to have been recapitulated in Christ, the last Adam. Here I cite the entire passage:
 
“Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned —  13 for until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense (παράβασις, transgression) of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come. 15 But the free gift is not like the transgression. For if by the transgression of the one the many died, much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abound to the many. 16 The gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned; for on the one hand the judgment arose from one transgression resulting in condemnation, but on the other hand the free gift arose from many transgressions resulting in justification. 17 For if by the transgression of the one, death reigned through the one, much more those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.
18 So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men. 19 For as through the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous.” (Romans 5:12-19 NASU)
 
The main objective of Paul in these verses is to show that, just as one man’s singular act of disobedience brought the condemnation of death upon all men, even so, Christ’s one act of obedience brought the justification of life to all men (v 18). He starts out by saying in verse 12:
 
“Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned.”
 
There has been much debate concerning what Paul meant when he said that sin and death entered the world “because all sinned.” Historically the Church has held that “because all sinned” means that we all sinned in Adam as the original father and representative head of humanity. However, some argue that the phrase, “because all sinned” is not to be understood as saying that all sinned in Adam, but that we all die because we all personally commit sin. However, there are at least three reasons why this cannot be the correct understanding.
 
1.The Parallel Typology
 
In the first place, if it were saying that all die because of something we subsequently do, rather than because of Adam’s one act of disobedience, then the parallel between that which Adam’s one act of disobedience brought upon all, and that which Christ’s one act of obedience brought upon that same all, breaks down. It is not something we continue doing which results in the justification resulting in life for all, but Christ’s one act of obedience that brings justification and life to all (v.18).
 
Irenaeus (130 to 202 AD), having known Polycarp, a disciple of John, is known for his Recapitulation Theory of the Atonement. This important aspect of the atonement is based upon this passage in Romans 5 and Ephesians 1:10. He correctly understood the phrase “because all sinned” as meaning that we all sinned in Adam at the beginning. He said:
 
“For we were debtors to none other but to Him whose commandment we had transgressed at the beginning.” [1]
 
Instead of saying that Adam transgressed the commandment at the beginning, he says in agreement with Paul in Romans 5:12 that we transgressed. While the detractors of the doctrine of original sin often attribute it to St. Augustine (354 to 430 AD), we see that, while Augustine further developed the doctrine (in my opinion overdeveloped it by adding original guilt), it did not originate with him. He himself denied that it originated with him, saying:
 
“It was not I who devised the original sin, which the catholic faith holds from ancient times; but you, who deny it, are undoubtedly an innovating heretic. In the judgment of God, all are in the devil’s power, born in sin, unless they are regenerated in Christ.”[2]
 
The heretics he is addressing are the Pelagianists. Historically, those who have most resisted the doctrine of original sin and Christ’s imputed righteousness have been the Pelagianists who believe that one doesn’t need Christ’s imputed righteousness in order to be saved. They believe that one can be saved by their own obedience through divine grace. Those of us who believe that Christ indeed recapitulated all humanity in Christ, the last Adam, should be among the most zealous in preserving the flow of Paul’s logic in this passage.
 
2. The Grammatical Construction 

There are several grammatical reasons why the phrase “because all sinned” cannot be construed as meaning that we die because we sin, rather than because all sinned in Adam. It is commonly argued that the reason why we have come to understand it to be referring to Adam’s original sin is because Augustine used Jerome’s Latin Vulgate where the Greek (ἐφ᾿ ᾧ, eph ho), was rendered as a relative clause, “in whom (Lat., in quo) all have sinned.” They are correct in saying that this reading is in error, since the Greek pronoun ᾧ (which), is neuter, while Adam is masculine.  
 
Most scholars agree that ἐφ᾿ ᾧ should be understood in the causal sense – “because all sinned.” Only a few, in an attempt to deny the doctrine of original sin, argue that it should be understood in the resultative sense: “with the result that all sinned.”
 
However, another grammatical consideration is that it doesn’t say “because all have sinned” (perfect tense) or “because all sin” (present). Rather, it is the aorist tense of the verb “because all sinned (ἥμαρτον).” By far the most common use of the aorist tense in Greek in the indicative is to refer to an action which occurred in the past. One debater who took the position against the doctrine of original sin argued that ἥμαρτον should be understood as a gnomic aorist which expresses a universal truth. This would mean that it should have been rendered “because all sin.” This is a rare use of the aorist which only applies when the context demands it. However, the context actually militates against this use of the aorist. In verses 13 and 14 Paul makes it clear that he meant to say that all sinned in Adam.  
 
3.Even those not legally guilty of Sin die
 
Perhaps the greatest indicator that Paul meant to say that all sinned in Adam is what he says in the following verses. In verses 13 and 14 he actually demonstrates the point that he made in verse 12 – that all die because of Adam’s sin, rather than for subsequent personal sins. He does this by pointing out that all died during the time between Adam and Moses when personal sins were not imputed against sinners. He explains:
 
“for until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense (παράβασις, transgression) of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.”
 
By “the likeness of Adam’s transgression” he means a transgression which carried the death penalty. His logic is that, although there was no law which involved a death penalty between the time of Adam and Moses when the Law was given, prescribing the death penalty for sins, everyone nevertheless died. This demonstrates that they all died, not because of their own sins, but because of Adam’s original sin. No one transgressed a law with the death penalty between Adam and Moses, yet everyone during that time still died. Therefore, all die due to Adam’s sin, not their own sins. He couldn’t have made his point any clearer.
 
Another evidence that Paul didn’t mention which demonstrates that everyone dies as a result of Adam’s one transgression and not due to personal sins is the fact that over a hundred million die every year without ever having sinned. I am referring to all the aborted babies and infants who die without ever having committed a single sin.
 
Having established that sin and death entered by one man’s transgression, he then proceeds to present the other one Man, Jesus Christ, as the antitype of Adam saying in verses 15 and 16,
 
“But the free gift is not like the transgression. For if by the transgression of the one the many died, much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abound to the many. 16 The gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned; for on the one hand the judgment arose from one transgression resulting in condemnation, but on the other hand the free gift arose from many transgressions resulting in justification.”
 
Notice that Paul’s emphasis here is that, just as it was by the one man, Adam alone that the condemnation of death came upon all without any contribution on our part, even so it was by the one Man, Jesus Christ alone, that the free gift of justification of life came upon all without any contribution from us. Typically, those who argue that we die because of something we do (sinning), also believe that the justification unto life comes to us, not solely as the free gift of the one Man, Jesus Christ, but also as a result of something we subsequently do.
 
When Paul says here that “the many” died in Adam, he is not contradicting himself when he says that condemnation and death come to “all men” in Adam in verses 12 and 18 or that “in Adam ‘all’ die” in  1Corinthians 15:22. Likewise, when he says that the free gift of justification abounds to “the many” in Christ, he is not contradicting himself when he says in verse 18 that His one act of righteousness resulted in justification of life to “all men” or that “in Christ ‘all’ shall be made alive” in 1Corinthians 15:22. Paul is simply emphasizing the effect that the one individual had over the many. In Scripture “many” is often used to refer to all. That is why when Paul said that Christ gave Himself a ransom for all in 1Timothy 2:6, He was not contradicting Jesus when He said that He came to give His life a ransom for many (Matt 20:28).
 
Many, interpreting the next verse in isolation from its context, have misunderstood it as saying that only those who actively receive the justification of life will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ. In verse 17 Paul says:
 
“For if by the transgression of the one, death reigned through the one, much more those who receive (οἱ λαμβάνοντες) the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.”
 
There are two ways in which the phrase, “those who receive” (οἱ λαμβάνοντες), can be understood: 1) to actively take or receive, or 2) to receive as a passive recipient. The context must determine whether the receiving is passive or active. For example, in several New Testament passages we see that the recipient must receive something he did not even desire to receive, such as a just reward for his disobedience (Heb 2:2), or a greater judgment (Luke 20:47). In other instances, the recipient receives that which he was not even anticipating. For example, everyone in Cornelius’ house was surprised when the Gentiles suddenly received the Holy Spirit (Acts 10:47). In these examples it is obvious that the recipient is passive.
 
Scholars are divided as to whether (οἱ λαμβάνοντες) in verse 17 should be understood in the active sense or in the passive sense. Arminian scholars generally understand it in the active sense as something we must do. On the other hand, St. Augustine and Calvinists generally understand it in the passive sense, emphasizing the divine initiative.
 
The highly esteemed Greek scholar Marvin Vincent correctly applies the passive meaning to Romans 5:17. He says: “They which receive (hoi lambanontes). Not ‘believingly accept,’ but simply ‘the recipients.” [3] Although he does not go into further detail, his rendering of οἱ λαμβάνοντες in the passive sense is necessitated by the context. The contrast throughout is between what all men receive in Adam as opposed to what all men receive in Christ - the Last Adam. As all men passively receive death, condemnation and bondage to sin through the one man’s disobedience, even so all receive life, justification, and dominion restored, through the one man, Christ.
 
I think it is significant that Irenaeus who is known for the Recapitulation Theory of the Atonement, understood οἱ λαμβάνοντες here in the passive sense, as did Origen and Gregory of Nyssa, believing as they did that eventually all will have been reunited in Christ, resulting in God being all in all (Eph 1:10; 1Cor 15:28). In light of the following verse, it becomes undeniable that Paul meant to say that all will be the recipients of grace unto justification and life through the One, Jesus Christ. In verse 18 Paul draws his conclusion saying:
 
“So then, as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men.”
 
In no uncertain terms Paul makes it clear that all who came under the condemnation of death in Adam will receive justification and life in Christ, the Last Adam. However, that being said, even as not every man experientially entered into Adam’s death, condemnation and bondage to sin at the moment Adam sinned, in like manner, not everyone experientially received life, justification or dominion restored at the moment when Christ - the Last Adam, died and rose from the dead.
 
Even as one must be born into Adam in order to experience the death, condemnation and bondage to sin he brought upon us all, so also every man must be made alive or born again before experientially entering into that justification and dominion which every man received when Christ the Last Adam died and rose again. Of the Last Adam’s death and resurrection, it is written, “The first man Adam became a living being. The last Adam became a life-giving spirit” (1Cor 15:45). And again, “as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive” (1Cor 15:22).

We inherited Death from Adam, not Guilt
 
The condemnation which came upon all men for Adam’s one transgression was death, not guilt. Only Adam was guilty for his transgression. A person is only guilty for the sins they personally commit. None of the Church Fathers prior to Augustine in the 5th century taught that we inherited Adam’s guilt. While they believed, as we see here in Romans 5, that Adam’s original sin brought death and corruption to all his progeny, they did not teach that one inherited guilt from the womb as Augustine taught.
 
God told Adam that he would die in the day that he ate from the tree. While he didn’t die physically that same day, he did die spiritually. He lost the beatific vision of God and was cast from the garden of Eden. In the garden before the fall, Adam and Eve were predominately spirit, even though they had a body of flesh. This loss of communion with God in their spirit resulting in them becoming predominately flesh (Gen 6:3). While we are born without having sinned, this spiritual death or absence of communion with God, resulted in us being sinners from the womb with a proclivity towards sin. In verse 19 Paul says that Adam’s one act of disobedience constituted the many or all sinners:
 
“For as through the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners (καθίστημι, ‘constituted sinners’), even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous (καθίστημι, ‘constituted righteous’).”
 
As many as have been born of Adam were constituted sinners because of his one act of disobedience. In Adam we are sinners by nature even before we commit our first sin. We don’t become sinners by sinning: rather, we sin because in Adam we are sinners by nature from the womb. As David says in Psalm 51:5: “Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin my mother conceived me.”
 
Those who deny original sin have difficulty with this straightforward statement from the Old Testament affirming the doctrine of original sin. They often argue that David was using exaggerated speech and since it is poetry it shouldn’t be taken literally. However, it seems that from the Apostolic Period, long before Augustine in the 5th century, the Church Fathers understood it literally. Commenting on Psalm 58:3 Irenaeus said:
 
“As also David says, ‘The alienated are sinners from the womb: they go astray as soon as they are born.’" [3]
 
As Paul said in Ephesians 2:3, prior to receiving a new nature through regeneration and having the righteousness of Christ, the Last Adam, imputed to us, we were “by nature children of wrath, just as the others.”  Although often ridiculed, the saying is true: “We are not sinners because we sin, but rather we sin because we are sinners.”
 
