“The resurrection of the dead is the Christian’s trust.” – Tertullian
Life After Death
Clement of Rome, at the end of the first century, wrote to the Corinthian ecclesia and speaks of the apostles Peter and Paul as having “departed to the place of glory” and being “removed from the world…into the holy place” (Clement, First Epistle to Corinthians, iv). This bishop of the Roman ecclesia is thought to have been contemporary with the apostles; thus these sentiments, which clearly appear to support the immortality of the soul, are most disappointing.
In the same letter, however, he is eloquent when reminding his readers of the apostolic hope:
“There shall be a future resurrection, of which He has rendered the Lord Jesus Christ the rust-fruits by raising him from the dead…Do we then deem it any great and wonderful thing for the Maker of all things to raise up again those that have piously served Him in the assurance of a good faith…Job says, ‘Thou shalt raise up this flesh of mine, which has suffered all these things.’ Having then this hope, let our souls be bound to Him who is faithful in His promises…” (Clement, First Epistle, xxiv, xxvi).
Polycarp (AD 65-155) writes of certain martyrs that, “they are now in their due place in the presence of the Lord” (Polycarp to the Philippians, ix.). Yet in the same epistle he affirms, “He who raised (Christ) up from the dead will raise up us also, if we do His will, and walk in His commandments…” (To the Philippians, ii).
The soul’s inherent immortality is a concept that is obviously not compatible with the true Christian hope, which is the promise of immortality. Apostolic teaching affirms that death is a sleep and that the change in nature from mortal to immortal follows a future resurrection (I Cor. 15:42-44). It seems remarkable that this plain and simple teaching of scripture was so quickly compromised.
One possible answer to this inconsistency in some of the very early writings is that they underwent later editing, after the immortality of the soul had become widely accepted in the church. (Scholars recognize that this did occur in some instances. See The Ante-Nicene Fathers, ed. Roberts and Donaldson, vol. I, p.37). However, it is plain that there was confusion in the second century about the soul of man, and that this confusion led eventually to a false concept of immortality. Greek and Roman thought was so steeped in the idea that the soul of man is immortal that converts were predisposed to that view.
The soul in pagan literature
Following are typical statements from the Greek and Roman philosophers:
“The soul is immortal, and is clothed successively in many bodies.” “The soul of man is immortal and imperishable.” — Plato.
“All men’s souls are immortal, but the souls of the righteous are both immortal and divine.” — Socrates.
“Whatever that be within us that feels, thinks, desires and animates is something celestial and divine, and consequently it is imperishable.” -Aristotle.
“If I err in my belief that the souls of men are immortal, I gladly err, nor do I wish this error, in which I find delight, to be wrested from me.” -Cicero.
“…Therefore look forward without fear to that appointed hour — the last hour of the body, but not of the soul.” — Seneca.
Justin Martyr
Justin Martyr (Al) 110-165) was a Gentile convert who had been educated in Greek philosophy. But in his dialogue with Trypho, a Jew, it appears that the immortality of the soul had not yet been formulated in Christian teaching. Justin declares: “For if you have fallen in with some who are called Christians…who say there is no resurrection of the dead, and that their souls, when they die, are taken to heaven; do not imagine that they are Christians” (Dialogue, ch. lxxx).
“Nor ought the soul to be called immortal; for if it is immortal, it is plainly unbegotten” (ch. v). But Justin does not go so far as to concede that the soul of man is unconscious in death.
“The souls of the pious remain in a better place, while those of the unjust and wicked are in a worse, waiting for the time of judgment.” Then, again confirming the soul’s mortality, he adds, “Thus some which have appeared worthy of God never die; but others are punished so long as God wills them to exist and to be punished” (Dialogue, ch. v).
While Justin understood that the soul of man is not immortal, he had moved from the New Testament position that both classes of believers await resurrection for their fate to be declared. The undermining of that simple truth would have a devastating effect upon the doctrines and practices of Christendom.
The hope of resurrection
The early Christian writers made efforts to reconcile the hope of resurrection with their preconceived notion about the soul. They often explained it this way: the soul at death departs to a place where it remains until the resurrection and judgment. The souls of the righteous are deemed to be resting in a state of blessedness; those of the wicked are already suffering punishment. Both are in Hades, the place of the dead. The parable of the rich man and Lazarus is often cited. (Typical examples are Tertullian’ s comments in A Treatise on the Soul,liv ,lv, .; On the Resurrection of the Flesh, xvii).