Logically, according to verse 19, those who deny that we were constituted sinners by one man’s act of disobedience must also deny that we were constituted righteous by Christ’s one act of obedience. Those who say that we are only sinners because we sin, typically say that we are only righteous because we stop sinning, rather than us being constituted righteous before God due to Christ’s righteousness having been imputed to us.
 
To me, those who oppose the historic doctrine of original sin and Christ’s imputed righteousness deny truths central to the gospel and are those whom Paul refers to as enemies of the cross of Christ, reducing His atoning death on the cross to nothing more than an example to follow. It concerns me to see so many enamored with the writings of George MacDonald, considering his contempt for the doctrine of Christ’s imputed righteousness through simple faith in Christ’s finished work on the cross. He said:
 
“- some of you say we must trust in the finished work of Christ; or again, our faith must be in the merits of Christ in the atonement he has made in the blood he has shed. All these statements are a simple repudiation of the living Lord, in whom we are told to believe, who, by his presence with and in us, and our obedience to him, lifts us out of darkness into light...” [4]
"And any system which tends to persuade men that…a man is saved by having his sins hidden under a robe of imputed righteousness – that system…is of the devil and not of God." [5]

Many today, even among those of us who profess to believe that all mankind was recapitulated in Christ and therefore all will finally be restored, reject the words of Paul here when he says that the free gift of justification came to all by the One Man, Christ (v.15), and that Christ’s one act of righteousness resulted in justification of life to all men (v.18). More often than not, they also deny the doctrine of original sin: that all sinned in Adam, and for that reason sin and death passed upon all, resulting in all being constituted sinners by nature (vv. 12,19). As Paul said of some: “For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and seeking to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted to the righteousness of God” (Rom 10:3). May we be found in Him, not trusting in our own righteousness but the righteousness which is by the faith of Jesus (Phil 3:9).
 
[1] Irenaeus, Against Heresies, book 5:16:3
 
[2] Augustine of Hippo, “On Marriage and Concupiscence,” in Saint Augustin: Anti-Pelagian Writings, ed. Philip Schaff, trans. Peter Holmes, vol. 5, A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, First Series (New York: Christian Literature Company, 1887), 293.

[3] Irenaeus Against Heresies Book 3:5:1
 
[4] MacDonald, George . Unspoken Sermons Series I, II, and III (p. 147).

[5] MacDonald, George . Unspoken Sermons Series I, II, and III (p. 100). 

​by George Sidney Hurd
 
Most of us have heard the assertion made from pulpits on more than one occasion: “Jesus spoke more often about Hell than He did about heaven.” Some of us may have even repeated this ourselves, assuming it to be true.
 
The truth is, we would expect Jesus and His disciples to have been pleading with the lost multitudes on every possible occasion to avoid Hell, if in fact it were a place of unending torment without any redemptive purpose beyond the condemned suffering eternal torments in order to pay an infinite penalty for the sins committed during their brief lifetime, as commonly taught. This is especially true considering the love and compassion Jesus had for the lost multitudes, and knowing that, as the Creator and sustainer of all things, He was the one who would have to sustain their continued existence in that dreadful place of unspeakable torments (Col 1:17; Heb 1:3; Acts 17:28).
 
However, contrary to the claims made by some Hellfire-and-brimstone preachers, the primary focus of Christ’s ministry was not upon Hell, but the kingdom of heaven in both its present and future forms. He often spoke to the multitudes concerning their Father in heaven (Matt 5:16, 45, 48, 6:1,9; 11:25). He told them to lay up for themselves treasures in heaven and to pray for the coming of their Father’s kingdom (Matt 6:10,20). He told the Sadducees that in the resurrection we will be like the angels in heaven (Matt 22:30). When the disciples were troubled concerning His departure, He gave them these wonderful words of comfort:
 
"Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also in Me.  2 In My Father's house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.  3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also.” (John 14:1-3)
 
Without in any way diminishing the warnings Jesus gave concerning postmortem judgments, I felt the need to once-and-for-all dispel the myth that Jesus spoke more often about Hell than heaven. First it is necessary to clarify what is meant by Hell, since there is so much misunderstanding concerning its actual meaning.
 
There are two different Greek words used by Jesus that were rendered as “Hell” in the KJV in spite of their distinct meaning. On three occasions in the gospels Jesus used the word Hades (ᾅδης). Hades literally means “invisible” and is the equivalent of the Hebrew word Sheol used in the Old Testament to refer to the invisible realm of the souls of the dead, both the just (Gen 37:35; Ps 16:10) and the unjust (Job 24:19). I consider further the meaning of these terms in my blog, Is Sheol the Grave? While Jesus mentioned Hades on three occasions, the only time He implied that some in Hades (the unseen realm of the dead) are in torments is in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus in Luke 16:23.
 
The other word used by Jesus that was rendered as “Hell” in the KJV is Gehenna (Γέεννα). While Gehenna was the name of the actual Valley of Hinnom outside of Jerusalem, by the time of Christ, the terms “Gehenna fire” and “eonian fire” were figuratively used in reference to postmortem purifying fires. I develop this subject further in my blog, What is Gehenna?
 
The word Gehenna (Gr.) is used by Jesus 11 times but only on four different occasions, first in the Olivet Discourse, speaking to the multitudes (Matt 5:22,29,30). Afterwards, He mentioned Gehenna once when speaking to His own disciples (Matt 10:28), once when warning against causing one of His little ones to stumble (Matt 18:9) and once as a warning to the scribes and Pharisees (Matt 23:15,33).
 
So, we see that Jesus only used the actual words Hades and Gehenna, rendered in the KJV as Hell on seven different occasions. In contrast, He used the word heaven (ouranos, οὐρανός) a total of 120 times! So clearly, based upon His actual mention of these terms, Jesus spoke of heaven much more frequently than He spoke of Hell.
 
Even factoring in all the indirect references made to Hades or Gehenna such as, “outer darkness,” “weeping and gnashing of teeth” “eonian fire,” “eonian punishment,” “eonian destruction,” etc., Jesus still spoke much more frequently of heaven and a positive future than He spoke of Hell or a negative future.
 
The four Gospels contain around 1,850 verses containing words of Jesus. Of those 1,850 verses, the total of verses which contain direct or indirect references to Hell is 25 on 10 different occasions. However, the total of verses where Jesus mentions heaven either directly or indirectly is 125. That amounts to only 1.35% of the verses about Hell as opposed to 6.75% about heaven.
 
Therefore, Jesus spoke about heaven 5 times more frequently than He did about Hell! If in fact Hell were eternal torment, rather than eonian and correctional, resulting in the eventual restoration of all who will be subjected to it, we would at the very least expect that these figures would be inverted. Yet, instead of us seeing Jesus focusing upon an eternal hell awaiting the multitudes, we see Him focused upon the good news of the kingdom of heaven. When it says of Him that He had compassion on the multitudes, we would expect that it would have moved Him to preach, warning of the eternal hell which awaited them, if the traditional model were true, but that is not what we find:
 
“And when Jesus went out He saw a great multitude; and He was moved with compassion for them, and healed their sick.” (Matt 14:14)
 
“I have compassion on the multitude, because they have now continued with Me three days and have nothing to eat.  3 And if I send them away hungry to their own houses, they will faint on the way; for some of them have come from afar.” (Mark 8:2-3)
 
Jesus had compassion on the multitudes because they were sick; because they were like sheep without a shepherd, or because they had nothing to eat. But nowhere do we find the loving Savior saying that He had compassion on them because He knew the majority of them would be eternally tormented in hell. Which would have been more urgent, healing, multiplying food, or warning them that they were headed for an eternal hell?
 
That is not to take lightly the warnings that Jesus gave to the multitudes (and the disciples) concerning Gehenna. But if Gehenna really were eternal and with literal flames, without any hope of restoration, having been invented for the sole purpose of eternally torturing its occupants, don’t you think He would have dedicated more of His time to warning them than doing good deeds and healing all those who were oppressed of the devil?
 
Therefore, the fact that Jesus spoke of heaven and a positive future much more frequently than He spoke of Hell and a negative future, is just another clear indicator that Hell, or more correctly, Gehenna fire or the Lake of Fire, is not everlasting punishment, as commonly taught, but eonian correction, resulting in the final restoration of all.
 

by George Sidney Hurd
 
 
As a missionary who believes in the final restoration of all, I have been asked more than once: “If you believe all will be saved in the end anyway, why risk your life and that of your family preaching the gospel and making disciples in a military conflict zone?” However, this question reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of the biblical doctrine of universal salvation. All too often Biblical Universalism is mistaken for other forms of Pluralistic Universalism which say that all roads lead to God, or an even more extreme form of Universalism which insists that we were never separated from God in need of salvation through Christ’s redemptive blood – that we are all gods and simply need to awaken to the divine within each one of us.  
 
Sadly, many influential teachers within the Church today are peddling a Christianized adaptation of this same New Age form of Universalism. According to this view, every sense of urgency to proclaim the gospel is removed, since, according to them, sin never caused a separation from God to begin with, and mankind doesn’t need to be saved from sin – they simply need to awaken to the truth that there never was any separation – that it has always been merely a figment of our imagination. According to this view, mankind simply lost sight of the reality of their own divinity or the “truth of their being,” and if they fail to embrace the “gospel” concerning their true identity in this life it is no great loss to them since they will discover it once they die.
 
While to me it is clear that Jesus and the disciples – consistent with the Old Testament, taught the final restoration of all (Acts 3:21), they also clearly emphasized the need to repent and believe the gospel in this life in order to avoid dying in one’s sins, missing out on the first resurrection unto life and later having to appear before God at the Great White Throne Judgment, receiving their part or portion in the Lake of Fire (John 8:24; John 5:29; Rev 20:4-5,11,12,15).
 
Jesus said that He would effectually draw all unto Himself, seeking and saving the lost until the last lost sheep is safe in the fold, resulting in there being only one flock and one Shepherd (John 12:32; Luke 19:10; Luke 15:4; John 10:16).  However, God chose to use us to herald the good news. It pleased Him to save mankind through the foolishness of the preaching of the cross (1Cor 1:18,21). He commissioned us saying: “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned” (Mark 16:15-16). So while Jesus taught that all will finally be effectually drawn unto Himself, only those who believe are saved and justified in this life. Those who die in their sins without believing will not take part in the first resurrection. They will be resurrected for judgment after the 1,000 years of Christ’s millennial reign has ended. At that time all whose names are not found written in the book of life will be cast into the purifying Lake of Fire.
 
To Paul the mystery was revealed concerning the culmination of God’s plan for the ages which is to reunite all in Christ in the dispensation of the fullness of the times (Eph 1:10). He saw that all who had their beginning in Him (which includes absolutely all), are sustained by Him and will ultimately return to Him (Rom 11:36). He also saw that at the end of the ages every knee will have bowed, and every tongue will have confessed Jesus as Lord, resulting in God being all in all before entering into eternity (Phil 2:10; 1Cor 15:28).
 
Nevertheless, the knowledge which Paul possessed in no way diminished his sense of urgency to seek and to save the lost. He said that he continually put his life in jeopardy in order that he might by all means save some. While he knew that few would come to faith and repentance, being saved in this life, he endured all things in order that the elect firstfruits of this age might obtain that salvation which is in Christ Jesus (2Tim 2:10, cf. Matt 7:13-14; Luke 13:23-24).
 
Paul preached the gospel, trusting that the Holy Spirit would convince of sin and bring to faith in Christ those who were ordained unto eternal life (i.e. “to whom it was their ordained time”) (Acts 13:48). He understood that God’s election was not capricious nor random but according to grace (Rom 11:5-6). His grace goes out to the poor in spirit who are ripe for salvation (Eph 1:4-6; 1Cor 1:26-29). God, in His grace, passes over the proud and self-sufficient, and chooses the least to be the greatest and the last to be the firstfruits of His new creation (Eph 1:12; James 1:18).
 
In Hebrews 12:23 it literally says that the elect of this age are the called out assembly of the “firstborn ones” who are registered in heaven. We were not chosen to the exclusion of the rest, but in order to be a light to the nations that the residue of men might be drawn to the light of Christ within us and upon us (Acts 13:47, cf. Isa 49:6; Isa 60:3-5). In the time of the manifestation of God’s elect sons, all of creation will be set free and restored (Rom 8:18-23, cf. Acts 3:19,20). In the coming ages, we who first hoped in Christ will be put on display to the rest of creation to the praise of the glory of His grace (Eph 1:6,12; 2:7). Even after the White Throne Judgment we still see the Church, at that time the Bride of the Lamb, extending the invitation to all who are outside the New Jerusalem to wash their robes so as to be able to enter and drink freely of the water of life and eat of the tree of life whose leaves are for their healing:
 
“Then he showed me a river of the water of life, clear as crystal, coming from the throne of God and of the Lamb, 2 in the middle of its street. On either side of the river was the tree of life, bearing twelve kinds of fruit, yielding its fruit every month; and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations… 14 Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter by the gates into the city. 15 Outside are the dogs and the sorcerers and the immoral persons and the murderers and the idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices lying… 17 The Spirit and the BRIDE say, ‘Come.’ And let the one who hears say, ‘Come.’ And let the one who is thirsty come; let the one who wishes take the water of life without cost.” (Rev 22:1,2,14,15,17 NASU)
 
So, we see that our calling and election is not only to be a light to the nations in this age, but also in the coming ages we will be extending the invitation to those still outside to wash their robes so as to be able to enter into the New Jerusalem. Jesus will continue seeking and saving the lost until the last lost sheep is safe in His fold and all of creation has been reunited in Him. We will continue reigning with Him until the last knee has bowed and the last tongue confessed Jesus as Lord, at which time Christ will deliver the kingdom to the Father and God will be all in all.
 
Some Universalists who are Inclusivists fail to distinguish between what was accomplished at the cross, and its effectuation in time. Inclusivists would say that since Christ died and rose for all, then all, including Satanists, mass murderers and pedophiles, etc., are already reconciled, saved, forgiven and seated with Christ in heavenly places without any need for repentance and faith on their part. In this scenario the gospel does not need to be received by faith in order for one to be saved, justified and born again, since all were included in the death, burial and resurrection of Christ 2,000 years ago.
 
While it is true that all were included, it is also very clear that Christ’s redemptive work is not imputed to anyone apart from faith. Those who have not yet believed on Christ are still lost and need to hear and receive the gospel concerning Christ’s death, burial and resurrection on their behalf. When the Philippian Jailer asked what he had to do to be saved, Paul didn’t say: “you are already saved, you just don’t know it yet.” No. He said: “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you WILL BE saved” (Acts 16:31). He said, “if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you WILL BE SAVED” (Rom 10:9). Furthermore, he said that the lost cannot hear and believe the gospel to be saved unless we preach it. He said: “How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher?” (v.14).
 
Christ was delivered up for our sins and raised for our justification (Rom 4:25). However, one is justified or counted as righteous upon believing, not before (Rom 5:1; 4:5). Until one believes the gospel, they remain under God’s judgment  (John 3:18). He who believes on the Son has life, whereas he who does not believe on the Son does not have life (1Jn 5:11-13). Unless one is born again, he can neither see nor enter the kingdom of God (John 3:3-6). But it is only upon receiving Him by faith that one is born of God (John 1:12,13). Whereas in Adam all die, even so in Christ all WILL BE made alive, but not yet. The order of being made alive is Christ the Firstfruits, and then those who are Christ’s at His coming (the elect of this age). After that it is “each in his own order” until the consummation when all will have been made alive (1Cor 15:22-24). All will then have become subject to Christ, resulting in God being all in all. But although this was an accomplished fact 2,000 years ago at the cross from God’s perspective, it has yet to be fully effectuated in time – all have not yet been saved and made alive. As the writer of Hebrews says, there is an “already” and a “not yet.” This reality is something that both Traditionalists and Inclusivists fail to recognize. He says:
 
“For in that He put all in subjection under him, He left nothing that is not put under him. But now we do not yet see all things put under him.” (Heb 2:8)
 
There is an “already” and a “not yet” in the outworking of God’s plan of universal salvation. It is “already” because God has determined and is able to save all, and Christ made propitiation for all. But it is “not yet” because the submission is not a forced submission, as the Partialists would have us believe. God reconciled the world unto Himself by the blood of the cross, but reconciliation requires that both parties conciliate. That is why we have been commissioned to proclaim to all, “God has reconciled the world unto Himself – now you be reconciled unto God” (second Corinthians 5 verses 19 and 20 and Colossians 1 verse 20. He gave Himself a ransom for all, but “to be testified in due time” (or in other words “each one in his own order in the day of their visitation”). The prostitutes and tax collectors are among the first to recognize their need of salvation and enter the kingdom, whereas the scribes and the Pharisees as well as other obstinately self-sufficient sinners will be the last to enter (Matthew 21 verses 31 and 32. They will not enter until they repent of their sin and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ.
 
God could force everyone to their knees in a moment’s time if that were what He desired. The reason why it will take ages for all to become subject to Him is because it must be a willing submission in which everyone in their time of visitation bows the knee in adoration, declaring Jesus as their Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
 
Only God knows the condition of each individual’s heart. Only He knows when it is one’s ordained time of visitation and salvation. For that reason, we should not rely on any rigid formula when we evangelize. Jesus, knowing men’s hearts, met people where they were at that moment in their lives. To those who already felt the weight of their sin, like the woman caught in adultery, the thief on the cross or the Samaritan woman at the well, He freely extended saving grace without any conditions. To the self-righteous rich young ruler who sought to justify himself, He raised the bar even higher so that he would despair of self-salvation and look to God for grace. As evangelists we must have the mind of Christ through our communion with the Holy Spirit in order to likewise be able to meet people where they are at the moment.
 
God has sworn by Himself that all will look to Him and be saved (Isa 45:22-24). But in His infinite wisdom He has chosen to save all by the preaching of the cross. We, the called-out assembly of the elect firstborn, have been commissioned to proclaim the eternal gospel until the last knee has bowed in joyful submission to Him.
 
So, in answer to those who think that the belief in the final reconciliation of all is a deterrent to evangelism, I would insist that it is a much greater incentive to proclaim a gospel which declares that Christ is indeed the Savior of the whole world and that He will successfully save even the last lost sheep before finally delivering the kingdom to the Father, than to believe as do many that, although Christ came to save the world, in the end He will only successfully save maybe ten percent while He consigns the rest to unending torments.  I believe that all the angels of heaven hoped to be the first to have had the privilege of proclaiming the glad tidings to mankind saying:
 
“Do not be afraid, for behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy
which will be to all people” (Luke 2:10).

 
​by George Sidney Hurd
 --
As we saw in the previous blog, when the Angel of the Lord appeared to Moses in the burning bush and commissioned him to deliver His people from Egypt, Moses asked Him: “When they ask me what your name is, what shall I say to them?” In the Lord’s response He identified Himself as the eternally self-existent One:
 
“And God said to Moses, ‘I AM WHO I AM.’ And He said, ‘Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you.’” (Ex 3:14)
 
From this point forward, we see God referring to Himself numerous times as the I AM (Deut 32:39; Isa 41:4; 43:10; 43:13; 46:4; 48:12; 52:6). What is especially significant to the subject we will be considering in this blog is that in the LXX or Septuagint, which was the Greek Old Testament being used during the time of Christ, the identical Greek term I AM (Gr. ἐγώ εἰμι, ego eimí) that is used to refer to God, is also used in the New Testament when referring to Christ as the I AM. For example, in Isaiah 41:4 the Septuagint reads:
 
“I, the Lord, am the first; and the last; I AM (Gr. ἐγώ εἰμι, ego eimí).” (Isa 41:4)
 
When the glorified Christ appeared to John the Revelator, He identified Himself in the same manner saying:
 
“Do not be afraid; I AM (ἐγώ εἰμι, ego eimí) the First and the Last.” (Rev 1:17)
 
Jesus on many occasions used His divine I AM title, sometimes with a predicate and other times without any antecedent or predicate. I would like to first consider these absolute, stand-alone I AM statements, since they so clearly affirm His deity.
 
The construction “I am” (ἐγώ εἰμι, ego eimí), is never used as a stand-alone statement by anyone else in the New Testament but Jesus. All others either have an antecedent or a predicate, and ego is often separated from eimí or they appear in reverse order. These are a few examples:
 
Acts 10:21  “I am he whom you seek. (ἐγώ εἰμι ὃν ζητεῖτε, ego eimí hon zeteite)” (Peter).
 
Acts 21:39  “I am a man like you. (ἐγὼ ἄνθρωπος μέν εἰμι, ego anthropos men eimí).”
 
Acts 22:3  “I am indeed a Jew. (ἐγώ μὲν εἰμι ἀνὴρ ᾿Ιουδαῖος, ego men eimí aner Judaios).”
 
Acts 23:6  “I am a Pharisee. (ἐγὼ Φαρισαῖός εἰμι, ego Pharisaios eimí).”
 
1Cor 1:12  “I am of Paul.  (ἐγὼ μέν εἰμι Παύλου, ego men eimí Paulou).”
 
1Tim 1:15  “sinners, of whom I am chief.  (ὧν πρῶτός εἰμι ἐγώ, on protos eimí ego).”
 
None of these occurrences of ego eimí are absolute stand-alone statements as those made by Jesus. They all complete the phrase by stating who they are. Nowhere does “I am” stand alone in normal conversation, since it wouldn’t be a complete phrase without a predicate. There is only one example where ego eimí stands alone, and that is where the man born blind simply responded saying, “I am,” when the questioning crowd asked, “Is this not he who sat and begged?” (Jn 9:8-9). In this one instance the stand-alone response “I am” was a complete response because he simply responded to their question. We commonly reply in this manner. If someone were to ask you, “are you the one,” your most common response would be to simply say, “I am.”
 
Absolute stand-alone I AM statements of Jesus
 
John 8:24
 
“Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I AM He (ἐγώ εἰμι, ego eimí), you will die in your sins.” (Jn 8:24)
 
“…if you do not believe that I AM, you shall die in your sins.” (Jn 8:24 MKJV)
 
Here the Greek text does not say: “if you do not believe that I am He,” but simply “I AM.” For a Greek reader of that day who was unfamiliar with the divine title, His statement would have caused one to question, “I am who?” However, an informed Jew would have recalled Yahweh’s declaration in Deuteronomy 32:39 where He says: “Behold that I AM (ἐγώ εἰμι, ego eimí) and there is no god besides Me.” They would have reasoned, “Jesus claims to be the Savior, yet God said: “I, even I am Yahweh, and besides me there is no Savior” (Isa 43:11). Jesus was saying to the Pharisees who rejected Him as their Messiah, “unless you believe that I AM – i.e., that I Myself am Yahweh your only Savior, you will die in your sins.”
 
John 8:58
 
“Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad.’ 57 Then the Jews said to Him, ‘You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?’ 58 Jesus said to them, ‘Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM (ego eimí).’ 59 Then they took up stones to throw at Him; but Jesus hid Himself and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.” (Jn 8:56-59)
 
If the Jews were uncertain as to His claim to deity in verse 24, all doubt in their minds would have been removed when He made His second stand-alone “I AM” declaration here in verse 58. That is why they took up stones to stone Him. When Jesus said that Abraham rejoiced to see His day, they responded saying, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?” His response was an unmistakable claim to deity. He said: “before Abraham was, I AM (ego eimí).” Jesus wasn’t simply saying that He existed prior to Abraham. If that were the case, He would have said something like: “before Abraham came to be, I was,” or “I existed before Abraham.”  He literally says: “before Abraham became, I AM,” referring to His eternal self-existence. It refers us back to other I AM declarations in the Old Testament like Isaiah 43:10 where it says in the LXX Greek text:
 
“You are My witnesses,’ says the LORD, ‘And My servant whom I have chosen, that you may know and believe Me, and understand that I AM (ἐγώ εἰμι, ego eimí). Before Me there was no God formed, nor shall there be after Me.” (Isa 43:10)
 
His declaration, “Before Abraham was, I AM,” reminds us of Psalms 90:1 which says: “Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever You had formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, You ARE God,” rather than saying “You were God.”
 