(The importance of a clear understanding of the parables of Christ is evident as we review this rapid departure from the principles of truth. In the case of “the rich man and Lazarus,” Tertullian overlooks the fact that the account is a parable, and that it is speaking of bodies, not “souls.”)
Some right thinking
A correct understanding of the nature of man is set forth in the writing of Theophilus of Antioch (c. AD 168).
“But some one will say to us, ‘Was man made by nature mortal?’ certainly not. Was he then, immortal? Neither do we affirm this. He was by nature neither mortal nor immortal. For if He (God) had made him immortal from the beginning, He would have made him God. Again, if He had made him mortal, God would seem to be the cause of his death. Neither, then, immortal nor yet mortal did He make him, but as we have said above, capable of both; so that if he should incline to the things of immortality, keeping the commandment of God, he should receive as a reward from Him immortality; but if, on the other hand, he should turn to the things of death, disobeying God, he should himself be the cause of death to himself. That, then, which man brought upon himself [i.e. death] through carelessness and disobedience, this God now vouchsafes to him as a gift through His own philanthropy and pity, when men obey him. For as a man, disobeying, drew death upon himself; so, obeying the will of God, he who desires is able to procure for himself life everlasting. For God has given us a law and holy commandments; and every one who keeps these can be saved, and, obtaining the resurrection, can inherit incorruption” (Theophilus to Autolycus, Book II. ch. xxvii).
The Third Century
Tertullian (AD 145-220) writes of “Gehenna, which is a reservoir of secret fire under the earth for purposes of punishment” and of Paradise, the place of heavenly bliss appointed to receive the spirits of the saints” (Apology, ch. xlvii). In the word “paradise” he does not mean heaven itself, for he also writes: “How, indeed, shall the soul mount up to heaven, where Christ is already sitting at the Father’s right hand, when as yet the archangel’s trumpet has not been heard by the command of God…every soul is detained in safekeeping in Hades until the day of the Lord” (Treatise on the Soul, 1v).
Origen (AD 185-254), a master of the Catechetical School in Alexandria, educated in Grecian literature, displays many ideas that are not scriptural. But his understanding of human nature retains some sense of the truth. He acknowledges that “there are souls in all living things” (De Principiis, Book II, viii); and he writes: “We who believe in the resurrection (of the body), understand that a change only has been produced by death, but that its substance certainly remains; and that by the will of its Creator, and at the time appointed, it will be restored to life…will be again raised from the earth, and shall after this, according to the merits of the indwelling soul, advance to the glory of a spiritual body” (De Principiis, Book III, vi, 5).
At the end of the century (about AD 300) Arnobius writes of immortality as “God’s gift” and that “He will deign to confer eternal life.” And, “None can grant to them a spirit which shall never die, except He who alone is immortal and everlasting” (Against the Heathens, Book II, 36 and 62).
The Fourth Century
But the Christian writers of the fourth century have fully accepted that the soul of man is immortal. They “prove” their point as much from the witness of pagan literature as from their (incorrect) application of scripture. Lactantius (AD 260-330) quotes Apollo of Miletus: “…after the wasting of the body, it (the soul) is altogether borne into the air, never growing old, and it remains always uninjured…”
He says the Stoics taught: “…that the souls of men continue to exist, and are not annihilated by the intervention of death: that the souls, moreover, of those who have been just, being pure, and incapable of suffering, and happy, return to the heavenly abodes from which they had their origin, or are borne to some happy plains, where they may enjoy wonderful pleasures; but that (the souls of) the wicked…though they cannot altogether be extinguished, inasmuch as they are from God, nevertheless become liable to torment…” To which the “Christian father” attests, “These things are near to the truth” (The Divine Institutes, Book VII, ch. xx).
The “unleavened bread of sincerity and truth,” commended to believers by Paul the apostle, became a rare commodity within a few years after the Acts. Human philosophy, especially in its teaching of the innate immortality of man, was a leaven that would corrupt the “whole lump.” That fallacy would be the first of several key elements which would subvert the gospel message.
The Origin of the Organic World – Part One