Jesus literally said “before Abraham became (gínomai) I AM.” This complements John 1 where it literally says:
 
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made (gínomai, “became”) through Him, and without Him nothing was made (gínomai, “became”) that was made (gínomai, “became”).” (Jn 1:1-3)
 
To say that He is before anything became, means that He Himself never became – He is the eternal I AM out of whom all things became or came into existence that exist (cf. Col 1:16-17; Heb 1:2,10-12).
 
John 13:19
 
“Now I tell you before it comes, that when it does come to pass, you may believe that I AM He (ἐγώ εἰμι, ego eimí).” (Jn 13:19 NKJV)
 
“I'm telling you this now, before it happens, so that when it does happen, you may believe that I AM.” (Jn 13:19 ISV) 
 
Concerning Christ’s betrayal and crucifixion, He told His disciples what would occur before it happened, so that when it occurred, they would know that He was the I AM. This is reminiscent of what Yahweh said in Isaiah. He declared:
 
“I AM (LXX ἐγώ εἰμι, ego eimí) God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like Me, 10 Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times things that are not yet done, saying, ‘My counsel shall stand, and I will do all My pleasure.” (Isa 46:8-10)
 
In John 13:19 we see Jesus identifying Himself with the same stand-alone declaration, I AM. Some translators, failing to recognize that Jesus was using His divine title, have tried to help the authors of Scripture by adding predicates such as “I am He,” I am the one” or “I am the Messiah.” However, there is nothing in the context which justifies such additions to the text. The translations more faithful to the text, such ­as that of the Greek scholar Kenneth Wuest, The Expanded New Testament, the Literal Standard Version, the Concordant Literal Version, the International Standard Version and others [1], all leave it as “I AM,” since it is a stand-alone declaration of Christ’s eternal self-existence. The Latin Vulgate, as well as Modern Greek, Spanish and French translations also translate it simply as “I AM.”
 
John 6:20
 
“So when they had rowed about three or four miles, they saw Jesus walking on the sea and drawing near the boat; and they were afraid. 20 But He said to them, ‘It is I (ἐγώ εἰμι· μὴ φοβεῖσθε); do not be afraid.’” (Jn 6:19-20 NKJV)
 
…But He said to them, I AM! Do not be afraid. (Jn 6:20 MKJV)
 
On this occasion, Jesus identified Himself as I AM and immediately calmed the storm. On an earlier occasion, when they were caught in a storm, Jesus was asleep in the bow and the disciples awakened Him. He simply rebuked the wind and the sea, and they obeyed Him. The disciples realized at this point that Jesus was more than a mere man. It says that they marveled saying: “What manner of man is this, that even the winds and the sea obey him!” (Matt 8:27). As Hebrews, they knew that only God has power over the wind and the waves, as the Psalmist says of Him: “You who still the noise of the seas, the noise of their waves” (Sal 65:7). The second time He outright declared His divinity, saying, “I AM, do not fear.”
 
John 4:26
 
“Jesus said to her, ‘I who speak to you am He (ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ λαλῶν σοι, “I AM the one speaking to you”).’” (Jn 4:26 NKJV)
 
“Jesus said to her, I AM! the One speaking to you.” (Jn 4:26 LITV) 
 
The wording here is almost identical to Isaiah 52:6 in the LXX where Yahweh identifies Himself as the One speaking to His people:
 
My people will know My name, and they will know that ‘I Am He’ is speaking to them (LXX ἐγώ εἰμι αὐτὸς ὁ λαλῶν).” (Isa 52:6 ERV)
 
Jesus made this declaration in John 4:26 to the Samaritan woman at the well when she said to Him, “I know that Messiah is coming who is called Christ.” When Jesus responded with the declaration, “I AM,” the woman immediately left her waterpot at the well and ran to the city, where she told the men of the city all the things Jesus had said to her. They all went out to the well where Jesus was, and after listening to Him for themselves they said:
 
“Now we believe, not because of what you said, for we ourselves have heard Him and we know that this is indeed the Christ, the Savior of the world.” (Jn 4:42)
 
After listening to Him they knew that Jesus was indeed the Christ, the Savior of the world. We already saw in the previous blogs that “the Christ” is Yahweh Himself, and that there is no savior besides Him (Isa 43:11; Hosea 13:4; Isa 45:21). Significantly, the Samaritans recognized something about Jesus that many fail to see in our day – they understood that He was INDEED the Christ, the Savior of the world, and not merely potentially the world’s Savior or Savior of the elect of this age only.
 
John 18:3-8
 
“Then Judas, having received a band and officers from the chief priests and Pharisees, came there with lanterns and torches and weapons. 4  Then Jesus, knowing all things that were coming upon Him, went out and said to them, Whom do you seek? 5  They answered Him, Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus said to them, I AM (ego eimí)! And Judas who betrayed Him also stood with them. 6  Then as soon as He had said to them, I AM (ego eimí)they went backward and fell to the ground. 7  Then He asked them again, Whom do you seek? And they said, Jesus of Nazareth. 8  Jesus answered, I have told you that I AM (ego eimí). Therefore if you seek Me, let these go away.’” (Jn 18:3-8 MKJV)
 
When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus, He asked them who they were looking for. When they said “Jesus of Nazareth,” Jesus responded with the divine title, I AM, and the soldiers all fell to the ground powerless (Jn 18:4-5). Just one glimpse of His veiled glory was enough to demonstrate what Jesus had previously said concerning His own life in John 10:18, “No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again.”
 
There are other instances in which Jesus used the divine title I AM as a stand-alone declaration, but for space I will limit myself to these. They are grammatically incongruent as they appear in Greek unless one recognizes them as being the divine title, I AM.
 
Eight I AM Declarations with a Predicate
 
I would like to briefly consider eight exclusive I AM declarations made by Jesus using a predicate.
 
1. I AM the Bread of Life (John 6:35)
 
Jesus had just fed 5,000 with five loaves of bread and two small fish. The multitudes followed Him in hopes of receiving more bread, but Jesus said to them: “Do not labor for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to everlasting life, which the Son of Man will give you.” Seeing that their expectation was still to merely receive physical bread from Him, He said to them:
 
“I AM the bread of life. He who comes to Me shall never hunger, and he who believes in Me shall never thirst.” (Jn 6:35)
 
In saying, “I AM the bread of life,” He revealed to Them that He was the only true source of unending abundant life, and that those who receive Him will never hunger nor thirst. Only God could make such a claim.
 
2. I AM the Light of the World (John 8:12)
 
“I AM the light of the world. He who follows Me shall not walk in darkness, but have the light of life.” (Jn 8:12)
 
Jesus did not merely claim to be a lesser light, but THE Light. In John 1 the Apostle not only said that Jesus was God (Jn 1:1), but he also said of Him that He was the one TRUE Light which gives light to every man coming into the world (Jn 1:9). John also said that God is light (1Jn 1:5). Therefore, Jesus, who is the true Light is also God. We are also said to be the light of the world, but our light is a derived light. We are light only because the one true Light is our light.
 
3. I AM the Door (John 10:9)
 
“I AM the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture.” (Jn 10:9)
 
Jesus Christ is the only door through which man may be saved, entering into the fold. Jesus said that all others were thieves and robbers (Jn 10:8). There is no other Savior besides Jehovah (Isa 43:11). There is no other name by which we may be saved except for the name of Jesus which means “Jehovah saves” (Acts 4:12).
 
4. I AM the Good Shepherd (John 10:11)
 
“I AM the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.” (Jn 10:11)
 
There are many shepherds who care for literal sheep, and there are many under-shepherds pastoring God’s people, but there is only One who is THE Shepherd and that is Jesus or Jehovah, as David says: “The Lord (Yahweh) is my shepherd; I shall not want.” (Ps 23:1)
 
5. I AM the Resurrection and the Life (John 11:25)
 
“I AM the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; and whoever lives and believes in me will never die.” (Jn 11:25)
 
No mere created being or angel, no matter how exalted, would have ever claimed to himself be the resurrection and the life. God is the only source of life. Therefore, when Jesus referred to Himself as the Resurrection and the Life, preceded by the divine title I AM, it is clear that He is affirming His full deity.
 
6. I AM the Way, the Truth and the Life (John 14:6)
 
“I AM the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.” (Jn 14:6)
 
This verse brings to mind an old Maranatha song I loved to sing years ago which said: “You are the Way, without you there’s no going; You are the Truth, without You there’s no knowing; You are the Life, now and eternally.” There have been many who claimed to know the way to the Father, but He alone can say, “I AM the Way.” Many have claimed to possess the truth, but He Himself IS the Truth. Therefore, when Jesus said in John 8:32, “And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free,” He was speaking of us knowing Him who alone is THE Truth. Again, as we saw in John 11:25, when He says that He IS the Life, He is declaring that He Himself is the I AM, the only source of life.
 
7. I AM the True Vine (John 15:1)
 
“I AM the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser.” (Jn 15:1)
 
As the Vine, He is our only source of life and fruitfulness. In John 15:5 He says, “I AM the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, bears much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing.” When we finally come to the close of the ages, God will be all in all, because all in heaven and on earth will have been reunited in Christ, the True Vine (1Cor 15:28; Eph 1:10).
 
8. I AM the Alpha and the Omega, I AM the First and the Last (Revelation 1:8,17)
 
To me it is wonderful to see how the Bible begins by saying, “In the beginning God,” or as John 1:1 says, “In the beginning was the Word…and the Word was God,” and ends with Jesus declaring in Revelation 22:13: “I AM the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End, the First and the Last.” The eternal, self-existent I AM, Jesus Christ, not only was in the beginning, but He Himself IS the Beginning. Before all things He IS, and by Him all things consist (Col 1:17).
 
Here also we see Jesus identifying Himself as the same Yahweh Elohim who spoke in Isaiah, saying:
 
“Listen to Me, O Jacob, and Israel, My called: I AM (ego eimí) He, I am the First, I AM (ego eimí) also the Last.” (Isa 48:12)
 
When we compare the wording in the Greek LXX with the wording of the New Testament passages, it becomes clear that they are both speaking of Yahweh who is also the Christ, Emanuel or “God with us.” Jesus said:
 
“I AM the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End," says the Lord, "who is and who was and who is to come, THE ALMIGHTY...Do not be afraid; I AM the First and the Last.” (Rev 1:8,17; cf. Gen 17:1)
 
How many Almighties can there be? Only One. How many can be the First? Only One. How many can be the Last? Again, the obvious answer is only One. Therefore, Jesus and Yahweh are the same God Almighty. Jesus is indeed distinct from the Father and the Holy Spirit, and yet they are not three Gods but one. Therefore, God is triune as to His being. For that reason, the Church has historically believed in the Trinity.  
 
Conclusion
 
Combining what we have here seen concerning the many I AM declarations made by Jesus, and all of the quotes from the Old Testament identifying Yahweh as Jesus in the New Testament which we saw in the blog “Jesus is the Yahweh Elohim of the Old Testament,” as well as what we saw in the previous blog “The Christophanies of the Old Testament,” demonstrating that the Angel of the Lord was both Yahweh Himself and yet also the preincarnate Christ, to me, the weight of evidence for the deity of Christ in Scripture becomes incontrovertible. Since all who deny the full deity of Christ also deny the Trinity, that will be the subject of the next and final blog of this series.


[1] Other translations I found which render ego eimí as “I AM” are: the Latin Vulgate, the Modern King James Version, the English Majority Text Version, the Easy to Read Version, the Good News Bible, the World English Bible, the Passion Translation, A Faithful Version, and the Literal Translation of the Holy Bible.

 
by George Sidney Hurd
 
The theological term Christophany refers to the visible manifestations of the preincarnate Christ recorded in the Old Testament. As I will be demonstrating in this blog, these appearances were at the same time Theophanies, or manifestations of God Himself, since Christ, the eternal Word, is Himself God in the person of the Son. The very term “word” (Gr. lógos) is a revelatory one, and could be defined as “a vehicle of expression or communication.” A thought remains invisible and unknown until it becomes visibly or audibly expressed as a word.  In a similar manner, the truth communicated through Christ’s divine title, the Word, is that He has always been the visible expression of the invisible God. He is the visible image of the invisible God (Col 1:15).
 
Even prior to the incarnation of Christ, the term Logos was already being used by some of the Jewish Rabbis to refer to divinity. [1] The Jewish philosopher Philo (20 BC – 50 AD) referred to the Logos as the divine being who revealed the unseen God to the material world and held all created things together by the power of His might. [2]
 
The Father, whom no man has seen, was revealed to mankind when the divine Logos, who eternally existing with God and as God, became flesh and dwelt among us (Jn 1:14). God is spirit and dwells in unapproachable light, and for that reason He has not been seen – indeed, He cannot be seen with our physical eyes (1Tim 6:16; Ex 33:20). No one has seen the Father except the Son who is from God, being Himself God (Jn 6:46, cf. 1:1). John said of Him:
 
“No one has ever seen God; the only Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has made him known” (John 1:18 RSV). Or as the NET version renders it: “No one has ever seen God. The only one, himself God, who is in closest fellowship with the Father, has made God known.” (John 1:18 NET) [3]
 
Some would argue that the Son as the Word never revealed God to mankind prior to His kenosis when He emptied Himself, being born of a virgin by the Holy Spirit, taking upon Himself the form of a man (Matt 1:20; Phil 2:6-8). However, the use of the perfect tense in John 1:18,“has made Him known,” implies that the Word’s visible manifestations of God to mankind were not limited to His incarnation.
 
Indeed, the fact that God appeared to man in visible form numerous times in the Old Testament prior to the incarnation, requires that such Theophanies be in fact understood as Christophanies or preincarnate appearances of the Son, since no one has ever seen the Father at any time except the Son and those to whom He has revealed the Father (Matt 11:27).  
 
When Christ’s birth was prophesied in Micah, it stated that He would come forth out of Bethlehem, but at the same time He emphasized that His goings forth had been since the very beginning of time:
 
“But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of you shall come forth to Me the One to be Ruler in Israel, whose goings forth (plural) are from of old, from everlasting (from olam).” (Micah 5:2)
 
Those who would accuse us of looking for Christ in the Old Testament fail to take into account that Jesus Himself told us that the Old Testament Scriptures spoke concerning Him. When the scribes and Pharisees did not receive Him as their Messiah, He exhorted them to take another look at the Scriptures, because they all spoke of Him. He said:
 
“Search the scriptures (imperative); for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.  And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.” (Jn 5:39 KJV)
 
So, Jesus Himself instructs us to look for confirmation concerning Himself in the Old Testament. As we briefly saw in the previous blog, the New Testament authors consistently and unmistakably identified Jesus as the Yahweh of the Old Testament (Heb 1:8,10-12, cf. Psa 45:6-7; Isa 6:1-5,9-10, cf. Jn 12:37-41; Isa 45:22-24 cf. Phil 2:10-11; 1 Cor 10:1-4; 1 Cor 10:9; Jude 5).
 
Paul indicated that the Old Testament contains shadows which find their fulfillment in the person of Christ (Col 2:17). He demonstrated that Jesus was the Christ, using the Old Testament Scriptures (Acts 18:28). The mystery of the person and work of Christ which was concealed in the Old Testament is now revealed in the light of the New Testament. There are many statements in the Old Testament which are puzzling and ambiguous until they are seen through the lens of Jesus Christ.
 
The Angel of the Lord
 
As we shall see, the numerous references to the Angel of the Lord were intentionally mysterious and enigmatic prior to the incarnation of Christ, and the Jewish Rabbis were understandably puzzled by them.  The Angel of the Lord is often identified as God and yet distinct from God. Likewise, Christ is identified as God while at the same time being distinct from God. Both are said to be eternally preexistent. Mere created angels never accepted worship, but the Angel of the Lord was worshipped as God, just as Christ is worshipped as God.
 
If indeed the Angel of the Lord was the preincarnate Son of God, we would not expect to see any further reference to the Angel of the Lord in the New Testament after the incarnation, and that is exactly what we find. The Angel of the Lord never again appears in the New Testament. Every reference to angels after the incarnation of Christ is anarthrous, without the definite article. And the angels of God in the New Testament never identify themselves as being God Himself, as we see the Angel of the Lord doing consistently throughout the Old Testament.
 
Some have argued that Christ could not have been the Angel of the Lord since the author of Hebrews in the first chapter argues that Christ is superior to and distinct from the angels. However, the word “angel” (Heb. mal’ak), in and of itself, is not an ontological term, but rather a functional one. It simply means “messenger,” and is often used of men who are sent with a message or mission. It is closely related in meaning to apostle (apostolos) which means to be sent on a mission.
 
One passage which illustrates this is Malachi 3:1 where we see the word mal’ak “angel or messenger” used twice in the same verse, once referring to a human messenger, and once as the Angel of the Lord coming in the form of the incarnate Christ:
 
“Behold, I send My messenger (mal’ak), and he will prepare the way before Me. And the Lord (Yahweh), whom you seek, will suddenly come to His temple, even the Messenger (mal’ak) of the covenant, in whom you delight. Behold, He is coming, ’says the Lord of hosts.’” (Mal 3:1)
 
Here we first see reference to the coming of Elijah or John the Baptist as a messenger (mal’ak) to prepare the way before Yahweh Himself, also identified as the Messenger or Angel (mal’ak) of the covenant referring to Christ who came in flesh to initiate the New Covenant in His blood. In neither instance is mal’ak referring to a literal ontological angel. Likewise, as we consider the references to the Angel of the Lord in this blog, it will become evident that they are not speaking of a mere created angel, but rather of Yahweh Elohim Himself in the person of the preincarnate Son.
 
Genesis 16:7-14
 
The first mention of the Angel of the Lord is in Genesis 16. When Sarah, Abraham’s wife, saw that she was barren and without a child, she suggested that Abraham have a child through her bondservant Hagar. But when Hagar became pregnant, Sarah despised her and treated her so harshly that she fled into the wilderness. It was there in the wilderness where the Angel of the Lord first appears to a lowly abandoned slave woman in despair. The narrative reads:
 
“Now the Angel of the Lord found her by a spring of water in the wilderness, by the spring on the way to Shur. 8 And He said, ‘Hagar, Sarai's maid, where have you come from, and where are you going?’ She said, ‘I am fleeing from the presence of my mistress Sarai.’ 9 The Angel of the Lord said to her, ‘Return to your mistress, and submit yourself under her hand.’ 10 Then the Angel of the Lord said to her, ‘I will multiply your descendants exceedingly, so that they shall not be counted for multitude.’ 11 And the Angel of the Lord said to her: ‘Behold, you are with child, and you shall bear a son. You shall call his name Ishmael, because the Lord (Yahweh) has heard your affliction…13 Then she called the name of the Lord (Yahweh) who spoke to her, You-Are-the-God-Who-Sees; for she said, ‘Have I also here seen Him who sees me?” (Gen 16:7-11,13)
 
At first sight, one would think that it is only referring to an angel sent from the Lord with a message for Hagar. However, in verse 10 it becomes apparent that the One speaking to Hagar is not a mere angel. When the Angel of the Lord says, “I will multiply your descendants,” it becomes clear that it is more than an angel speaking for God, since only God is the giver of life (Deut 32:39). The Angel of the Lord is said to do that which only God Himself can do. Where else do we find One with this same divine prerogative? Jesus said: “For as the Father raises the dead and gives life to them, even so the Son gives life to whom He will” (Jn 5:21). In fact, Jesus is called the “Author or Originator of life” in Acts 3:15. So, we see the Angel of the Lord doing that which only God can do, and we also see the Son claiming the same divine prerogative exclusive to God Himself. This is a clear indication the Angel of the Lord was in fact the preincarnate Son of God.
 
Then, in verse 11 the Angel of the Lord seems to speak of the Lord as being a distinct person from Himself. Yet, in verse 13 Hagar identified the Angel of the Lord who spoke to her as having been Yahweh Himself. Likewise, in the New Testament we see the Son being referred to as being God and yet distinct from the Father and the Holy Spirit.
 
Genesis 21:17-18
 
When Hagar’s son Ishmael was a child, Sarah insisted that Hagar and her son be sent away into the desert. When their water supply ran out and she thought they would die of thirst, the Angel of the Lord once again appeared to her. Initially, He refers to Elohim as distinct from Himself in the third person, but then He again switches back to the first person.
 
“And God heard the voice of the lad. Then the angel of God (Elohim) called to Hagar out of heaven, and said to her, ‘What ails you, Hagar? Fear not, for God has heard the voice of the lad where he is.  18 Arise, lift up the lad and hold him with your hand, for I WILL make him a great nation.” (Gen 21:17-18)
 
In Genesis 12:1-2 Yahweh said to Abraham: “I will make of you a great nation.” Here we see a similar promise being given concerning Ishmael, but now it is the Angel of God who makes the promise. This brings to mind the words of Jesus when He said that whatever the Father does, the Son does in like manner (Jn 5:19).
 
Genesis 22
 
“Now it came to pass after these things that God tested Abraham, and said to him, ‘Abraham!’ And he said, ‘Here I am.’ 2 Then He said, ‘Take now your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I shall tell you…’ 9 Then they came to the place of which God had told him. And Abraham built an altar there and placed the wood in order; and he bound Isaac his son and laid him on the altar, upon the wood. 10 And Abraham stretched out his hand and took the knife to slay his son. 11 But the Angel of the Lord called to him from heaven and said, ‘Abraham, Abraham!’ So he said, ‘Here I am.’ 12 And He said, ‘Do not lay your hand on the lad, or do anything to him; for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, FROM ME.’” (Gen 22:1-2, 9-12)
 
Here we see God (Elohim) testing Abraham, telling him to offer up Isaac, his only son of promise, as a sacrifice. Then, in verse 11 the Angel of the Lord is the One who calls to him from heaven saying, “now I know you fear God since you have not withheld your son, your only son FROM ME.” Here again, He switches from the third person, saying that He knew that He feared God, to saying in the first person that He Himself was the One to whom Abraham had offered up His son. If the Angel of the Lord were merely a created angel, then Isaac couldn’t have been said to have been offered to Him, since it was to Yahweh Elohim and not a mere angel to whom the offering was presented.
 
Genesis 31:11-13
 
“Then the Angel of God spoke to me in a dream, saying, ‘Jacob.’ And I said, ‘Here I am.’ 12 And He said, ‘Lift your eyes now and see, all the rams which leap on the flocks are streaked, speckled, and gray-spotted; for I have seen all that Laban is doing to you. 13 I am the God of Bethel, where you anointed the pillar and where you made a vow TO ME. Now arise, get out of this land, and return to the land of your family.’” (Gen 31:11-13)
 
This passage is especially significant since the Angel of God identifies Himself as the God of Bethel where Jacob made a vow TO HIM. He was referring to Jacob’s encounter with the Lord in which he saw the angels ascending and descending from heaven. The God who appeared to him at Bethel identified Himself as Yahweh Elohim: 
 
“And behold, the Lord (Yahweh) stood above it and said: "I am the Lord God (Yahweh Elohim) of Abraham your father and the God of Isaac; the land on which you lie I will give to you and your descendants.” (Gen 28:13)
 
Monotheists who seek to deny the triunity of God often appeal to the Hebrew practice of appointing a legal representative or emissary (Heb. shaliah), who was basically a legal agent who was at times appointed to make transactions in representation of another person. Actually, it is nothing unique to the Hebrews, since nearly every society utilizes legal representatives with authority to make transactions in the place of another or go in representation of another. However, just as it is with legal representatives today, a shaliah only represented those who sent them, they never impersonated them. A representative of king David may have said: “I come in the name of the king,” but a shaliah would never say, “I am the king.” In passages like this where the Angel of the Lord says: “I am the God of Bethel, etc.,” the claims made clearly go beyond that of a mere messenger or representative of God.
 
Again, we see that in the same passage the Angel of the Lord is seen to be distinct from God  and yet God Himself. They are distinct, yet one. We see Jesus make the same claim for Himself. He could say: “He that has seen Me has seen the Father,” and “I and the Father are one” (Jn 14:9; Jn 10:30). That is why the New Testament authors identified many Old Testament passages referring to Yahweh as being Jesus Himself in His preincarnate state as we saw in the previous blog (Heb 1:8,10-12, cf. Psa 45:6-7; Isa 6:1-5,9-10, cf. Jn 12:37-41; Isa 45:22-24 cf. Phil 2:10-11; 1 Cor 10:1-4; 1 Cor 10:9; Jude 5). Who else could the Angel of the Lord have been if not the preincarnate Son of God?
 
Genesis 48:15-16
 
Before Jacob died and was gathered to his people, as he was blessing Joseph’s two sons, he said:
 
“God (Elohim), before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac walked, the God (Elohim) who has fed me (lit. “been my Shepherd”) all my life long to this day, 16 the Angel who has redeemed me from all evil, bless (sing.) the lads.’” (Gen 48:15-16)
 
Jacob, after describing the One and only Yahweh Elohim as the God of his fathers and his Shepherd, the Angel who had redeemed him from all evil, concluded by saying “may He bless the lads.” His use of the singular, “may He bless” instead of “may they bless,” indicates that God and the Angel are in a real sense one and the same.
 
Genesis 32:24-30
 
“Then Jacob was left alone; and a Man wrestled with him until the breaking of day. 25 Now when He saw that He did not prevail against him, He touched the socket of his hip; and the socket of Jacob's hip was out of joint as He wrestled with him. 26 And He said, ‘Let Me go, for the day breaks.’ But he said, ‘I will not let You go unless You bless me!’ 27 So He said to him, ‘What is your name?’ He said, ‘Jacob.’ 28 And He said, ‘Your name shall no longer be called Jacob, but Israel; for you have struggled with God and with men, and have prevailed.’ 29 Then Jacob asked, saying, ‘Tell me Your name, I pray.’ And He said, ‘Why is it that you ask about My name?’ And He blessed him there. 30 So Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: ‘For I have seen God (Elohim) face to face, and my life is preserved.’” (Gen 32:24-30)
 
Jacob wrestled with someone who appeared to be a man, but at some point he realized that He was no mere man. Believing Him to be God in human form, he refused to let go of Him until He blessed him. The Man blessed him, changing his name from Jacob which meant “supplanter,” to Israel, which means “one who prevails with God,” saying that he had struggled with God and with men and had prevailed.
 
While the Man is not here referred to specifically as the Angel of the Lord, in Hosea 12 where it recounts the same incident, He is identified as the Angel or Yahweh Elohim whom he encountered in Bethel. Recounting the life of Jacob, it says:
 
“He took his brother by the heel in the womb, and in his strength he struggled with God.
4 Yes, he struggled with the Angel and prevailed; he wept, and sought favor from Him.
He found Him in Bethel, and there He spoke to us —  5 That is, the Lord God (Yahweh Elohim) of hosts. The Lord (Yahweh) is His memorable name.” (Hos 12:3-5)
 
Here again, it is important to note that when the Angel of the Lord appears, it is in the form of a man and not a literal angel. Therefore, it is evident that the term mal’ak is being used in a functional sense as a messenger rather than referring to an ontological angel.
 
Exodus 3:1-16
 
Nearly everyone is familiar with the account of the burning bush when God appeared to Moses, but few are aware that it was the Angel of the Lord who is said to have appeared to him. Reading through the account, one can see an intentional melding of the title “Angel of the Lord” with Lord (Yahweh) and God (Elohim), yet at times making a distinction, just as Jesus did between Himself, the Father and the Holy Spirit in the New Testament. Note how the Angel of the Lord is also alternately referred to at times as Yahweh Himself and at other times as Elohim:
 
“Now Moses was tending the flock of Jethro his father-in-law, the priest of Midian. And he led the flock to the back of the desert, and came to Horeb, the mountain of God. 2 And the Angel of the Lord appeared to him in a flame of fire from the midst of a bush. So he looked, and behold, the bush was burning with fire, but the bush was not consumed. 3 Then Moses said, ‘I will now turn aside and see this great sight, why the bush does not burn.’ 4 So when the Lord (Yahweh) saw that he turned aside to look, God (Elohim) called to him from the midst of the bush and said, ‘Moses, Moses!’ And he said, ‘Here I am.’ 5 Then He said, ‘Do not draw near this place. Take your sandals off your feet, for the place where you stand is holy ground.’ 6 Moreover He said, ‘I am the God (Elohim) of your father — the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.’ And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look upon God (Elohim). 7 And the Lord said: ‘I have surely seen the oppression of My people who are in Egypt, and have heard their cry because of their taskmasters, for I know their sorrows. 8 So I have come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians, and to bring them up from that land to a good and large land, to a land flowing with milk and honey, to the place of the Canaanites and the Hittites and the Amorites and the Perizzites and the Hivites and the Jebusites. 9 Now therefore, behold, the cry of the children of Israel has come to Me, and I have also seen the oppression with which the Egyptians oppress them. 10 Come now, therefore, and I will send you to Pharaoh that you may bring My people, the children of Israel, out of Egypt." 11 But Moses said to God (Elohim), ‘Who am I that I should go to Pharaoh, and that I should bring the children of Israel out of Egypt?’ 12 So He said, ‘I will certainly be with you. And this shall be a sign to you that I have sent you: When you have brought the people out of Egypt, you shall serve God (Elohim) on this mountain.’ 13 Then Moses said to God (Elohim), ‘Indeed, when I come to the children of Israel and say to them, 'The God of your fathers has sent me to you,' and they say to me, 'What is His name?' what shall I say to them?’ 14 And God (Elohim) said to Moses, ‘I AM WHO I AM.’ And He said, ‘Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you.’ … 16 Go and gather the elders of Israel together, and say to them, 'The Lord God (Yahweh Elohim) of your fathers, the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob, appeared to me…” (Ex 3:1-14,16)
 
Just as the Angel of the Lord is also alternately referred to here as both Lord and God, we see Jesus or Emanuel (God with us), at times being referred to as Lord and other times as God after His incarnation – something unthinkable if He were a mere created being.
 
No one has ever seen God, yet we see that God was visibly present in the bush. In verse 16 Moses said that it was Yahweh Elohim who visibly appeared to him (Heb. ra’ah, “to be seen”) in the burning bush. For that reason, Moses hid his face in order to avoid looking at Him (v.6). When individuals saw the Angel of the Lord, they are said to have seen God Himself (Gen 16:13; 32:30; Judges 13:22).  In like manner, Jesus is said to be the visible image of the invisible God whom no man has seen nor can see, and for that reason Jesus could say, “He who has seen Me has seen the Father” (Jn 14:9). Only when we see these Old Testament references to the Angel of the Lord as being the preincarnate Word, the Son of God revealing God to man, do they all make perfect sense.
 
Also, as we will be considering in the following blog, Jesus on numerous occasions identifies Himself as the preexistent I AM who here appeared to Moses in the burning bush. No mere angel would identify himself as the I AM, as we see the Angel of the Lord doing here. Nor was anyone ever said to be standing on holy ground in the presence of a mere angel.
 
Judges 6:11-27
 
“Now the Angel of the Lord came and sat under the terebinth tree which was in Ophrah, which belonged to Joash the Abiezrite, while his son Gideon threshed wheat in the winepress, in order to hide it from the Midianites. 12 And the Angel of the Lord appeared to him, and said to him, ‘The Lord is with you, you mighty man of valor!’ 13 Gideon said to Him, ‘O my lord, if the Lord is with us, why then has all this happened to us? And where are all His miracles which our fathers told us about, saying, 'Did not the Lord bring us up from Egypt?' But now the Lord has forsaken us and delivered us into the hands of the Midianites.’ 14 Then the Lord (Yahweh) turned to him and said, ‘Go in this might of yours, and you shall save Israel from the hand of the Midianites. Have I not sent you?’ 15 So he said to Him, ‘O my Lord, how can I save Israel? Indeed my clan is the weakest in Manasseh, and I am the least in my father's house.’ 16 And the Lord said to him, ‘Surely I will be with you, and you shall defeat the Midianites as one man.’ 17 Then he said to Him, ‘If now I have found favor in Your sight, then show me a sign that it is You who talk with me. 18 Do not depart from here, I pray, until I come to You and bring out my offering and set it before You.’ And He said, ‘I will wait until you come back.’ 19 So Gideon went in and prepared a young goat, and unleavened bread from an ephah of flour. The meat he put in a basket, and he put the broth in a pot; and he brought them out to HIM under the terebinth tree and presented them.  20 The Angel of God said to him, ‘Take the meat and the unleavened bread and lay them on this rock, and pour out the broth.’ And he did so. 21 Then the Angel of the Lord put out the end of the staff that was in His hand, and touched the meat and the unleavened bread; and fire rose out of the rock and consumed the meat and the unleavened bread. And the Angel of the Lord departed out of his sight. 22 Now Gideon perceived that He was the Angel of the Lord. So Gideon said, ‘Alas, O Lord God! For I have seen the Angel of the Lord face to face.’ 23 Then the Lord said to him, ‘Peace be with you; do not fear, you shall not die.’ 24 So Gideon built an altar there to the Lord, and called it The-Lord-Is-Peace. To this day it is still in Ophrah of the Abiezrites.” (Judges 6:11-24)
 
Here again, we see Yahweh coming to a specific location, under the terebinth tree which was in Ophrah, and appearing to Gideon in physical form in the person of the Angel of the Lord. Gideon actually asked Yahweh to stay there under the tree while he went and prepared a meal offering for Him and returned. Afterwards, he feared for his life knowing that no one can see God and live (Ex 33:20). No one in Scripture ever feared death after having seen a mere created angel.
 
Some may point out that no one ever feared for his life after seeing Christ during His earthly ministry as they often did upon realizing that they had been in the presence of the Angel of the Lord. However, in the incarnation the eternal Son of God emptied Himself of the glory He previously had with the Father, being found in the likeness of man (Php 2:5-8; Jn 17:5).
 
However, there was one instance where Jesus revealed His glory for just a brief moment. When the soldiers came to arrest Him, He asked them who they were looking for. When they said “Jesus of Nazareth” Jesus responded with the divine title, I AM (ego eimí), and the soldiers all fell to the ground powerless (Jn 18:4-6). Just one brief glimpse of His veiled glory was enough to demonstrate what Jesus had previously said concerning His own life in John 10:18, “No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again.” When the glorified Christ appeared to John the revelator in His glorified state he fell at His feet as dead, even though John was in the Spirit at the time (Rev 1:17).
 
The full display of His glory was veiled during His earthly ministry, just as it was veiled to varying degrees in His Christophanies as the Angel of the Lord in order that man might be able to see Him and live.
 
Judges 13:6-23
 
“So the woman came and told her husband, saying, ‘A Man of God came to me, and His countenance was like the countenance of the Angel of God, very awesome; but I did not ask Him where He was from, and He did not tell me His name. 7 And He said to me, ‘Behold, you shall conceive and bear a son. Now drink no wine or similar drink, nor eat anything unclean, for the child shall be a Nazirite to God from the womb to the day of his death.’ 8 Then Manoah prayed to the Lord, and said, ‘O my Lord, please let the Man of God whom You sent come to us again and teach us what we shall do for the child who will be born.’  9 And God listened to the voice of Manoah, and the Angel OF GOD came to the woman again as she was sitting in the field; but Manoah her husband was not with her. 10 Then the woman ran in haste and told her husband, and said to him, ‘Look, the Man who came to me the other day has just now appeared to me!’ 11 So Manoah arose and followed his wife. When he came to the Man, he said to Him, ‘Are You the Man who spoke to this woman?’ And He said, ‘I am.’ 12 Manoah said, ‘Now let Your words come to pass! What will be the boy's rule of life, and his work?’ 13 So the Angel OF THE LORD said to Manoah, ‘Of all that I said to the woman let her be careful. 14 She may not eat anything that comes from the vine, nor may she drink wine or similar drink, nor eat anything unclean. All that I commanded her let her observe.’ 15 Then Manoah said to the Angel of the Lord, ‘Please let us detain You, and we will prepare a young goat for You.’ 16 And the Angel of the Lord said to Manoah, ‘Though you detain Me, I will not eat your food. But if you offer a burnt offering, you must offer it to the Lord.’ (For Manoah did not know He was the Angel of the Lord.) 17 Then Manoah said to the Angel of the Lord, ‘What is Your name, that when Your words come to pass we may honor You?’
18 And the Angel of the Lord said to him, ‘Why do you ask My name, seeing it is wonderful?’
19 So Manoah took the young goat with the grain offering, and offered it upon the rock to the Lord. And He did a wondrous thing while Manoah and his wife looked on —  20 it happened as the flame went up toward heaven from the altar — the Angel of the Lord ascended in the flame of the altar! When Manoah and his wife saw this, they fell on their faces to the ground. 21 When the Angel of the Lord appeared no more to Manoah and his wife, then Manoah knew that He was the Angel of the Lord. 22 And Manoah said to his wife, ‘We shall surely die, because we have SEEN GOD (Elohim)!’ 23 But his wife said to him, ‘If the Lord had desired to kill us, He would not have accepted a burnt offering and a grain offering from our hands, nor would He have shown us all these things, nor would He have told us such things as these at this time.” (Judges 13:6-23)
 
Here the Angel of the Lord appeared as a man, first to the woman who would become Samson’s mother, and then later to her husband Manoah also. They noted that His countenance was like the Angel of God but didn’t positively identify Him as the Angel of the Lord until He ascended in the flame of the altar, just as He did in the case of Gideon. When Manoah saw that it was the Angel of the Lord he said, “We shall surely die, because we have SEEN GOD!” It is clear that those who encountered the Angel of the Lord somehow knew that He was God Himself and not a mere angel representing Him.
 
It is more than significant that when Manoah asked Him what His name was, He responded, “Why do you ask My name, seeing it is Wonderful?” To me, this response was a deliberate mystery that would later enable us to positively identify the Angel of the Lord as having been the preincarnate Christ. Isaiah prophesied concerning His incarnation saying:
 
“For unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given; and the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.” (Isa 9:6)
 
So, included among the very obviously divine names given to the Messiah in addition to Jesus, which means “Jehovah saves,” and Emanuel which means “God with us,” we also see that His name is Wonderful, the very name the Angel of the Lord used to identify Himself to Manoah and his wife! It is incomprehensible to me, in the light of all these names affirming the full deity of Christ, that some today still deny that our Lord Jesus Christ is Himself God the Son incarnate.
 
Also, while the affirmation that the Angel of the Lord was the preincarnate Christ may not be a test of Orthodoxy, I myself have been greatly enriched in my vision of Christ through this understanding, and I believe that the Lord would say to those who would deny that He was the one who appeared as the Angel of the Lord prior to His incarnation the same thing he once said to the Pharisees: “Search the scriptures for they testify of me.”
 

​
[1] An example of the Word being referred to as a distinct person within the Godhead is found in a commentary of Deuteronomy 32:39 in the Targums. It reads: “When the Word of the Lord shall reveal Himself to redeem His people, He will say to all the nations: ‘Behold now, that I am He who is, and was, and will be, and there is no other God beside Me: I, in My Word, kill and make alive; I smite the people of Beth Israel, and I will heal them at the end of the days; and there will be none who can deliver them from My hand, Gog and his armies whom I have permitted to make war against them.’” (Targ. PS.-J.)
 

[2] Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy (2nd ed): Philo Judaeus, 1999
Adam Kamesar (2004). "The Logos Endiathetos and the Logos Prophorikos in Allegorical Interpretation: Philo and the D-Scholia to the Iliad" (PDF). Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies (GRBS). 44: 163–81. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2015-05-07.

[3] John 1:18 tc The textual problem μονογενὴς θεός (monogenēs theos, “the only God”) versus ὁ μονογενὴς υἱός (ho monogenēs huios, “the only son”) is a notoriously difficult one. Only one letter would have differentiated the readings in the mss, since both words would have been contracted as nomina sacra: thus qMs or uMs. Externally, there are several variants, but they can be grouped essentially by whether they read θεός or υἱός. The majority of mss, especially the later ones (A C3 Θ Ψ ƒ1,13 M lat), read ὁ μονογενὴς υἱός. P75 א1 33 have ὁ μονογενὴς θεός, while the anarthrous μονογενὴς θεός is found in P66 א* B C* L. The articular θεός is almost certainly a scribal emendation to the anarthrous θεός, for θεός without the article is a much harder reading. The external evidence thus strongly supports μονογενὴς θεός. Internally, although υἱός fits the immediate context more readily, θεός is much more difficult. As well, θεός also explains the origin of the other reading (υἱός), because it is difficult to see why a scribe who found υἱός in the text he was copying would alter it to θεός. Scribes would naturally change the wording to υἱός however, since μονογενὴς υἱός is a uniquely Johannine christological title (cf. John 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9). But θεός as the older and more difficult reading is preferred. As for translation, it makes the most sense to see the word θεός as in apposition to μονογενής, and the participle ὁ ὤν (ho ōn) as in apposition to θεός, giving in effect three descriptions of Jesus rather than only two. (B. D. Ehrman, The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture, 81, suggests that it is nearly impossible and completely unattested in the NT for an adjective followed immediately by a noun that agrees in gender, number, and case, to be a substantival adjective: “when is an adjective ever used substantivally when it immediately precedes a noun of the same inflection?” This, however, is an overstatement. First, as Ehrman admits, μονογενής in John 1:14 is substantival. And since it is an established usage for the adjective in this context, one might well expect that the author would continue to use the adjective substantivally four verses later. Indeed, μονογενής is already moving toward a crystallized substantival adjective in the NT [cf. Luke 9:38; Heb 11:17]; in patristic Greek, the process continued [cf. PGL 881 s.v. 7]. Second, there are several instances in the NT in which a substantival adjective is followed by a noun with which it has complete concord: cf., e.g., Rom 1:30; Gal 3:9; 1 Tim 1:9; 2 Pet 2:5.) The modern translations which best express this are the NEB (margin) and TEV. Several things should be noted: μονογενής alone, without υἱός, can mean “only son,” “unique son,” “unique one,” etc. (see 1:14). Furthermore, θεός is anarthrous. As such it carries qualitative force much like it does in 1:1c, where θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος (theos ēn ho logos) means “the Word was fully God” or “the Word was fully of the essence of deity.” Finally, ὁ ὤν occurs in Rev 1:4, 8; 4:8; 11:17; and 16:5, but even more significantly in the LXX of Exod 3:14. Putting all of this together leads to the translation given in the text.tn Or “The unique one.” For the meaning of μονογενής (monogenēs) see the note on “one and only” in 1:14.
 

by George Sidney Hurd
--
“The sea gave up the dead who were in it, and Death and Hades delivered up the dead who were in them. And they were judged, each one according to his works. 14 Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. 15 And anyone not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire.” (Rev 20:13–15)
 
What is the second death? Apart from the Scriptures equating the second death with the Lake of Fire, little detail is given us concerning it. This makes it necessary for us to arrive at an understanding of what it entails deductively, comparing Scripture with Scripture.
 
Annihilationists would say that the second death is one’s extermination. However, in 1Corinthians 15:22-26 we see that the last enemy, death, is not destroyed by killing, but by making alive in Christ all who die in Adam. Certainly, God’s plan from the beginning has been to destroy death by making all alive, not by killing! (For a critique of Annihilationism, see my book, Extermination or Restoration?). 
 
Those who hold to the doctrine of eternal torment would say that the second death is a state of eternal separation from God. However, far from this doctrine resulting in the destruction of death (1Cor 15:26), it actually perpetuates it. It creates an eternal dualism in which the evil that was introduced into God’s good creation in Eden continues on forever in perpetual opposition to God. It presents God with His elect few in heaven, and Satan, along with the majority of mankind, as well as a third of the angels, quarantined in a state of eternal torment. Hardly a worthy unending-end to God’s glorious creation story!
 
At least Annihilationists see evil as being irradicated. But instead of bringing evil and death to an end, the doctrine of eternal torment actually perpetuates evil. We must keep in mind that it is God Himself who sustains all things, including the Lake of Fire and all those in it (Heb 1:3; Col 1:17). Paul could even say to the unconverted men of Athens: “in Him we live and move and have our being” (Acts 17:28). That would have to be true of those in the Lake of Fire also, since apart from His sustaining power, they would cease to exist.
 
There is no place where God is not, including Sheol or Hades. As the Psalmist said, “Even if I make my bed in hell (Sheol), you are there” (Psa 139:8). Would God commence creation and foreordain the entrance of evil, knowing from the beginning that doing so would result in it being necessary for Him to endlessly afflict His wrath upon the majority of those whom He lovingly created in His own image and likeness, sustaining their existence so that He can torment them forever? How can that be reconciled with passages where God says that He will not be angry forever, nor cast off forever any of the children of men? (Lam 3:31-33; Isa 57:16; Jer 3:12-13; Mic 7:18; Psa 103:8-9; 30:5). How can it be true that the last enemy, death, will be destroyed (1Cor 15:26), resulting in there being no more death (Rev 21:4) if in fact the second death is an eternal state of conscious torment?
 
Thankfully, the Scriptures teach neither the annihilation of the lost, nor eternal torment, when properly understood as written in their original languages. On the contrary, what the Scriptures teach is the final restoration of all (Acts 3:21), the reconciliation of all (Col 1:16,20) and the salvation of all (1Tim 4:10). They declare that all will finally be reunited in Christ (Eph 1:10) and that all who die in Adam will be made alive in Christ, resulting in God becoming all in all (1Cor 15:22,28). As I demonstrate in my article, Sulfur, Salt and the Refiner’s Fire, the Lake of Fire, rightly understood, is the Refiner’s crucible and is for purification, not extermination or eternal fiery torment.
 
Once we understand that the Lake of Fire is for purification and that the second death, being equated with the Lake of Fire, is therefore part of the same process, we are on our way towards being able to determine the purpose and nature of the second death.
 
Jesus said to the church of Smyrna: “He who overcomes shall not be hurt by the second death” (Rev 2:11). What Jesus is here saying is that those who overcome in this life will not have to undergo the second death later. The term “hurt by” (αδικηθη, pass., “to be hurt or injured”) would not have been a good choice of words if in fact Jesus meant to say that they would be annihilated or eternally separated from God.
 
Death defined
 
In order to arrive at a proper understanding of the second death, it is first necessary to determine the correct definition of death according to Scripture. Many in today’s secular materialistic society see death as simply ceasing to exist. However, in the Scriptures the primary idea expressed by the Greek word for death in the New Testament, θάνατος (thanatos), is not annihilation or ceasing to exist, but separation.
 
As to the lexical definition, Thayer defines death (θάνατος thanatos) as, “properly, the death of the body, i.e. that separation (whether natural or violent) of the soul from the body by which the life on earth is ended.” 1 Vines expository Dictionary of Biblical Words defines death saying: “thanatos “death,” is used in Scripture of: (a) the separation of the soul (the spiritual part of man) from the body (the material part), the latter ceasing to function and turning to dust, e. g., John 11:13; Heb 2:15; 5:7; 7:23. In Heb 9:15). (b) the separation of man from God; Adam died on the day he disobeyed God, Gen 2:17, and hence all mankind are born in the same spiritual condition, Rom 5:12,14,17,21).” Vines defines the verb form, apothnesko saying: “lit., ‘to die off or out,’ is used…of the separation of the soul from the body, i. e., the natural "death" of human beings.”  2

This is not only true of the separation of the soul from the body. In the following chart we can see at least four other examples where the word death does not refer to cessation or annihilation but rather to separation:

 
by George Sidney Hurd
 --
What is Gehenna? Many Christians are not even familiar with the term, since most translations simply translate it as “hell,” along with the other Greek words Hades and Tartarus, also rendered as hell, in spite of the fact that each of these terms are distinct in meaning.
 
It is beyond the scope of this article to go into the actual meaning of Hades and Tartarus within their biblical contexts. Here we will restrict ourselves to a consideration of what Jesus meant when He referred to the fires of Gehenna. Was Jesus referring to an eschatological postmortem judgment, or was He simply warning the Jews living in that generation that they were in danger of being killed and their dead corpses cast into the Valley of Hinnom west of Jerusalem, which was called Gehenna in Greek?
 
Preterists would argue that when Jesus spoke of the Gehenna of fire He was merely referring to those Jews who would be killed and thrown into the Valley of Hinnom in 70AD. However, what they often either overlook or intentionally omit is the eschatological significance that the term Gehenna had acquired for the Jews by the time of Christ. There were two primary rabbinical schools in Jerusalem during Christ’s ministry, that of the rabbi Hillel (70BC – 10AD) and the school of Shammai (50BC – 30AD) [1] Both used the term Gehenna (Heb. Gehinnom גיהנום, “Valley of Hinnom”) to refer to a place of postmortem purification. Both schools taught that the righteous entered directly into the “age to come” (Olam Ha-Ba), whereas the rest went to Gehenna where they would undergo purification for one year. [2]   The more radical and pharisaical rabbi, Shammai, taught that the unredeemable reprobates would continue on in an eternal state of shame and contempt. [3] However, by the end of the second century, Traditional Judaism generally held that only the worst of the wicked will remain in Gehenna beyond 12 months. The Shabbat Talmud says: “The judgment of the wicked in Gehenna lasts for twelve months. Surely their sin was atoned in that time.” [4]
 
The word Gehenna (Gr. Γέεννα) is used by Jesus 11 times but only on three different occasions, first in the Olivet Discourse speaking to the multitudes (Matt 5:22,29,30). Afterwards, He mentioned Gehenna once when speaking to His own disciples (Matt 10:28), once when warning against causing one of His little ones to stumble (Matt 18:9) and once as a warning to the scribes and Pharisees (Matt 23:15,33). There are at least 5 considerations which make it evident that Jesus was referring to the common understanding of the Jews of that time, referring to Gehenna as a place of postmortem purification rather than speaking of the literal Valley of Hinnom:  1) Jesus called Gehenna “eonian fire,” 2) Gehenna is seen to be a place of temporary containment, 3) The sins worthy of Gehenna do not correspond to the sin which led to Israel’s desolation, 4) God – not man, is seen to be the one casting into Gehenna, and 5) The alternative to Gehenna is not merely being left alive, but “entering into life” or “entering into the kingdom.”
 
1) Jesus called Gehenna “Eonian Fire”
 
“If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off, and cast it from you. It is better for you to enter into life maimed or crippled, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into the eternal fire (τὸ πῦρ τὸ αἰώνιον, “eonian fire”). 9 If your eye causes you to stumble, pluck it out, and cast it from you. It is better for you to enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into the Gehenna of fire.”
(Matt 18:8-9 WEB)
 
The fact that Jesus also referred to the Gehenna of fire as “the eonian fire” (τὸ πῦρ τὸ αἰώνιον), makes it clear that He was not simply speaking of their dead corpses being cast into the Valley of Hinnom outside Jerusalem. This becomes even more evident considering how He employs the exact same term in reference to the separation of the Gentile sheep from the Gentile goats at His Second Coming:
 
"Then He will also say to those on the left hand, 'Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire (τὸ πῦρ τὸ αἰώνιον, “eonian fire”) prepared for the devil and his angels.” (Matt 25:41) 
 
Here Jesus doesn’t call it Gehenna of fire, since He is addressing the goats from the Gentile nations at His coming who would not have been familiar with that Hebraism. That He is not referring to the literal Valley of Hinnom is even more evident, considering that the eonian fire is “prepared for the devil and his angels” – something that could not be said of the Valley of Hinnom. In the same passage Jesus also called the eonian fire “eonian correction” (κόλασιν αἰώνιον, kolasin aionion), which would be incompatible with corpses that have been cast into the Valley of Hinnom (Matt 25:46).
 
There is no reason to conclude that the Gehenna of fire or the eonian fire is distinct from the Lake of Fire into which the Beast and False Prophet will be cast alive at Christ’s Second Coming (Rev 19:20), and also where those who are not found written in the book of life will be cast after being resurrected for the White Throne Judgment at the close of Christ’s millennial reign in order to undergo the Second Death (Rev 20:11-15).
 
The Early Church Fathers also understood Gehenna fire or eonian fire to be equivalent to the Lake of Fire. This can be seen in the following quote from Irenaeus (130 – 202 AD). In Against Heresies he said: “…death and hell were sent into the lake of fire, the second death."  Now this is what is called Gehenna, which the Lord styled eternal fire.” [5]  Cyprian (210 to 258AD) also equated Gehenna with the Lake of Fire or the second death. He said: “Assuredly he may fear to die, who, not being regenerated of water and the Spirit, is delivered over to the fires of Gehenna; he may fear to die who is not enrolled in the cross and passion of Christ; he may fear to die, who from this death shall pass over to a second death…” [6] Origen (185 to 253AD) wrote: “Gehenna…for the purification of such souls as are to be purified by torments, agreeably to the saying: ‘The Lord cometh like a refiner's fire, and like fullers' soap: and He shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver and of gold.’” [7] It is worthy of note that none of the Early Fathers understood the fire of Gehenna as referring to the 70AD judgment.
 
I demonstrate the temporal purifying nature of the eonian fire or the Lake of Fire in my article: Sulfur, Salt and the Refiner’s Fire.
 
2) Gehenna is seen to be a place of temporary containment
 
“…whoever shall say, 'You fool!' shall be in danger of the fire of Gehenna… 26 Most assuredly I tell you, you shall by no means get out of there, until you have paid the last penny.” (Matt 5:22,26 WEB)
 
Here Jesus compared one being cast into Gehenna of fire to being cast into prison until one has paid in full. The Lake of Fire or eonian fire is seen to be limited in duration. Those who are cast into the Lake of Fire are said to be judged according to their works, receiving “their part” (μερος meros, “deserved portion”) in the Lake of Fire. A part or portion speaks of a measured sentence, not a perpetual one. Jesus also said that some would receive few lashes, whereas others will receive many (Luke 12:47-48). Such references to a limited duration and measured severity are just as incompatible with the dead corpses thrown into the Valley of Hinnom in 70AD, as they are with the doctrine of eternal torment or annihilationism.
 
3)The sins worthy of Gehenna do not correspond to the sin which led to Israel’s desolation
 
The sins that Jesus said would result in one being cast into Gehenna of fire included sins we all have been guilty of, such as calling someone a fool, failing to seek reconciliation with someone whom you have offended, causing one of His little ones to stumble, or looking at a woman to lust after her (Matt 5:22-23,28; 18:6-9).  However, the nation of Israel was not judged for these sins in 70AD, but for the sin of rejecting and crucifying Jesus, their Messiah and King (Luke 10:11-12; Matt 21:43; 23:37-39). Indeed, if all the Jews of that generation living in Judea who were guilty of these common sins had been killed and cast into the Valley of Hinnom, the valley would have become a literal mountain of corpses.
 
4) God – not man, is seen to be the one casting into Gehenna
 
“I tell you, my friends, don't be afraid of those who kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do. 5 But I will warn you whom you should fear. Fear him, who after he has killed, has power to cast into Gehenna. Yes, I tell you, fear him.” (Luke 12:4-5 WEB)
 
Apart from the fact that Jesus is here speaking to His own disciples rather than the Jewish leaders who were the ones guilty of rejecting Him, we see that man does not have the power to cast anyone into Gehenna, only God does. Many who died due to starvation, attacks by the Romans, or by factions within Jerusalem were thrown over the wall into the Valley of Hinnom by men. Yet Jesus here says that man is not able to cast anyone into Gehenna. That is the sole prerogative of God, the just Judge of all.  
 
Some counter that it cannot be God to whom Jesus is referring when He says that we are to fear Him who has power to cast into Gehenna, since, right after saying this, He tells them not to be afraid (Luke 12:7). However, although it might sound paradoxical, those who walk in the fear of the Lord fear nothing. As Moses said to the children of Israel, “Do not fear; for God has come to test you, and that His fear may be before you, so that you may not sin” (Ex 20:20). The fear of the Lord frees us from all fear. I consider this subject further in my article: Fear Him who can Destroy Both Body and Soul.
 
5) The alternative to Gehenna is not being left alive, but “entering into life” or “entering into the kingdom of God”
 
“If your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off. It is better for you to enter into life lame, rather than having your two feet to be cast into Gehenna, into the fire that will never be quenched—46 'where their worm doesn't die, and the fire is not quenched.' 47 If your eye causes you to stumble, cast it out. It is better for you to enter into the Kingdom of God with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into the Gehenna of fire.” (Mark 9:45-47 WEB)
 
So, we see that the alternative Jesus presents here is not that of avoiding death as opposed to being killed and cast into the Valley of Hinnom, but rather it is between being cast into Gehenna, the eonian fire, or entering into life, entering into the kingdom.
 
These are the same alternatives later presented in the separation of the sheep from the goats at Christ’s Second Coming where the sheep among the Gentiles will inherit the kingdom, entering into the eonian life, whereas the goats will enter into the eonian fire prepared for the devil and his angels, also referred to as eonian correction (Matt 25:34,41,46).
 
The obvious reason why Jesus didn’t refer to the eonian fire as Gehenna of fire in Matthew 25 is because He is speaking of the Gentile nations who would be unfamiliar with the term Gehenna. Gehenna is only named by Jesus in the synoptic gospels when addressing a Jewish audience.  References to Gehenna do not appear in the Gospel of John which is addressed to a Gentile audience. The word is only used in one other place in the New Testament in the epistle of  James, which was addressing Jews from the dispersion (James 1:1; 3:6).
 
Conclusion
 
We have seen that, during Christ’s ministry, the Jews already understood “Gehenna of fire” to be referring, not to the literal Valley of Hinnom, but to a postmortem fire in which the unjust are believed to undergo a twelve-month period of purification. While some among the Pharisees believed that the fires were everlasting for the worst of the wicked like Nero or Hitler, Jesus referred to the eonian fire as being limited in duration for all subjected to it, lasting indefinitely “until.” I develop this further in my article: The Duration of Punishment.
 
We also saw that the sins which are said to result in one being cast into Gehenna do not correspond to the sin which resulted in Jerusalem’s desolation which was the sin of rejecting and crucifying their Messiah. Also, it is God alone who is said to have the power to cast into Gehenna of fire, whereas the dead corpses cast into the Valley of Hinnom were thrown there by men. Finally, those who avert Gehenna are said to enter into life or enter into the kingdom of God, rather than simply remaining alive, as was the case with those who survived because they heeded Jesus’ command to flee Jerusalem when they saw the armies surrounding the city. Therefore, all things considered, it is evident that Jesus was referring to the common understanding of Gehenna at that time as a place of postmortem purification and not the literal Valley of Hinnom.


[1] https://sharperiron.org/article/jesus-and-his-disciples-rabbinic-schools-oral-law-and-distinct-callings-discipleship#:~:text=The%20Two%20Rabbinic%20Schools%20in%20Jesus'%20Day&text=As%20a%20matter%20of%20fact,%E2%80%9D)%20Shammai%20and%20Beit%20Hillel.&text=Modern%20Judaism%20has%20mostly%20descended,Hillel%20faction%20of%20the%20Pharisees.
 

[2] Mishnah Eduyot 2:10 https://www.sefaria.org/Mishnah_Eduyot.2.10?lang=bi
 
 

[3] Rosh Hashanah 16b https://www.sefaria.org/Rosh_Hashanah.16b.15?lang=bi
 

[4] Shabbat https://www.sefaria.org/Shabbat.33b.8?lang=bi
 

[5] Irenaeus, Against Heresies, book 5, chapter 35 section 2
 

[6] Cyprian, Treatise 7, paragraph 14
 

[7] Origen, Contra Celsius. VI. 25